Is this release schedule sustainable?

HoundofShadow

End of the day, it's still down to expectation. If a player plays casually and non-competitively, but he expects to catch up (without spending money) with another player who plays everyday or plays competitively, then I think there needs to be some kind of realignment of expectation for that player. Or, a new player starts playing MPQ and he's already thinking how to roster all 100++ characters within 3 or 6 months, he will definitely feel overwhelmed by the release schedule. Expectation, expectation, expectation...

Like other players mentioned, I think the vets overestimated how difficult it is to catch up with roster slots and 4* release schedule.

I started playing MPQ in late November 2017.  I have spent zero dime and I am about 10 roster slots ahead of the 4* release schedule, and the gap can only get bigger. I'm gaining 8-10 roster slots a month and there are at most 2 new 4* every month. I'm gaining a net of minimum 6 roster slots every month even after accounting for the two 4* releases. 

Even if i were to restart and start playing MPQ today, by the end of next year, I will still be able to roster 100% of the 4* without spending a single dime. 

Tony_Foot

It's not the rostering of them that would bother me, it's the ISO required to champ them to make them useful. Even if you could ignore every other tier and earn enough ISO to do one per week with the bar in motion it will take you nearly 2 years.

I think I'd offer 4x ISO to Shield rank 50 and 2x ISO to SR 100. Help players get over that 2 and 3 star phase much quicker and get started well into the fours.

snlf25

I have 178 full roster slots, I don't need any more toons to put up against Bullseye, Moonstone and Ares. I don't need this blue deadpool guy whoever he is. I need new things to do with what I already have.

TeamStewie

Projectus2501 said:

The guys that suffer more with this agressive release policy are the new players.... 

Well I know when I was a new player even if I managed to get the 4 or 5 star they usually had to be sold for lack of roster space. It's not the fact that they keep releasing stuff which is frustrating but the fact that none of it is really aimed at newer players who can use it.

bbigler

Newer players probably feel overwhelmed by all the new releases (chime in new players) because they're already struggling to roster everyone and more work is being thrown unto their pile.  Unless new players don't realize it's best to roster everyone, so in that case, they just pick and choose who they want. 

HoundofShadow

I hear that playing MPQ is like having a part-time job. If I were to modify this analogy and link each tier with a general full-time job position:

1* player: new employee with no working exp.
2* player: employee with working experience
3* player: Assistant Manager
4* player: Manager
5* player: Director

Completing each tier is equivalent to gaining adequate working experience to promote you to the next higher position.

A new player who has played MPQ for a few weeks but he is already thinking of how to roster all the characters in the game within 6 months to 1 year is similar to a new employee thinking of how to be the director of the company within 6 months or a year after gaining a few weeks or a couple months of working experience. 

New releases are probably similar to keeping up with new changes in the industry. If you want to move higher, you have to keep up with the changes.

Phumade

HoundofShadow said:

I hear that playing MPQ is like having a part-time job. If I were to modify this analogy and link each tier with a general full-time job position:

1* player: new employee with no working exp.
2* player: employee with working experience
3* player: Assistant Manager
4* player: Manager
5* player: Director

Completing each tier is equivalent to gaining adequate working experience to promote you to the next higher position.

A new player who has played MPQ for a few weeks but he is already thinking of how to roster all the characters in the game within 6 months to 1 year is similar to a new employee thinking of how to be the director of the company after gaining a few weeks or a few months of working experience. 

New releases are probably similar to keeping up with new changes in the industry. If you want to move higher, you have to keep up with the changes.

Hehe. Cheating on rosters is like fudging your resume.  5* players can watch one event and tell who sold who’s roster and or it’s being played radically differently.

broll

Tony_Foot said:

It's not the rostering of them that would bother me, it's the ISO required to champ them to make them useful. Even if you could ignore every other tier and earn enough ISO to do one per week with the bar in motion it will take you nearly 2 years.

I think I'd offer 4x ISO to Shield rank 50 and 2x ISO to SR 100. Help players get over that 2 and 3 star phase much quicker and get started well into the fours.

That's less of a problem than ever before.  Now you can just save covers for a bunch and focus on champing just the ones that will really help you advance.  Then come back and champ the others when you have an ISO surplus or need the champ rewards and not lose anything.  I think I've only champed 2 4*s since saved covers and went from no surplus ISO to 2.5 mil right now (now if I champed all the 4*s I could I don't think that would be enough so it's not truly a surplus but it's allowing me to focus on champing/soft capping 5*s vs struggling to stay afloat with the release schedule.)

JFisch

Excluding the initial launch characters, from 10/24/2013 to 10/17/2018 they released 146 characters across the 2-5-star tiers. That's an average of 29.2 a year.

If we simplify and assume 1 year = 52 weeks, the current pace is 26/year.

So they're actually on pace to release the fewest characters since 2014 this year.

2013 - 6 characters (3 months)

2014 - 27 characters

2015 - 31 characters

2016 - 29 characters

2017 - 32 characters

2018 - 24 characters (with likely 2 more)

shartattack

They could have adjusted this schedule by releasing supports in one of the 4 star release spots. but no one cares about supports, so...

bbigler

Here's a crazy idea, instead of getting a new 5* next week, I would be happy if they reworked a bad 5* (like Doc Ock) to make them good and then put them back into Latest. As long as the 5* is good, would anyone mind? They could also update some of the bottom tier 4*s too. 

skittledaddy

bbigler said:

Here's a crazy idea, instead of getting a new 5* next week, I would be happy if they reworked a bad 5* (like Doc Ock) to make them good and then put them back into Latest. As long as the 5* is good, would anyone mind? They could also update some of the bottom tier 4*s too. 

It'd be like getting a "new" character but not having to start over with yet ANOTHER actual new character.

whitecat31

bbigler said:

I've said the same thing before, that unless something changes, their release schedule is bad for the game.  The current and future problem is that older 4*s and 5*s are very hard to cover.  I also agree that despite something "working" for years, that doesn't mean it's sustainable.  Take US social security, for example.

US Social security is working.   In theory it has another 50 to 80 years of sustainability, unless it is heavily borrowed against to pay for tax breaks for the top 1%.  Currently, the largest US debt holder is the social security fund. 

whitecat31

So since we have so many 4 stars, why are we not having them more into the PVP rotation as was suggested last season like when we saw Carol Danvers as the featured character for pvp?  

Tony_Foot

bbigler said:

Here's a crazy idea, instead of getting a new 5* next week, I would be happy if they reworked a bad 5* (like Doc Ock) to make them good and then put them back into Latest. As long as the 5* is good, would anyone mind? They could also update some of the bottom tier 4*s too. 

No I wouldn't mind, it would ease the pressure on people that already have him and then not dilute your pulls between Latest/Classic and new release store. I'm not a fan of new release stores for that reason.

PuceMoose

I've always thought it should be one new character release per season, and each new release gets their own story or boss event to introduce (and reward) them. Even if they just did a quick & dirty cut & paste on an existing story with a few minor changes, it would still be something to look forward to, a little bit of new dialogue/story to complement the new character (and, while I'm shaking the wish tree, introduce their kit in-game with dialogue between characters). I'd also see the event reward at least one cover regardless of placement (like the Hulk event), which would drive roster sales for new players and seem like a nice gesture (Hey, you only have five minutes to play each day? You can still get Dr. StockingShine, as long as you can beat this one Scaled-to-your-roster mode once within the five days this event runs. Beat the whole event? Have another cover on us!)

MrDupaTM

It's unsustainable. The odds of getting a right cover are getting slimmier and slimmier with each new character introduced. It has to change or d3go! will have to introduce changes to the odds of getting 4* and 5* characters out of elite and heroic pulls or - better yet, lower the command points price of legendary tokens and character leveling for players under certain shield rank. 

Straycat

I think the only thing they've done to address it is the emphasis on newer characters in pve. That has probably let me keep up with releases about as well as in the 50% latest 12, 50% classic token days. So I think if they give more avenues to earn newer covers, they can probably let dilution continue for a while. They're also adding in limited characters again, which is another way they are kicking the can instead of changing anything.