Is an every-other/4-week release schedule for 4 stars and 5 stars good for the game?

moss04
moss04 Posts: 147 Tile Toppler
in MPQ General Discussion
I've heard rumor that MPQ might switch to a 4/5/4/5/4/... or every-other schedule for release of characters.  I know that for me, if they did so without increasing methods of gaining 5 covers I would legit quit the game. I've basically been a 5 star player for quite a while, transitioning a little before gambit came out. And that was, what, a year and a half ago? (maybe more?). I currently have 19 5 star champions in my roster and I can keep up with a 6 week pace while squirreling away a little extra to occasionally dip into classics or, more likely, limited time stores that have classics I haven't champed yet in them. But a 4 week schedule is one that I cannot keep pace with. With nothing on the horizon as a fix for dilution, and nothing in the rumor mill either, that would mean I stop making any progress in this game. And if I can't make progress why would I play.

What do other's think?  Would you be able to keep a 4 week pace?  If not, would you keep playing?  Are you hopeful for more ways to get 5 covers or think that a solution for dilution is coming?
«1

Comments

  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 10,101 Chairperson of the Boards
    Genuine questions and no snark intended (but a touch of incredulity):

    1) With 19 champed 5* characters do you even need to champ every new 5* release, especially if not Meta?
    2) Why would not being able to champ a 5* in that timeframe change anything?
    3) I guess this really is the first world problem of MPQ...
  • moss04
    moss04 Posts: 147 Tile Toppler
    edited May 2019
    DAZ0273 said:
    Genuine questions and no snark intended (but a touch of incredulity):

    1) With 19 champed 5* characters do you even need to champ every new 5* release, especially if not Meta?
    2) Why would not being able to champ a 5* in that timeframe change anything?
    3) I guess this really is the first world problem of MPQ...
    You can't always predict which characters are meta or not beforehand. To maintain this pace I already skip occasional duds.  I didn't champion kingpin or wasp.  And I got a bit of a head start by selling a champion gambit when he got his real nerf.  I am basically keeping my head above water on anyone that is good or decent.

    I perfectly understand that this doesn't matter to non 5 star players, but if you have a 5 star roster and then you stop being able to roster them, sure you can keep playing the game with the same characters you already have, but why would you? The thing you get as reward for playing is the resources that allow you to roster heroes, and the thing that they keep making are heroes.  I'm not playing this game purely out of the love of match 3 gems and I doubt many others are either.
  • Ed_Dragonrider
    Ed_Dragonrider Posts: 591 Critical Contributor
    Im just wondering where such rumors come from? No snark intended, but how do you know this? where have they said or indicated this?
  • moss04
    moss04 Posts: 147 Tile Toppler
    I don't know the original source or if it is true so I am phrasing this question as speculation, but I think it is an important question to ask because it would be good to understand what a variety of players would think of a potential change like this
  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 10,101 Chairperson of the Boards
    moss04 said:
    DAZ0273 said:
    Genuine questions and no snark intended (but a touch of incredulity):

    1) With 19 champed 5* characters do you even need to champ every new 5* release, especially if not Meta?
    2) Why would not being able to champ a 5* in that timeframe change anything?
    3) I guess this really is the first world problem of MPQ...
    You can't always predict which characters are meta or not beforehand. To maintain this pace I already skip occasional duds.  I didn't champion kingpin or wasp.  And I got a bit of a head start by selling a champion gambit when he got his real nerf.  I am basically keeping my head above water on anyone that is good or decent.

    I perfectly understand that this doesn't matter to non 5 star players, but if you have a 5 star roster and then you stop being able to roster them, sure you can keep playing the game with the same characters you already have, but why would you? The thing you get as reward for playing is the resources that allow you to roster heroes, and the thing that they keep making are heroes.  I'm not playing this game purely out of the love of match 3 gems and I doubt many others are either.
    Fair enough, I respect your response here and hope things don't change so you want to leave as it is a blow to us all when high level players such as yourself leave.
  • Ed_Dragonrider
    Ed_Dragonrider Posts: 591 Critical Contributor
    bluewolf said:


    -------

    Aside:  My newest idea is to stop the 2 week cycle, and go to a 3 week cycle where you DO go to 4/5/4/5/4/5 etc, so each 5 still gets 18 weeks in Latests but you have half the number of 4's being released and thus dilution slows a bit.

    Assuming no action is going to be taken anytime soon to actually address dilution.

     I would absolutely be in favour of a 3 week cycle, especially if it means the same amount of time passes between new 5*s. Its very hard to earn enough cp between stores if they follow too closely after each other.
     All i usually try for is to get 1 cover for pve, but even that can be quite the tall order. And us mid/lower rosters just dont earn enough cp for a 5* release every 4 weeks.
  • Reecoh
    Reecoh Posts: 210 Tile Toppler
    edited May 2019
    I have 11 champed 5*s and 5 more with 9+ covers. I'm getting a bit burned out on the hamster wheel of champing  myself, and if they were to increase the drop rate of 5*s to every 4 weeks without any adjustment in earned CP then I'm not sure I'd stay on for very long either. That would feel like nothing more than a push to get more buy club action. A change that large sure seems like they'd need an adjustment to the economy.
  • bluewolf
    bluewolf Posts: 5,733 Chairperson of the Boards
    Today's the day!  Get your popcorn ready.
  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 10,101 Chairperson of the Boards
    I never did get a blue Doom cover. Oh well, seeya Victor.
  • Waddles_Pines
    Waddles_Pines Posts: 1,221 Chairperson of the Boards
    DAZ0273 said:
    I never did get a blue Doom cover. Oh well, seeya Victor.
    I have 7 blues :/, trade you for a black  :D
  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 10,101 Chairperson of the Boards
    Waddles_Pines said:
    DAZ0273 said:
    I never did get a blue Doom cover. Oh well, seeya Victor.
    I have 7 blues :/, trade you for a black  :D
    Ha! There should so totally be an MPQ marketplace!
  • Therealsmkspy
    Therealsmkspy Posts: 254 Mover and Shaker
    Waddles_Pines said:
    DAZ0273 said:
    I never did get a blue Doom cover. Oh well, seeya Victor.
    I have 7 blues :/, trade you for a black  :D
    I have 10 blacks will trade for one yellow or blue. 
  • Shintok17
    Shintok17 Posts: 620 Critical Contributor
    Waddles_Pines said:
    DAZ0273 said:
    Waddles_Pines said:
    DAZ0273 said:
    I never did get a blue Doom cover. Oh well, seeya Victor.
    I have 7 blues :/, trade you for a black  :D
    Ha! There should so totally be an MPQ marketplace!
    I've said this before but that should definitely be a feature of alliances.  Let alliance members trade covers in their respective queues (not covers that have been saved/applied already),  Make it so that a person has to be in an alliance for a set amount of time (1 month, 1 season, whatever) in order to neutralize abusing the system.  Maybe do the same for resources... 
    Hahaha. That's what Mobile games devs say when players mention a Trade System in a micro transaction heavy game environment like free to play games. You know the reason is always the loss of Money $$$$. Why would people spend money on RNG packs or Resources when they can just trade for them? That is why it will not be implemented. I would love it specially between alliance mates, but the sad truth is mobile games are not made for fun, but to make money.
  • Momo988
    Momo988 Posts: 15 Just Dropped In
    Until mobile devs and licensors accept getting paid in fun instead of money, it will stay that way. 
  • Therealsmkspy
    Therealsmkspy Posts: 254 Mover and Shaker
    The odds for 5s just need a bump if they do start going this route. 

    It's already hard enough to complete a five for a competitive player, and shorter latest status is really going to push away a lot of us. 

    Champing fives is pretty much all you've got at the five star level if you're someone that doesn't play for top 10 every event. 
  • Bowgentle
    Bowgentle Posts: 7,926 Chairperson of the Boards
    Therealsmkspy said:
    The odds for 5s just need a bump if they do start going this route. 

    It's already hard enough to complete a five for a competitive player, and shorter latest status is really going to push away a lot of us. 

    Champing fives is pretty much all you've got at the five star level if you're someone that doesn't play for top 10 every event. 
    They don't care if they push away players who don't pay.
    They'll start caring if they push away too many paying players.
  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 10,101 Chairperson of the Boards
    Shintok17 said:
    Waddles_Pines said:
    DAZ0273 said:
    Waddles_Pines said:
    DAZ0273 said:
    I never did get a blue Doom cover. Oh well, seeya Victor.
    I have 7 blues :/, trade you for a black  :D
    Ha! There should so totally be an MPQ marketplace!
    I've said this before but that should definitely be a feature of alliances.  Let alliance members trade covers in their respective queues (not covers that have been saved/applied already),  Make it so that a person has to be in an alliance for a set amount of time (1 month, 1 season, whatever) in order to neutralize abusing the system.  Maybe do the same for resources... 
    Hahaha. That's what Mobile games devs say when players mention a Trade System in a micro transaction heavy game environment like free to play games. You know the reason is always the loss of Money $$$$. Why would people spend money on RNG packs or Resources when they can just trade for them? That is why it will not be implemented. I would love it specially between alliance mates, but the sad truth is mobile games are not made for fun, but to make money.
    Yeah, I don't think either Waddles or I were talking in any realistic terms. We just think it *should* happen, not the same as snowballs chance in Hades of *actually* happening!
  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 10,101 Chairperson of the Boards
    Bowgentle said:
    Therealsmkspy said:
    The odds for 5s just need a bump if they do start going this route. 

    It's already hard enough to complete a five for a competitive player, and shorter latest status is really going to push away a lot of us. 

    Champing fives is pretty much all you've got at the five star level if you're someone that doesn't play for top 10 every event. 
    They don't care if they push away players who don't pay.
    They'll start caring if they push away too many paying players.
    Wins Based PvP with CP in placement is here to stay!!!

    30 seconds later...

    No it isn't!

Categories