A discussion on the changing PvP Meta

fight4thedream
fight4thedream GLOBAL_MODERATORS Posts: 1,975 Chairperson of the Boards
edited September 2019 in MPQ General Discussion
Preface

First, I think it's important to preface this essay by stating that everything I am about to talk about is simply based on assumption and 100% conjecture, intermixed heavily with my own personal opinions and ideas. So take it with a grain a salt. Or feel free to ignore it as I have a feeling this is going to be a long one. I will have to remember to include a tl;dr at the end. (Please remind me if I forget)

Anywhoo, on to the point of discussion. The PvP meta is changing. We are shifting from an "offense is the best defense" to "defense is the best defense" meta. Long ago, when a new user would ask what a good defensive team was the answer was often your best offensive A team. But that has certainly changed, hasn't it?

In the beginning of the 5* era, when OML/Phoenix reigned king and queen, it was a rather simple calculus: the higher the level of the of a 5*meta elite character the riskier the proposition in challenging that team. It was common for many high end players to float quite high for long lengths of time. That remained mostly true until that legendary heart breaker Gambit was introduced. But for the sake of brevity, I am going to skip going into the details of that most controversial age and jump into the Thor/Okoye meta.

The Wakandan/Asgardian Connection 

In terms of pure offensive power and speed for PvP, there is no better team than Okoye/Thor.  Many quickly realized that if you are able to have Okoye tank red and yellow, you could not only better ensure Okoye's ability to retain TUs to enhance Thor's power set but also have her soak up damage and heal it off at the end of the match, allowing players to play PvP without exhausting their health pack limit. Furthermore, this team hits with such force that very few 5* teams, regardless of their champ levels, are safe.

Of course, there were calls for a nerf. Those calling for the nerf argued the team had too much power, was too fast and immediately rendered newer 5* obsolete. Those that defended the team pointed out that while powerful on offense, Okoye/Thor were relatively easy to beat on defense and unlike the Gambit meta, players could use a variety of teams to beat them. Fortunately or unfortunately, depending on your point of view, Okoye/Thor has been left untouched.

Enter: Kitty Pryde

Up until the arrival of Kitty Pryde, PvP played at the highest level was mainly a sea of Thor/Okoye with the occasional Thanos/Black Panther and other random 5* pairings here and there. As is the case when you have one team dominating the meta, most players choose to run with that team but to be frank, it was quite monotonous.  However, this changed with the arrival of Kitty Pryde.

Simply put, the Kitty/Grocket pairing revolutionized the PvP meta. Here is a team that forces a player running Thor/Okoye to take a gamble: do I risk it and hope I can remove enough strike tiles before things get out of control or do I skip? While Jessica Jones was a significant precursor to this, Kitty/Grocket took it to a whole nother level. With Jessica, you can see her trap tiles and can work around it somewhat or have Okoye take the damage and heal it off if all goes well. But with Kitty, the damage stacks. The longer it takes you to remove the tiles or down her, the more dangerous it gets. 

And once again, a significant section of the forum community called for a nerf. 

Why the community calls for nerfs

I think it's important to keep in mind the reason why forum members request nerfs: their enjoyment of the game is being hindered by a character, or more precisely, a specific mechanic a character has that impedes their ability to reach satisfaction, most usually winning. In the case of Kitty/Grocket, it's the inability to win such a match up without great luck or having specific characters who can counter their skill set, specifically Black Suit Spider-man.

I imagine the Kitty/Grocket pairing affected a significant portion of the player base since the dev teams released two 4* characters to help deal with strike tiles, Thanos and Sabertooth, about half a year since her release. While it is certainly debatable how effective these two are at dealing with Kitty/Grocket, I think we can take it as a sign that the Dev team is at least aware of the frustration that this particularly team is causing.

However, for me personally, what I find rather fascinating is this move to more defensive mechanics.

Does "defense" have a place in the PvP meta? 

By its very nature, any worthwhile defensive mechanic is bound to cause the player some degree of frustration. The more effective the mechanic, the more frustration it will cause.  And without question, the strongest defensive mechanics are passive since the AI cannot be trusted to use an active defensive power reliably.

The top passive defensive abilities that come to mind are:

Black Bolt's Energy Channeling (black power)
Dr. Strange's Flames of the Faltine (yellow power)
Thanos's Court Death (black power)
Jessica Jone's Damning Evidence (blue power)
Kitty Pryde's Phase and Conquer (yellow power)
Bishop's Overclocked and General Reserves/Energy Conversion (red and blue powers)

There are primarily two effective types of defensive abilities:

1. Damage dealing
    a. direct such as Flames of the Faltine or Energy Channeling
    b. indirect such as tile enhancement or AP generation

2. Match delaying
    a. stun
    b. AP theft/burn
    c. jump to the front
    d. damage reduction

Notably, Bishop has both damage dealing and match delaying powers in almost all sub-categories with the exception of damage reduction but more on this point later.

In terms of game design, ideally the conditions that activate the passive defensive mechanism are such that a player feels they have some level of control or ability to reduce the risk of or avoid the mechanic entirely. I think Jessica Jones captures this perfectly. The attacking player sees where her trap tiles are and can make choices they feel are to their benefit when fighting such an opponent. In theory, it is totally possible to go into the match an escape unscathed by her passive defensive mechanism (although often not the case in practice).

It was with the arrival of Kitty/Grocket where this semblance of damage control was lost and thus the forum outcry.  The reason: the damage stacking accelerates at such a high degree that a player was almost guaranteed to take significant damage or lose, leaving the attacking player to feel helpless. A players ability to negotiate this battle was tied specifically to the opening board, or to put it more simply to luck: A lucky attacking player will be able to have a board that will allow them to match away enough tiles within the first two or three moves. A not so lucky player will have been able to manage a win but at the loss of one or two members. And a player with bad luck will have to watch in horror as their whole team is taken out since they couldn't match away enough strike tiles or counter the ability in time.

Any good defensive team is bound to cause player frustration 

There is no escaping this fact. The reason for the outcry on the forum is simple: people are not used to losing anymore. In no uncertain terms, Okoye/Thor was basically an insta-win, especially if you have the ideal build of having Okoye tanking for Thor. The pairing allows players to punch way above their weight class. Before the arrival of Kitty/Grocket and Bishop, high level PvP was basically a sea of Okoye/Thor teams with the occasionally sighting of Thanos/Panther and sometimes a rare non-meta pair.  

This is no longer the case. 

Now, many players will use Thor/Okoye for their initial climb and switch to Kitty/Grocket when going to shield and hop. Recently, I have seen players use Bishop/Jessica Jones as well once they have finished their climb. Finally, defense is an actual facet of PvP meta play. Before the arrival of Kitty/Grocket and Bishop, the best defense was to simply add champ levels to your best A team. But this has changed to a great degree.

Is this not what we have been asking for? More variety at the top level of play? The ability to use more of your roster?

I understand that Kitty/Gritty and Bishop are very frustrating to fight against, particularly when the three are teamed together in S.H.I.E.L.D. Simulator, because the odds of winning are not certain and the risk of taking significant damage is high. But isn't that what a good defensive team should be? 

I am not saying this to belittle the very real frustrations of many who have posted about the current issues they have with PvP. I think it is important to communicate what you find unenjoyable about the game. However, I do feel many high end players have gotten used to going through PvP without facing much risk because Okoye/Thor enabled them to do so. 

Bishop is the Okoye/Thor nerf

Looking at the design of Bishop, it seems rather clear to me that he was purposefully designed to disrupt the Okoye/Thor meta and serve as a bridge between the 4* and 5* tier. He self-generates AP from 5* match damage, on defense stuns whichever character is out front and passively doles out damage. He also has a pretty decent health pool meaning he can potentially stun lock a whole team before going down. 

Now the idea of a 4* character outshining the whole 5* tier in terms of defensive capability might strike some as odd but I think he serves his intended purpose well.  He is not a character many are likely to climb with since he basically eats a health pack after each match. He does not adversely affect the lower tiers and he has given value to Jessica Jones, Dr. Strange, Daredevil and even to Silver Surfer. He also is effective against Kitty/Grocket teams. 

I believe the dev team are working to diversify the PvP play experience and Bishop is intended to play a significant part in that move. Up until recently, the meta has always been dominated by one team or character and meta changes were often the result of nerfs. I think the devs realize the potential backlash they would receive if they did nerf Okoye/Thor and so they are trying a new approach that deals with the issues that Okoye/Thor poses to the PvP without having to nerf them outright. 

Now if you are the cynical type, you might argue that they are trying to fix one broken mechanic with another broken mechanic. But I believe what we are currently witnessing is the growing pains to reach a healthier, more varied PvP experience. Obviously, the current state of affairs is not perfect. The existence of Bishop is creating a need for counter mechanics. 

Counters Characters

Silver Surfer is one option when going up against a Bishop team and while not ideal he does get the job done if you have him at a high enough level. Yes, there is the potential risk that you may invite more hits running a Surfer team but then again what team is safe in the current Okoye/Thor and Kitty/Grocket meta? If you are worth a good amount of points, odds are you will get hit regardless of the team you run. One of the arguments for not nerfing Okoye/Thor is that they are easy to beat on defense so I fail to see why a player would worry about taking on hits running a Surfer/Thor team as opposed to Thor/Okoye. I suppose people might hit you just for the novelty of seeing Surfer or simply because a player's Surfer is significantly lower in champ levels than a player's Okoye.

Admittedly, there aren't a lot of players running around with a high level Surfer and I do feel he needs to be buffed a bit because of power creep. It does bother me on a comic geek level that cosmic characters with the power to destroy planets are noticeably weaker than earthbound characters with less impressive feats. But that's a topic for a different day. 

Similarly, Black Suit Spider-man is a good counter to Kitty/Grocket and you will see some players occasionally bust out the black suit to deal with that specific team. Additionally, 4* Thanos and Sabertooth were added to give players more options, although honestly, I don't think 4* Thanos is a great choice. But as with all things MPQ, these scale differently:

Viable Kitty/Grocket Counters:

Great: Black Suit Spider-man, Bishop
Ok: Sabertooth, 5* Daredevil
Poor: 4* Thanos

I personally would like the dev team to tweak the Black Suit Spider-man so that he and DD can be the go to team for dealing with Kitty/Grocket. Unfortunately, they are a bit too slow currently. 

For 5* rosters, there are only four viable options for countering Bishop:

OK counter: Silver Surfer, Bishop
Poor counter: 5* Doctor Octopus, 5* Black Widow

I am hoping somewhere down the line, hopefully sooner rather than later,  they will introduce a good character that passively reflects stun attacks. 

Conclusion: The Current State of the PvP Meta

I think the meta is in a better place than it was last year, at least at the higher end of PvP. Last year, it was complaints about the monotony of having to fight Okoye/Thor teams over and over again. This year started off with calls for Kitty/Grocket being nerfed but I think many high level players have found ways to deal with that team. For example, Cloak and Dagger TUs have proven quite useful when fighting that team. Although I imagine Kitty/Grocket is more of a pain for 4* players than anyone else.

I imagine in time players will find ways to deal with Bishop, too. But I do understand if you don't have counter characters for these high damage risk teams, it certainly isn't fun having to deal with them. And you certainly have every right to voice your frustrations on the issue. For me personally, I do find the game more interesting because matches are no longer an insta-win, the new mechanics make for a varied play experience and I can use more of my roster but I understand that I am fortunate in that regard and for those who don't have a means to deal with these defensive teams, it can be a wall of frustration.

But I do think it's important that the dev team continue to move away from the "one team to rule them all" meta and hopefully achieve the ideal rock-paper-scissors-lizard-spock play experience. And I think strong defensive teams should have a place at that table, with proper counters of course.

I would like to conclude this think piece with the questions that spurred me on to write it in the first place: What is a good defensive team? Does defense have a place in the PvP meta?

Tl; dr (haha didn't forget!): The current meta is currently undergoing growing pains to achieve a healthier, more varied play experience. Compared to last year, there are more viable options when playing PvP events (perhaps not so much in PvP Sim?). Bishop was designed specifically to deal with Okoye/Thor and as a bridge between 4* and 5* tier play. New counters are needed against Bishop or at least a decent Surfer buff. Finally, I left off with two questions: What is a good defensive team? Does defense have a place in the PvP meta?
«134

Comments

  • Tony_Foot
    Tony_Foot Posts: 1,814 Chairperson of the Boards
    That’s probably a great post but at this point I can’t be bishoped to read that much on the game in one sitting, but I will give you a like anyway for effort.
  • jp1
    jp1 Posts: 1,081 Chairperson of the Boards
    I appreciate the OP and I agree completely. For me it is almost an argument that you should be entitled to be guaranteed a win or the character needs a nerf. For all the talk about making the game interesting, people just want it to stay the same.

    There is a segment of the player base that doesn’t sit around in Line rooms exploiting the system for easy wins. For us, Bishop has made it possible to climb higher than before without losing our hats from retals.

    I don’t agree that his mechanic is stupid at all, for the most part I think he functions exactly as intended. Throw away arguments I have seen that are “you are punished for making a match 3 in a match 3 game” are too basic and ignore the fact we aren’t playing bejeweled. Many characters “punish” you for doing things that are a normal part of the game, arguably Bishop is the greatest offender...but, that doesn’t mean he is broken.

    I also disagree that the argument about whether or not Bishop can be beat is irrelevant. It is the most relevant point. I climb to 2000 in SIM right through the Bishop wall that is “impossible”. I also take retals to the tune of about 200 points shortly after leaving my Bishop/Gritty out in Sim at those levels. He is manageable. 

    Wether or not he is “fun” or not is subjective enough that I think everyone will just have to form their own opinions on the matter.

    In any case, just wanted to say I appreciate the well thought out post which conveys how I feel about the meta situation and nerfing pretty accurately. It’s important to build this bridge between 4* and 5* tiers to diversify roster use and make the ever increasingly difficult leap a little more palatable for those players on the way up.
  • shinnaruto
    shinnaruto Posts: 60 Match Maker
    edited September 2019
    When I run in to too many Bishops, I either:
    A ) Counter with my own Bishop and let them slaughter each other
    B ) Try to put forth my best 4 star team

    I think it is just the fact that it is a 4 star trumping/disrupting so many 5 star teams. If Bishop was a 5 star, then this would not be an issue. That is how you know he is broken or the way they are building the 5 and 4 star tiers are broken. Bishop plays like a 4.5*
  • Borstock
    Borstock Posts: 2,733 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited September 2019
    While I appreciate the effort put into the OP, for complete rosters, defense in this game is currently limited to Bishop. Every single other team can be wrecked frequently and at a win rate greater than 90%, including the offensive metas of Thorkoye and Gritty.

    I disagree that the meta was ever "offense is the best defense". In my opinion and experience, there have only ever been 2 defensive strategies prior to Bishop that worked on a semi-regular basis:

    1:  Characters with frequent and long animations that took up a lot of time, incentivizing players to skip in order to avoid a tedious match (ex: Mr. Cardusa)

    2:  Pre-meganerf Gambit

    Every other team I have personally run got demolished on defense; power teams, healing teams, protect tile teams.... All of them.
  • tiomono
    tiomono Posts: 1,654 Chairperson of the Boards
    Well put together and interesting read.

    Imo Kitty/grocket coming along did not revolutionize the meta at the high end game though. Thorkoye still beats them without much fuss. Thorkoye is still in my eyes the undisputed top dogs.

    Gritty brought options. But also brought new challenges to 4* and young 5* rosters. Notably she already had a perfect counter to her best partner in game when she was released. 

    I sincerely hope they get a bishop counter for 5* players in place quickly. He is taking away options for players. He came out and slapped every 5* in the face and forced them to skip or call out a squad of their 4* buddies. But since for 5* players he is often paired with a 5* character it makes bringing a team of 4's to deal with him highly risky.

    I love expanding the meta but the growing pains are hard. And bishop tried to go from 2 feet tall meta to 6 feet tall overnight. Too much growth too fast. All the 5* characters are getting stretch marks from bishops growth. He needs to slow his mullet down.
  • ZootSax
    ZootSax Posts: 1,819 Chairperson of the Boards
    A very interesting and well thought out post, to be sure, but I'm curious how you can say having one character dominate two tiers of play is on the path to "(achieving) a healthier, more varied play experience" in the TLDR?  

    I gave up on non-seed PVP this season because the Bishop wall was starting as low as ~250pts for my MMR (partially-covered 5*'s at Lv315 & champed 4*'s at Lv280) and accidental cascades with Lv266 3*'s will trigger a ~Lv290-310 Bishop.  It doesn't matter who is boosted or who the featured character is.  4* PVP is Bishop/Featured/(some guy/gal).  When I get a more varied play group of opponents in the Dark Avenger PVEs, yet can't choose the difficulty, PVP is a pointless drag rather than something enjoyable.  Granted, I was always more of a PVE player, but I never before experienced one character who sucked the life out of PVP and that even includes with OML was practically everywhere in 2* & 3* MMR PVP.
  • tiomono
    tiomono Posts: 1,654 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited September 2019
    ZootSax said:
    A very interesting and well thought out post, to be sure, but I'm curious how you can say having one character dominate two tiers of play is on the path to "(achieving) a healthier, more varied play experience" in the TLDR?  

    I gave up on non-seed PVP this season because the Bishop wall was starting as low as ~250pts for my MMR (partially-covered 5*'s at Lv315 & champed 4*'s at Lv280) and accidental cascades with Lv266 3*'s will trigger a ~Lv290-310 Bishop.  It doesn't matter who is boosted or who the featured character is.  4* PVP is Bishop/Featured/(some guy/gal).  When I get a more varied play group of opponents in the Dark Avenger PVEs, yet can't choose the difficulty, PVP is a pointless drag rather than something enjoyable.  Granted, I was always more of a PVE player, but I never before experienced one character who sucked the life out of PVP and that even includes with OML was practically everywhere in 2* & 3* MMR PVP.
    Bishop is not dominating the 4* tier though.

    On another note. I'm kind of hoping this does not just morph into another bishop topic, lol. I have 2 topics all about him and see him plenty in sim right now. I need a safe space. I dont want to start having nightmares of bishop busting through my wall like the koolaid man yelling "OVERCLOCKED!"

    Edit: now that I think of it maybe we should all just start any comment about bishop with the all cap overclocked lol.
  • jackstar0
    jackstar0 Posts: 1,280 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited September 2019
    Man would I LOVE to see Surfer get a buff after all this time.

    He's so close to viable in his current state, but a little re-balance of more damage for Red, lower damage AND cost for Black would go a long way.

    My re-work would be:

    Blue -- Same+ New Passive
    At the start of each turn Silver Surfer heals 250 for every charged tile on the board. Silver Surfer cannot be stunned.

    Red -- higher damage by about 2-3k, no other changes

    Black -- lower cost to 9; up the destroyed tiles to 6; drop the damage by about 2k-3k
  • tiomono
    tiomono Posts: 1,654 Chairperson of the Boards
    Just realized I missed the 2 questions.

    Does defense have a place? 
    As I have progressed through the game there have for sure been characters that I would stop and think about how to beat. But not to the point that the game did not have a counter or strategy that worked against it. I guess I prefer counter strategies or characters over the idea of defense. In a game with as deep of a roster as mpq has going I dont think any team or character should just be a wall.

    What is a good defensive team?
    Well I left 5* daredevil and bishop out unshielded for over 40 hours in doctor dooms event and took 7 hits 3 of which were wins. So I'm gonna go with my hp free shield bishop. For my tier of play any team with bishop is usually not worth the hassle.
  • tiomono
    tiomono Posts: 1,654 Chairperson of the Boards
    jp1 said:
     It’s important to build this bridge between 4* and 5* tiers to diversify roster use and make the ever increasingly difficult leap a little more palatable for those players on the way up.
    To me a bridge character is one that is in that next tier up and plays well with the tier below them.

    For example 4* thor. She is a mediocre 4, but is deadly if she is your 1st 4*. As you transition to the next tier certain characters will pull their weight more when you have fewer champs in a tier. Then as you get more of the next tier up champed you should rely less on that character because you have more diverse teams and options in the tier you are moving into. And you all but stop using the tier below because the higher tier does stuff better or stronger.

    Bishop is not a bridge. I have 9 5* champs. For awhile I would use 2 of them in versus events. In sim I would run 3 5* characters. But now that Bishop is doing what he does I play versus events with 1 5* and bishop. And I play sim with 1 5*, a 4*, and bishop. Not because he is fun or interesting. But because he scares 5* players from hitting me. 

    Bishop is a top tier 4* and balanced just fine in his own tier. But when a character can make a whole tier above them just want to use the skip tax to beat him, something may be out of alignment.
  • Borstock
    Borstock Posts: 2,733 Chairperson of the Boards
    Oh man, 4* Thor was my go-to when I made the transition to 4-land. That's a really good example. Although, I will say that I tended to use her with 3* IM. So, I guess he's an example of a bridge character that played up. 
  • wymtime
    wymtime Posts: 3,759 Chairperson of the Boards
    Very good post by the OP.  For PVP defense does have a place for some players.  Some players play for high scores in PVP, some play for 75 wins, some play for 1200, some play for 900.  Placing a defensive team out can let a player float for a time period and not lose to many points.  Other players prefer to leave out an offensive team like Thor Okoye to take hits so they can climb off of the retaliations.

    overall for the 5* meta I do think it is in a similar place to what it was at this time last year.  Last year players were feeling the meta was stale because of Thor Okoye.  Even with Gritty Kitty the meta is still stale.  You mostly see Thor Okoye or Gritty Kitty and not much variety in between.  This is why I feel there should be more regular balance changes to the game even if it was every 3 months.  Buffing weaker characters or nerfing over used or strong characters should be part of any character based game.  
  • tiomono
    tiomono Posts: 1,654 Chairperson of the Boards
    Borstock said:
    Oh man, 4* Thor was my go-to when I made the transition to 4-land. That's a really good example. Although, I will say that I tended to use her with 3* IM. So, I guess he's an example of a bridge character that played up. 
    Exactly. But the more 4's you champ the less you use 3* ironman. Bishop is different. Imo if a new 5* doesnt do something to slow or stop bishop they are not useful. Currently the biggest challenge to all young 5* rosters is bishop and grocket. Not a super strong pairing of 5*. There are multiple answers to grocket in both 5* and 4* play. We are not there yet on bishop. I just hope it happens soon.
  • AXP_isme
    AXP_isme Posts: 809 Critical Contributor
    There’s some good analysis there OP with some interesting points. I’m not much of a pvp player and am a bit behind the curve in terms of characters so while I’m aware of the changing of the pvp meta it’s not something I have first hand experience of. My major concern would be that there are few viable counters to bishop and that none of them are easily accessible. If they added a new hard counter to bishop/gritty/[insert your bugbear here] tomorrow it would be inaccessible to large swathes of the player base. 

    I don’t want to sidetrack this discussion into one about dilution but every time a new character is introduced to freshen up the meta they are harder to cover than the one before. 5* acquisition while they’re in latest is hard enough but with the pit that is classics and the infrequency of bonus heroes, well... 4*s are no better, the chance of natively drawing a particular 4* are now tiny so you have to rely on BH to cover the new characters. For as long as this situation stays the same parts of the meta will stay stale and RNG will decide who gets to develop the next set of counters. 
  • WEBGAS
    WEBGAS Posts: 474 Mover and Shaker
    Great post and analysis....I may only add a suggestion to the development team: No nerfs, please, but only buffs  ;)

Categories