Is the 4* tier dead?

fight4thedream
fight4thedream GLOBAL_MODERATORS Posts: 1,973 Chairperson of the Boards
edited January 2020 in MPQ General Discussion
Vhailorx said:
blankcanvas said:
I agree he doesn't look great but to say the 4* tier is dead is a little premature. 2019 gave us some fun characters like Juggs, Thanos, Ronin, Creed, (*cough* Steve and his magic hammer *cough*), MODOK, Hammond Torch to name a few.

But you are right that dilution continues to be a problem. Rather than rolling out characters relentlessly, it would be nice to see how the developers plan to tackle this subject in 2020. (Assuming shards has something to do with it).
There were many good 4*s released this year, but the 4* tier is still dead. 

Trash tier characters are always bad.  They just dilute the pool, and 4* land is very dilute. (Northstar is in this tier, I think.)

But even good 4* characters are now just treading water.  They do little to add to the variety of play for 5* players, nor can they compete with level 330+ 4* champs.  and even for newer players on whose rosters the good new 4*a would make a difference, the 4* tier is SOOOOO diluted now that it's necessary to hoard for more than a month (while grinding hard) to gather aeven a handful of targeted 4* covers). Would you rather have 10 covers for sabertooth, or 5 each for sabertooth and 2099, even if you think 2099 is a bit better?

Broken characters (worthy and to a lesser extent Juggs) are also bad because they invalidate all prior characters.  Are there really any 4*s that matter for 5* play right now beyond bishop, worthy, and (when boosted or otherwise able to tank) Juggs?  These characters break fundamental rules of mpq (they enable massive AP gain on round 2 in PvP, or they make aoe damage effectively zero cost). no one should advocate in favor the 4* tier because they want to see new broken 4*a.  That is just a bad outcome for everyone.
I have seen this argument on occasion and to be honest, I don't quite understand it.

For one thing, I don't think the majority of the players are 5* players so I imagine 4* characters still play a significant part for a good portion of the player base (I see a lot of 4* level rosters utilizing Juggs for example). But I also don't buy the argument that 4* characters add little variety for 5* players. Before the arrival of Kitty, PvP was for the most part a sea of Okoye/Thor teams. Fast forward to the end of 2019 and now I see: Kitty/Grocket, JJ/Bishop, and Worthy Cap/Hawkeye teams in addition to the 5* pairs of Okoye/Thor and Iceman/Prof X.

At least from my own personal observations, I am seeing a greater variety of competitively viable teams being used in PvP than ever before.

Now I understand there are some players who believe that a team of two 5* characters should always trump a 5*/4* pairing considering the difficulty in acquiring 5* characters but if the goal is to maximize the amount of fun for the most amount of players then this middle road approach seems to be the best one. Not every player can keep up with the 5* release schedule and in spite of the dilution issue, it is still easier to champ a 4* character than a 5* character.

Is it a perfect system? No. Dilution is a significant issue that needs to be addressed. There are a variety of possible solutions such as rotating drop rates based on team affiliations or as in the Evergreen tokens power colors, developing new events that give greater access to 4* covers/shards, update to the rewards structure and so on.

But what I am trying to understand is what people who make this argument about the 4* tier expect. If a 4* character power set does nothing noticeably significant they are written off as a waste of roster space. In contrast, if a 4* character power set does something that impacts the meta, they are called broken. I think the problem lies in the conceptualization that the different tiers should operate separately from each other, specifically with each higher tier clearly dominating the preceding tiers,  which I believe is bad game design.

The goal should be to intermesh the different tiers to expand possible strategies and thus the meta and I believe the 4* tier still has an important role to play in that regard. For example, Rogue was the MVP of my team for the Evergreen event. Her ability to lock out the other's team ability to gain green and the other effects of her Power Siphon ability really let her shine.  If anything we need more variety in PvP and PvE event styles that give opportunities for new strategies and game play dynamics.

The argument that new characters invalidate all prior characters only holds true under standard game play modes and is not a unique problem to the 4* tier. The same arguments can be made in all tiers. Granted, the 5* tier has notably slowed down on the power creep and instead embraced a lateral expansion of the top tier which I think has been a smart move as it allows more players to participate in higher tiers of play. And a key part of that expansion has been 4* characters.

So I am struggling to understand what is meant when people say "the 4* tier is dead." Are you suggesting the dev team stop making 4* characters? What characters would players chase then? 5* characters? How would that shift appeal to casual players and people who are not 5* players? Dilution would still be a problem and there will still be characters released that don't do anything remarkable in terms of the meta. But on top of that, the situation would worsen for non-competitive players. Progress for them while now perhaps experienced as a trickle would halt to an occasional drop.

I think the recent introduction of shards, the mighty tokens, and non-competitive PvE events show that devs are still looking for ways to address the 4* dilution problem without disrupting the game economy. As they have noted, they aren't finished implementing shards and/or mighty tokens into game rewards yet, and I think it is wise they are taking a more cautious approach. If they went all in from the get go and decided to rollback rewards since it was affecting their bottom line, they would take a lot of heat. Instead, they can monitor how people are utilizing the new shard system and consider carefully where to expand them in the current reward scheme. And I hope they continue to explore successful 4*/5* pairings to make more 5* characters relevant. I think a fun, robust PvP meta is one that allows for a variety of team compositions, whether they be 5*/5* pairings or 4*/5* pairings.

While I am quite aware that the current PvP meta isn't everyone's cup of tea, I have been enjoying it. And I am sure I am not the only one.

Edit to add: Original discussion found in Northstar Character thread.
«13

Comments

  • tiomono
    tiomono Posts: 1,654 Chairperson of the Boards
    I agree the tiers should be able to mesh together. The problem comes in when a team with a 4* and 3* stomps all dual 4* teams. Or when a 5* and 4* team stomps all dual 5* teams. If you work hard to get to the 5* tier and have over 50% of that tier available to play you should not struggle with a team that has a 4* on it. 

    There should be a level of risk in running one of your characters from the tier below the other not additional security.
  • HoundofShadow
    HoundofShadow Posts: 8,004 Chairperson of the Boards
    I think it's down to players having different visions of what MPQ should be. I think this is what I gathered:

    1) New players should be able to catch up with all 4* characters within 2 years, or even sooner. However, due to dilution, they will never be able to catch up without spending a lot of money.

    2) It is compulsory to have high level 4* in order to be competitive.

    3) 5* should automatically bulldoze 4* easily and without much difficulty.

    The flaws, that I think, with this is:

    1) It is assumed that the goal of all players is to champ all the characters in the game, which is obviously not true, based on the comment by the devs about players' playstyles.

    2) It is assumed that all players should be able to do this without spending a lot of money or without playing competitively. This also mean that players playing for progression rewards should be able to champ 4* characters as fast as competitive players.

    3) It is assumed that all players are playing for speed; therefore, players are only interested in characters that ends a match fast. I'm sure it has been mentioned by many here that MPQ is all about speed.

    When I learn about this forum, I saw a lot of comments about how it is impossible to catch up with 4* tiers and roster slot costs without spending a lot of money. Two years later, over 80 of my 4* is either champed or at 13 covers, without spending any form of money on this game. I have excessive HP income. This made me doubt what some of the vets are saying about not catching up because my experience contradicted what they are saying.

    As for MPQ is about speed, I played 4-6 hours after the first bracket of SCL 7 opened a number of times due to work. After I did the initial 4 clears, I still end up with position 5X. I really doubt that majority of the players are all about speed. 

    As for dilution problem, I believe that how the dev approach this problem depends on how majority of the players play the game. Players' behaviours have effects on how the devs solve the problem. If majority of the players are only interested in playing and leveling up their favourite characters as high as possible, then, in a sense, shards help them with dilution. However, if the belief is that all players should be able to champ it all, then shards is not helpful.

    I'm not sure if it's helpful or detrimental if the devs share how players play the game. If it contradicts how the players in here play the game, I think they might be demoralised and quit the game. 
  • peterdark
    peterdark Posts: 151 Tile Toppler
    tiomono said:
    I agree the tiers should be able to mesh together. The problem comes in when a team with a 4* and 3* stomps all dual 4* teams. Or when a 5* and 4* team stomps all dual 5* teams. If you work hard to get to the 5* tier and have over 50% of that tier available to play you should not struggle with a team that has a 4* on it. 

    There should be a level of risk in running one of your characters from the tier below the other not additional security.

    I generally agree with that but I can imagine IM40, Mags and Blackwidow 3* should have no problem competing against a Mysterio and Talos team :)
  • fight4thedream
    fight4thedream GLOBAL_MODERATORS Posts: 1,973 Chairperson of the Boards
    blankcanvas said:
    I agree with what you say about there still being life in the 4* tier. But it's absolutely down to personal preference and what players want to get out of the game.

    I'm pve only and play only for progression I have zero interest in placement so I really enjoy mixing teams up in pve to find new, innovative combinations.

    I appreciate that I am probably the minority but I have every 4* champed that I want and am only chasing new characters that interest me and I feel can add something different to the way I play (sadly I do not see Northstar in this bracket).

    @Vhailorx does raise important points around the desperate need for character rebalancing at 4* & 5* tiers to eliminate the so called trash tiers in both but also the issue of dilution which grows wider with every passing day.

    I think it is important that these points are not lost in the discussion over "is this character a dud" or "4* are dead" etc.

    To be honest, I don't think you are the minority at all.

    I think your attitude towards the game and which characters you want reflect a significant portion of the player base. For example, OML frequently features in fan favorite tokens even though he is considered competitively sub-par on the forum. Casual players are probably Marvel fans who have their own personal favorite characters and focus on collecting them regardless of their competitive value and are not overly concerned about champing every character in the game.

    Since they are playing casually, it's likely they are not familiar with or care all that much about the meta. It's only when a design is glaringly jarring such as 5* Hulk or 4* Emma that they may regret the time they invested in pursuing the character. Or perhaps they find some unique set up that works for them. 

    They might put a bit more effort in the game when a personal favorite is released but since they normally play casually, they probably don't expect to walk away with top rewards. Maybe for them an extra cover or two is a sufficient victory. And now with shards, they can work towards getting more covers of that character.

    I, however, am not a casual player. I play the game quite competitively and find the current meta a lot more fun and engaging. 2019 saw an abundance of well designed, fun 4* characters and new events featuring opportunities to win more 4* covers so I am left scratching my head by what is meant when someone says "the 4* tier is dead."

    Yes, the removal of bonus heroes was a significant loss, some 4* characters bring nothing interesting in terms of game play and dilution is a significant problem but I don't see how that adds up to arguing a whole tier is no longer relevant. 

    tiomono said:
    I agree the tiers should be able to mesh together. The problem comes in when a team with a 4* and 3* stomps all dual 4* teams. Or when a 5* and 4* team stomps all dual 5* teams. If you work hard to get to the 5* tier and have over 50% of that tier available to play you should not struggle with a team that has a 4* on it. 

    There should be a level of risk in running one of your characters from the tier below the other not additional security.

    We are going to have to agree to disagree here.

    I don't have an issue with inter-tier team synergy being the better option. I think synergy should take precedence over tier status. In fact, if the game dynamics operated in the way you wished, then one could make a legitimate argument that "the 4* tier is dead" since 4*s would be ineffective against all 5* characters. Ideally, there should be a healthy balance between 5*/5* teams and 4*/5* teams. I believe this allows more people to participate in PvP.

    I do agree their should be a level of risk running a lower tiered character but I imagine we would disagree on the parameters of such a risk.

    For example, Kitty/Grocket can take out most 5* teams with out much fuss. However, they are rendered almost completely useless by Black Suit Spider-man and are not a major threat to those running the Okoye/Thor (with Okoye tanking). I think that is sufficient but I know there are those who argue that since Black Suit Spider-man isn't a top tier character, the user incurs a greater risk utilizing him to counter Gritty and so don't find it a worthy solution.
  • tiomono
    tiomono Posts: 1,654 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited January 2020
    fight4thedream said:
    blankcanvas said:
    I agree with what you say about there still being life in the 4* tier. But it's absolutely down to personal preference and what players want to get out of the game.

    I'm pve only and play only for progression I have zero interest in placement so I really enjoy mixing teams up in pve to find new, innovative combinations.

    I appreciate that I am probably the minority but I have every 4* champed that I want and am only chasing new characters that interest me and I feel can add something different to the way I play (sadly I do not see Northstar in this bracket).

    @Vhailorx does raise important points around the desperate need for character rebalancing at 4* & 5* tiers to eliminate the so called trash tiers in both but also the issue of dilution which grows wider with every passing day.

    I think it is important that these points are not lost in the discussion over "is this character a dud" or "4* are dead" etc.

    To be honest, I don't think you are the minority at all.

    I think your attitude towards the game and which characters you want reflect a significant portion of the player base. For example, OML frequently features in fan favorite tokens even though he is considered competitively sub-par on the forum. Casual players are probably Marvel fans who have their own personal favorite characters and focus on collecting them regardless of their competitive value and are not overly concerned about champing every character in the game.

    Since they are playing casually, it's likely they are not familiar with or care all that much about the meta. It's only when a design is glaringly jarring such as 5* Hulk or 4* Emma that they may regret the time they invested in pursuing the character. Or perhaps they find some unique set up that works for them. 

    They might put a bit more effort in the game when a personal favorite is released but since they normally play casually, they probably don't expect to walk away with top rewards. Maybe for them an extra cover or two is a sufficient victory. And now with shards, they can work towards getting more covers of that character.

    I, however, am not a casual player. I play the game quite competitively and find the current meta a lot more fun and engaging. 2019 saw an abundance of well designed, fun 4* characters and new events featuring opportunities to win more 4* covers so I am left scratching my head by what is meant when someone says "the 4* tier is dead."

    Yes, the removal of bonus heroes was a significant loss, some 4* characters bring nothing interesting in terms of game play and dilution is a significant problem but I don't see how that adds up to arguing a whole tier is no longer relevant. 

    tiomono said:
    I agree the tiers should be able to mesh together. The problem comes in when a team with a 4* and 3* stomps all dual 4* teams. Or when a 5* and 4* team stomps all dual 5* teams. If you work hard to get to the 5* tier and have over 50% of that tier available to play you should not struggle with a team that has a 4* on it. 

    There should be a level of risk in running one of your characters from the tier below the other not additional security.

    We are going to have to agree to disagree here.

    I don't have an issue with inter-tier team synergy being the better option. I think synergy should take precedence over tier status. In fact, if the game dynamics operated in the way you wished, then one could make a legitimate argument that "the 4* tier is dead" since 4*s would be ineffective against all 5* characters. Ideally, there should be a healthy balance between 5*/5* teams and 4*/5* teams. I believe this allows more people to participate in PvP.

    I do agree their should be a level of risk running a lower tiered character but I imagine we would disagree on the parameters of such a risk.

    For example, Kitty/Grocket can take out most 5* teams with out much fuss. However, they are rendered almost completely useless by Black Suit Spider-man and are not a major threat to those running the Okoye/Thor (with Okoye tanking). I think that is sufficient but I know there are those who argue that since Black Suit Spider-man isn't a top tier character, the user incurs a greater risk utilizing him to counter Gritty and so don't find it a worthy solution.
    I didnt say all 4*'s should be ineffective vs 5*'s. I just feel that a team of a 5* and a 4* should not trump 90% of dual 5* teams.

    I have 11 5*'s champed. My best teams are never dual 5*'s or even three 5*'s in simulator. My most reliable offensive/defensive team is a 5* with two 4*'s. Certain 4*'s being that good are more in line with thinking that the 5* tier is dead. If there are combinations of 4* characters that can easily beat any combination of 5*'s, why progress your roster beyond 4* at all?
  • Halleck
    Halleck Posts: 30 Just Dropped In
    For 4* players, especially those that aren’t going into the 5* tier anytime soon (if ever), 4* releases remain relevant. This seems obvious, but maybe it needs to be said.

    If a 4* release is relevant to 5* players, and/or relevant to hyper-competitive play, those are both interesting and worth briefly noting in the respective character thread. However, I don’t think this is the standard by which a 4* character’s mechanics should be primarily judged.

    Dilution of the 4* tier remains a weighty concern for 4* players. Although it affects many aspects of the game, my personal preference is for this to be a separate topic of conversation from individual characters.
  • tiomono
    tiomono Posts: 1,654 Chairperson of the Boards
    peterdark said:
    tiomono said:
    I agree the tiers should be able to mesh together. The problem comes in when a team with a 4* and 3* stomps all dual 4* teams. Or when a 5* and 4* team stomps all dual 5* teams. If you work hard to get to the 5* tier and have over 50% of that tier available to play you should not struggle with a team that has a 4* on it. 

    There should be a level of risk in running one of your characters from the tier below the other not additional security.

    I generally agree with that but I can imagine IM40, Mags and Blackwidow 3* should have no problem competing against a Mysterio and Talos team :)
    So who is your 3rd 4* in this team? Im40 is a top 3 3* character easily on most people's list magneto is top 10 most likely. Give Talos and Mysterio (a wildly underrated character imo) any top 10 4* as a 3rd and it will stomp the 3*'s.
  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 10,275 Chairperson of the Boards
    The problem with talking about this topic as a broad generalisation is that there are sub tiers of players within the different * tiers. I always think there are basically from the 3* tier upwards 3 distinct sub-sects in each one ranging from shallow to medium to deep levelled/advanced rosters. Depending on where you are in these phases depends on what problems you face. Ruling out an entire tier will cause different problems based upon where you are. Reaching the 5* tier depends a lot on the champion rewards you could reap from the 3* tier, progressing in the 5* tier I would suggest depends a lot on the 4* champion rewards you reap.

    Even players who advance to the 5* tier are likely going to have to rely on their better 4* to some degree (as referenced by tiomono above) due to lack of a broad roster choice. Champ Kitty? Well done! What use is she without R4G? It is no different to when you went up to the 4* tier with a few champs but still used Dr. Strange for PvE clearing. There are phases that players go along and I imagine that the 4* tier is probably the one that is the most realistic target for the majority of players. I remember as a champed 2* but no champed 3* player thinking how fundamentally unfair Iron Fist + Luke Cage was when they had that attack & protect tile for nothing! After one match I am doing nothing to them and they are punching me in the face! I am sure any champed Bishop feels like that to a player who is "just in" the 5* tier whereas more advanced rosters will just laugh him off unless he is max champed. Tiers within tiers.

    What I took from the Bbigler "experiment" is that you can fast track if you streamline but I suspect that without the broad 4* roster needed to churn champ rewards he would not have progressed as anywhere near the pace in going up the 5* ladder itself.

    If I am honest my solution to making the 4* "relevant" again to 5* players would be a return in some form of vaulting but I dunno how that would go down and whether the "12 latest" is the right formula - if 5* players cover these characters with less effort to use as 5* champ reward batteries/feeders they might be happier at having Northstar's and Wolfsbane's who don't even register let alone move any needles.






  • Ed_Dragonrider
    Ed_Dragonrider Posts: 593 Critical Contributor
    edited January 2020
    tiomono said:
    peterdark said:
    tiomono said:
    I agree the tiers should be able to mesh together. The problem comes in when a team with a 4* and 3* stomps all dual 4* teams. Or when a 5* and 4* team stomps all dual 5* teams. If you work hard to get to the 5* tier and have over 50% of that tier available to play you should not struggle with a team that has a 4* on it. 

    There should be a level of risk in running one of your characters from the tier below the other not additional security.

    I generally agree with that but I can imagine IM40, Mags and Blackwidow 3* should have no problem competing against a Mysterio and Talos team :)
    So who is your 3rd 4* in this team? Im40 is a top 3 3* character easily on most people's list magneto is top 10 most likely. Give Talos and Mysterio (a wildly underrated character imo) any top 10 4* as a 3rd and it will stomp the 3*'s.
    You can have Namor for 3rd or Emma perhaps :)
  • Phumade
    Phumade Posts: 2,496 Chairperson of the Boards
    overall overall the 4* tier is prettty vibrant.  Lots of fun dynamic releases in the last year.  I also appreciate the different pvp formats that make allow different combos to shine.

    The main issue from my perspective is better roster/tier sorts and or preload combos.

    Unless you have a PhD in mpq chars, it’s incredibly hard to search and select out of 100+,200+,300+ slots.

    if you have all the 4* champed or at a usable level, you’d be hard pressed to know all the combinations and who counters what?  Someone had to remind me that I had a usable quake that would negate jugg gritty combos. In the current event.

    yes players need to know their roster but the devs can do a better rob of making it easier to experiment and learn the boundaries of your roster.

    during the first half of most events, I really enjoy using 5/4 combos to learn power sets when it’s easy and convenient.  

    But I switch to dual 5s because i don’t want to leave a 4* out that can be countered with a fast mirror match or another pair that nullifies.


  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 10,275 Chairperson of the Boards
    Ed_Dragonrider said:
    tiomono said:
    peterdark said:
    tiomono said:
    I agree the tiers should be able to mesh together. The problem comes in when a team with a 4* and 3* stomps all dual 4* teams. Or when a 5* and 4* team stomps all dual 5* teams. If you work hard to get to the 5* tier and have over 50% of that tier available to play you should not struggle with a team that has a 4* on it. 

    There should be a level of risk in running one of your characters from the tier below the other not additional security.

    I generally agree with that but I can imagine IM40, Mags and Blackwidow 3* should have no problem competing against a Mysterio and Talos team :)
    So who is your 3rd 4* in this team? Im40 is a top 3 3* character easily on most people's list magneto is top 10 most likely. Give Talos and Mysterio (a wildly underrated character imo) any top 10 4* as a 3rd and it will stomp the 3*'s.
    You can have Namor for 3rd or Emma perhaps :)

    I sort of begrudgingly like Namor...that man can blow a horn.
  • bluewolf
    bluewolf Posts: 5,821 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited January 2020
    Too many characters is a definite issue.  202 now?  Who can remember what they do at a certain point?

    There is definitely a diminishing return on adding characters that don't do much or do convoluted things.  People like to think about who they want in the game in terms of favorite Marvel characters, but odds seem pretty good that you won't use them because of their powerset regardless of how much you like them, assuming you are trying to minimize game time etc (and some people just can't win because they're just plain bad).

    No one posts "what powers do you want to see in the game" threads, which is kind of interesting to note.  It's all about "I want Throg, or Omega Red, or whoever".  

    There's no good answer to the level of confusion in trying to remember (around) 600 powers divided among 202 characters.  You can take characters into DDQ or review them or whatever, but ultimately the confusion just ends up strengthening the approach of "just always use what works best" which ultimately results in less variety in the game than you might expect given how many characters there are.
  • AXP_isme
    AXP_isme Posts: 809 Critical Contributor
    Namor’s not Talos level bad, his kit’s just a bit meh. He doesn’t do anything particularly well so it’s hard to justify bringing him along, even when boosted. 
  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 10,275 Chairperson of the Boards
    My playground is always the BigE in DDq but that is as much to satisfy comic book geekery as gameplay. I'm not particularly convinced the original Defenders line-up have any useful synergy but I'll play that sucker anyway. So from that point - now we are getting Alpha Flight I will want more Alpha Flight and I will use them at least in one node. But that isn't really a good basis to justify more dilution.
  • skittledaddy
    skittledaddy Posts: 999 Critical Contributor
    I love the 4* tier and frankly would prefer to stay in it indefinitely. I have no discernible desire to move to the 5* tier, but fear I will have to make that hard decision shortly as I am very near finally champing the 4* tier in its entirety.

    In full disclosure, however, I'm a devout PvE player and only dabble in PvP (usually I wait for the first season to flip and then only play to the 4* cover in Sim and the 10-pack in season rewards and I'm done), so that absolutely affects my opinion of the tiers compared to avid PvP players.
  • tiomono
    tiomono Posts: 1,654 Chairperson of the Boards
    OJSP said:
    tiomono said:
    If there are combinations of 4* characters that can easily beat any combination of 5*'s, why progress your roster beyond 4* at all?
    It depends on what we want out of the game.

    If we play competitively, I think we need 5*s to be able to get top5-t10 placements in the highest SCLs in PvE and without coordination in PvP. It's not impossible using only 4*s, but generally speaking, it's quite rare. Even if we're able to compete with exclusively 4*s now, as other people grow their rosters, chances are we'd get left behind. There is also another problem when our 4*s get to around lvl 335 and they are considered the same as 5* champions for MMR purposes. That could make PvP much harder if the majority of our 4* roster is not appropriately developed.

    If we don't play competitively, there are 2 ways of looking at this: the 5*s are a hinderance due to MMR, so it's better to stay at the 4* tier. Or, there's more opportunity to find interesting combinations, because we're not pressured to score high. A lot of boosted 4*s (and some unboosted 4*s) could beat low level championed 5* teams.

    I think if we don't actually care about placements or even moving to 5* land, it's much better to stay as 4* players now. We could choose an appropriate SCL to play for PvE, we could still get top progression in PvP by getting 75 wins and we could still get 2000 in SHIELD Sim if we time our climb appropriately.
    I can definitely agree that what you want out of the game completely impacts this discussion. It just feels off to me that in versus events 90% of the 5* tier champed struggles against teams that include certain unboosted 4*'s.
  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 10,275 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited January 2020
    tiomono said:
    OJSP said:
    tiomono said:
    If there are combinations of 4* characters that can easily beat any combination of 5*'s, why progress your roster beyond 4* at all?
    It depends on what we want out of the game.

    If we play competitively, I think we need 5*s to be able to get top5-t10 placements in the highest SCLs in PvE and without coordination in PvP. It's not impossible using only 4*s, but generally speaking, it's quite rare. Even if we're able to compete with exclusively 4*s now, as other people grow their rosters, chances are we'd get left behind. There is also another problem when our 4*s get to around lvl 335 and they are considered the same as 5* champions for MMR purposes. That could make PvP much harder if the majority of our 4* roster is not appropriately developed.

    If we don't play competitively, there are 2 ways of looking at this: the 5*s are a hinderance due to MMR, so it's better to stay at the 4* tier. Or, there's more opportunity to find interesting combinations, because we're not pressured to score high. A lot of boosted 4*s (and some unboosted 4*s) could beat low level championed 5* teams.

    I think if we don't actually care about placements or even moving to 5* land, it's much better to stay as 4* players now. We could choose an appropriate SCL to play for PvE, we could still get top progression in PvP by getting 75 wins and we could still get 2000 in SHIELD Sim if we time our climb appropriately.
    I can definitely agree that what you want out of the game completely impacts this discussion. It just feels off to me that in versus events 90% of the 5* tier champed struggles against teams that include certain unboosted 4*'s.
    I suspect however that this is actually a 5* player caused problem. If you start with Champed 5* MMR then you might see the odd 4* roster if you are lucky but your opponent's are other 5* players. So it is 5* players who are using these characters in ways that is annoying because 4* players shouldn't be on your radar. If as a 4* player I use Bishop it is because I have no other weapons available to me. But I doubt you are seeing my roster which tops out at 360. So it is 5* players who need to ween themselves off of using 4* characters as far as I can work out this issue.
  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 10,275 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited January 2020
    BTW - I caveat the above that if 5* players come in and say they can see 4* teams no problem all the time and it is 4* players who are the issue - I don't have their MMR and I would believe them 100%. That just doesn't line up with what I know about how the game works generally.

    P.S. None of the above should in anyway be construed as any negative comments towards 5* players. We all play to win, right? Well accept Talos and grills...
  • tiomono
    tiomono Posts: 1,654 Chairperson of the Boards
    DAZ0273 said:
    tiomono said:
    OJSP said:
    tiomono said:
    If there are combinations of 4* characters that can easily beat any combination of 5*'s, why progress your roster beyond 4* at all?
    It depends on what we want out of the game.

    If we play competitively, I think we need 5*s to be able to get top5-t10 placements in the highest SCLs in PvE and without coordination in PvP. It's not impossible using only 4*s, but generally speaking, it's quite rare. Even if we're able to compete with exclusively 4*s now, as other people grow their rosters, chances are we'd get left behind. There is also another problem when our 4*s get to around lvl 335 and they are considered the same as 5* champions for MMR purposes. That could make PvP much harder if the majority of our 4* roster is not appropriately developed.

    If we don't play competitively, there are 2 ways of looking at this: the 5*s are a hinderance due to MMR, so it's better to stay at the 4* tier. Or, there's more opportunity to find interesting combinations, because we're not pressured to score high. A lot of boosted 4*s (and some unboosted 4*s) could beat low level championed 5* teams.

    I think if we don't actually care about placements or even moving to 5* land, it's much better to stay as 4* players now. We could choose an appropriate SCL to play for PvE, we could still get top progression in PvP by getting 75 wins and we could still get 2000 in SHIELD Sim if we time our climb appropriately.
    I can definitely agree that what you want out of the game completely impacts this discussion. It just feels off to me that in versus events 90% of the 5* tier champed struggles against teams that include certain unboosted 4*'s.
    I suspect however that this is actually a 5* player caused problem. If you start with Champed 5* MMR then you might see the odd 4* roster if you are lucky but your opponent's are other 5* players. So it is 5* players who are using these characters in ways that is annoying because 4* players shouldn't be on your radar. If as a 4* player I use Bishop it is because I have no other weapons available to me. But I doubt you are seeing my roster which tops out at 360. So it is 5* players who need to ween themselves off of using 4* characters as far as I can work out this issue.
    It's absolutely 5* players doing it. But why is 90% of their high end roster a worse option than running unboosted 4*'s?

Categories