Okoye everywhere

145791012

Comments

  • MayoMayo Posts: 148 Tile Toppler
    If you have 550 Okoye, would you still be saying the same thing?

    My slice is ending soon and I just checked who my opponents are, and this is after crossing 900 points in the current SCL 10 PvP:

    Note: I record every team per skip, up to first 10 teams.

    Polaris/R4G
    Yelena Polaris
    Baby champed iHulkoye
    Polaris/Karnak
    Polaris/R4G
    Baby champed IHulk/ 500 Okoye
    Apocalypse/Onslaught
    Apocalypse/BRB
    Champed iHulkoye, level 480.
    340 Carbage/Medusa

    Out of 10, 3 teams are iHulkoye. I hardly call them being around everywhere. I think I have figured it out: iHulkoye is everywhere, but they are not everywhere in pvp, but they are everywhere in that player's mind.
    You can be skipping teams because they give minimum points. Also every seasoned player knows that if the slice is about to finish most players in the t25 range are shielded thus your data is purposely misleading. Facts can not be covered with biased data, i just started the next pvp and half the teams are okoye +ihulk but where you will find the most of this team is when climbing with the rest of players and when many whales enter between 30 to 12 hours to finish the slice.

    If I had okoye at 550 it is likely i also have a bunch of other 550s and would not care if okoye is nerfed as i can continue playing without a hickup.

    The only ones that would not like the nerfing  okoye are those who hoarded for months just to exploit the system. What are your okoye and i hulk levels?
  • SekiliciousSekilicious Posts: 232 Tile Toppler
    Phumade said:



     1200 is no longer a meaningful benchmark on comp vs casual.  The goal should be to speed all players past the 1-3* phases into 4* land where 1200 is the default expectation.  To facillate that player acceleration, let’s ease the road to 1200.  Longer matches that allow people to acquire and fire powers is okay for this tier of play

    As someone in four-star land without Polaris I get hit a lot and skip her unless she is with teammates that leave her vulnerable. I would love the progression rewards as well. I don’t think multiple mmr will help someone like me though. I would just get hit more often. I personally wish they didn’t value wins at 16pts for max progression. Ideally they would only count points I earn without subtracting those I lose. Or value wins at 30pts per lowering the win total to 40 wins for max progression. Either of these choices are pretty reasonable which probably means the developers do not agree with my assessment for how my four star experience should be. 
  • PhumadePhumade Posts: 2,060 Chairperson of the Boards
    Phumade said:



     1200 is no longer a meaningful benchmark on comp vs casual.  The goal should be to speed all players past the 1-3* phases into 4* land where 1200 is the default expectation.  To facillate that player acceleration, let’s ease the road to 1200.  Longer matches that allow people to acquire and fire powers is okay for this tier of play

    As someone in four-star land without Polaris I get hit a lot and skip her unless she is with teammates that leave her vulnerable. I would love the progression rewards as well. I don’t think multiple mmr will help someone like me though. I would just get hit more often. I personally wish they didn’t value wins at 16pts for max progression. Ideally they would only count points I earn without subtracting those I lose. Or value wins at 30pts per lowering the win total to 40 wins for max progression. Either of these choices are pretty reasonable which probably means the developers do not agree with my assessment for how my four star experience should be. 
    This profile is an Important type of player, and my suggestion is directly aimed at improving their play experience.

    AS a 4* player you should be  seeing and hitting 3* teams to 700-800.  The hope is that other peer level 4* players should start filling in those Q for 40-60 points and give you a better shot at hitting 1200.  I’ll certainly acknowledge that lots of testing needs to happen to see the real world effects on ques.  I’ll also acknowledge that the 5* players will hit your team, but again: 1. ELO design limits your real point losses and below 1000 your actually generating shard points..   2.  The ideal scenario is that those 5* roster start using a wider diversity of 5* chars creating more chances that you have an ideal 4* counter play team, while they wait for an ideal opportunity to catch point waves to 2000, 3000 etc.


  • PhumadePhumade Posts: 2,060 Chairperson of the Boards


    Players are able to progress even more quickly with Shards, Daily Quests, Milestone quests etc. So, how fast do you think it should take for new players to hit 4* land? What's the timeframe, and for what kind of players is that time frame for?


    This is a great question that cuts to heart of these discussions. What should the avg play exp feel like for a player of my roster size / point expectation?

    With the acknowledgement that players are advancing much faster, let’s critically look at the fundamental point and matchmaking mechanics to see if it still serve the various 5* tiers, 4* tiers.  

    From my personal perspective,  the lack of new 3* chars tells me that 3* tier is dead and really just an introduction to 4* mechanics and high level pvp play.

    So if I was redesigning the exp from scratch ( and we all remember Kabir and Anthony repeatedly saying they deleted and reinstalled from scratch to always see the new player exp). I would scale the prologue to be 1*-3* type missions. With the idea that 1*-3* players are focusing on learning the structure and format of various events.  Once you have a few 4* champs. You should at least  be playing pve and pvp to prog.

    overall I think prologue content with 3* should last around 6 moths with players making tangible progress to 4* champs with them being able to complete a pve pvp progression ladder in 12 months.   With the idea they might be chasing 4* for the next 2 years before breaking into baby 5* land.
  • HoundofShadowHoundofShadow Posts: 4,274 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited 28 February 2021, 08:17
    To Phumade,

    What kind of paying players will that kind of progress apply to? VIP players? $2.99 players? SCL Bundle players? Or others?

    Using my playstyle as a reference, it took me about 8 months to champ all 3* by being 100% f2p and playing competitively.

    You need 61 roster slots to cover one 1*, thirteen 2* and forty seven 3*. The total HP needed up to 61st slot is 23,480. The players need to earn 23,480/180 days = 130.44 HP everyday in order to progress pass 3* land. I don't think 6 months is achievable for most full progression players.

    Also, by fast tracking players to 4* land, you are increasing the pressure to gather ISO-8 and hero points to champ and roster them in time. Given that new 4* appear 4-5 times before rotating out, it's really easy to fully cover them with decent placement.  Your solution will require the number of HP gain for new players to be increased substantially, which I don't think the dev or the finance will be agreeable to. At the end of day, what benefits does the dev gain by reducing their revenues and increasing rewards for players substantially?


  • SekiliciousSekilicious Posts: 232 Tile Toppler
    Phumade said:
    Phumade said:


    AS a 4* player you should be  seeing and hitting 3* teams to 700-800.  The hope is that other peer level 4* players should start filling in those Q for 40-60 points and give you a better shot at hitting 1200.  I’ll certainly acknowledge that lots of testing needs to happen to see the real world effects on ques.  I’ll also acknowledge that the 5* players will hit your team, but again: 1. ELO design limits your real point losses and below 1000 your actually generating shard points..   2.  The ideal scenario is that those 5* roster start using a wider diversity of 5* chars creating more chances that you have an ideal 4* counter play team, while they wait for an ideal opportunity to catch point waves to 2000, 3000 etc.


    Yeah testing would be good. Here is my experience. I see a lot of 3* teams to about 600. Boosted sure, but with Grocket and Gamora I can usually kill them off pretty quickly. My float is around 450 because Polaris was designed to target Grocket. Her viable counters are herself, Medusa, and Sabertooth. I have Medusa but she doesn’t act as a deterrent. So when I reach 650 and log off to do other things I expect to lose around 150 in a short amount of time, until my point total is not worth the trouble. I rarely get hit by 5* rosters, but in your scenario I would expect to see then more often. And get hit more often. The only way I would expect to reach 1200 points without is I did each PvP session in a single sitting when no one else is playing, or by shield hopping. Much like I do now. I took a break from the game after I reach 4* (hence the reason my 4* roster is so thin) land but I remember my 3* experience being similar, though with a lower float. 

    I like this discussion. I 100% agree that progression in PvP should be achievable by the average player without spending HP on shields. Like it is with PvE now. Maybe that would be easier with your idea.  Other ideas would be worth exploring as well.
  • acescrackedacescracked Posts: 1,046 Chairperson of the Boards
    I’d prefer instead of castrating characters we shut out each SCL in proportion to roster strength . The top 4 SCL could be limited by quantity of 5 stars on roster. SCL 7, you can’t have more than two 5*, for example , 10 for 8, 20 for 9, and 21 plus you MANDATORY play SCL 10. This would keep the cowards who don’t want to play against their peers from bullying much weaker rosters ( Please don’t insult me with the lame excuse , “ I’m not a coward , I’m just not interested in the reward vs time and resources required ). This way MMR levels would be more balanced and competitive, you’d be facing tons of mirror matches most likely , which is great because it would stop players from bringing a gun to a knife fight . 

    SCL & MMR have nothing to do with each other in PvP. You'd face the same opponents no matter which SCL you choose. Thought maybe you meant placement rewards until your last statement.

    Btw, I'm not a coward, I'm just interested in the reward vs time and resources required. Not trying to insult you with a lame excuse.
  • PhumadePhumade Posts: 2,060 Chairperson of the Boards
    To Phumade,

    Also, by fast tracking players to 4* land, you are increasing the pressure to gather ISO-8 and hero points to champ and roster them in time. Given that new 4* appear 4-5 times before rotating out, it's really easy to fully cover them with decent placement.  Your solution will require the number of HP gain for new players to be increased substantially, which I don't think the dev or the finance will be agreeable to. At the end of day, what benefits does the dev gain by reducing their revenues and increasing rewards for players substantially?


    Devs have already made that decision with the loosening of shards cp and covers.  At the end of the day the questions of revenue and margins is q question for accounting.  Especially with them breaking up with Sony and moving to gaming as a service.  Indeed does anyone think the changes to work allocation (I.e. seems like employee workflow changed a lot based on output) are related to realigning employees and workload to a LT Service revnue model.

    the most important point to consider is the the value of a new lifetime costumer.  In my my day and age. Every cover was paid at full retail (you had to play aggressive, LOTS of matches,, including multiple copies of every 2*/3*.   These days this early resources and covers come much faster. ( and to be honest,  I could t break 1300 until I got my first XFW champ so almost a year before I was a full progression player).  To be fair my lifetime spend has be used over 6 years 2400 days.  In comparison, if you plopped me down fresh in the game today at day 0.  The expected dollar spend to get back to my current ladder position is gonna substantially less than my actual spend.

    now those lower tier resources flow much faster and more naturally.  That’s was a developer lead decision that was presumably part of some outlook plan.

    I personally think that’s an open issue on wether hp gain is a real issue for players.  I achieved my critical mass In The days before saved covers,  so I view supply logistics with a critical eye.

    you and I both pray they have a smart enough financial analyst who can  who can properly align the cost structure to whatever revenue model and resource tree results.  


  • HoundofShadowHoundofShadow Posts: 4,274 Chairperson of the Boards
    HP will still be the main breaking point because it's their main source of income. Let's not forget that HP&CP was reduced/traded for shards. If players are fast tracked to 4* land within 6 months, something else will be "taken away", which is likely to be CP and HP. History has shown that such events happened a lot of time. I think that the only time they will be generous with everything is when they decide to close down MPQ. For example, the last couple f2p mobile games that I played, Marvel Battle Lines and Sega Heroes, became more generous with their resources. 

    Ultimately, I think your suggestion should benefit only players who go for a minimum of full progression in pves and play for top 10 placement up to scl 7 PvPs and top 25 placements in PvPs from scl 8 to scl 9. I can't imagine what the scoring structure for all the slices would be if ~1200 is the average floating point.  :o
  • Michael1957Michael1957 Posts: 630 Critical Contributor
    edited 1 March 2021, 08:59
    I’d prefer instead of castrating characters we shut out each SCL in proportion to roster strength . The top 4 SCL could be limited by quantity of 5 stars on roster. SCL 7, you can’t have more than two 5*, for example , 10 for 8, 20 for 9, and 21 plus you MANDATORY play SCL 10. This would keep the cowards who don’t want to play against their peers from bullying much weaker rosters ( Please don’t insult me with the lame excuse , “ I’m not a coward , I’m just not interested in the reward vs time and resources required ). This way MMR levels would be more balanced and competitive, you’d be facing tons of mirror matches most likely , which is great because it would stop players from bringing a gun to a knife fight . 

    SCL & MMR have nothing to do with each other in PvP. You'd face the same opponents no matter which SCL you choose. Thought maybe you meant placement rewards until your last statement.

    Btw, I'm not a coward, I'm just interested in the reward vs time and resources required. Not trying to insult you with a lame excuse.
    I’m saying stop basing SCL levels on MMR and base them on roster strength , both by quantity and quality of champed 5*.  Other players in my alliance playing SCL 9 with 0-1 5* see rosters of 12 5* and 250 total characters. Those players take placement 1-25 every event . So divide SCL 7 through 10 into levels restricted by the roster . It’s done in all competitive sport levels from boxing to wrestling, you don’t battle outside a very narrow class where opponents are essentially equal and someone weighing 250 isn’t fighting someone 120, which is analogous to most PvAI battles here .
  • ThaRoadWarriorThaRoadWarrior Posts: 5,785 Chairperson of the Boards
    I’d prefer instead of castrating characters we shut out each SCL in proportion to roster strength . The top 4 SCL could be limited by quantity of 5 stars on roster. SCL 7, you can’t have more than two 5*, for example , 10 for 8, 20 for 9, and 21 plus you MANDATORY play SCL 10. This would keep the cowards who don’t want to play against their peers from bullying much weaker rosters ( Please don’t insult me with the lame excuse , “ I’m not a coward , I’m just not interested in the reward vs time and resources required ). This way MMR levels would be more balanced and competitive, you’d be facing tons of mirror matches most likely , which is great because it would stop players from bringing a gun to a knife fight . 

    SCL & MMR have nothing to do with each other in PvP. You'd face the same opponents no matter which SCL you choose. Thought maybe you meant placement rewards until your last statement.

    Btw, I'm not a coward, I'm just interested in the reward vs time and resources required. Not trying to insult you with a lame excuse.
    I’m saying stop basing SCL levels on MMR and base them on roster strength , both by quantity and quality of champed 5*.  Other players in my alliance playing SCL 9 with 0-1 5* see rosters of 12 5* and 250 total characters. Those players take placement 1-25 every event . So divide SCL 7 through 10 into levels restricted by the roster . It’s done in all competitive sport levels from boxing to wrestling, you don’t battle outside a very narrow class where opponents are essentially equal and someone weighing 250 isn’t fighting someone 120, which is analogous to most PvAI battles here .
    By all accounts, MMR is already based on roster strength, but it does it with a kind of a naive assessment of your highest leveled 3 characters. I'm not sure a qualitative analysis of your entire roster would be possible to implement, because so many of the characters are only "good" or even "playable" if you have other characters on that same team. Also this is a "great" opportunity for somebody on the Dev team to assign values to characters that are unearned by actual quality simply because they think they should work (see: every active power character released as a counter to a passive meta historically). That being said, I've been proposing that SCLs gate characters by character level rather than gating players by total roster progress. If you want to play down an SCL or 3, fine, but you can't use your 550s etc. This is more like Spec Racing (everyone drives identical cars) than Unlimited Class racing (run what you brung, generally the best funded team wins).
  • MayoMayo Posts: 148 Tile Toppler
    edited 1 March 2021, 17:45
    Dogface said:
    Mayo said:


    The only ones that would not like the nerfing  okoye are those who hoarded for months just to exploit the system. What are your okoye and i hulk levels?
    That's a bold statement. First of all, what do you mean by exploiting the system? It's a regular power, no tricky play. If you want to talk exploit, I'd consider getting Thor to half health more of an exploit.

    Second, Okoye has never been too much of a problem until iHulk came along. I can tell you out of experience that my regular Okoye/Medusa team was/is no match for no one whatsoever. Great to win, awful on defense.

    Third, as many seem to forget. There's more than just PVP in this game. Nerfing Okoye would make PVE harder/take longer. Maybe if you're a veteran with a sh*tload of highleveled champs you can afford to have a character nerfed. I'm not in that boat. 

    And just FYI, my Okoye is 457, my iHulk is 315.

    How many players have ihulk without okoye in pvp? How many players can use okoye with any other character with aoe power? Elminate hulk and still okoye should be overpowered with the correct teammate, ihulk without okoye is almost unusable.

    Using half thor is a minor exploit, using it in pvp will bring you easy retals, i chase those teams with my brb+thanos team and rarely lose. Yes, okoye + thor is also very bad at defense. Okoye and ihulk is good on attack and defense.

    If pve is your concern, as i suggested before,  devs could just block okoye+ihulk teams in pvp.

    So your okoye is more than 140 lvls over ihulk, guess you have plenty other 5* at okoye level. Losing her in pvp would not be a problem unless you hoarded like crazy and neglected growing your roster and have no other viable teams...that is exploiting the system.

    Having that okoye puts you in a boat you should have not boarded, better stay at your true level and grow your roster naturally and battle players around your true level.

    If 5* captain marvel and other 5*s were nerfed because players were exploiting them then it is likely okoye is in row too. Making a balanced and fair game experience is part of its longevity and profitability.

    If players exploited the system and only hoarded for Okoye then maybe it is time to start chasing other options just in case someday okoye gets nerfed and will have to sell her to level down and don't become a baby seal.
  • MayoMayo Posts: 148 Tile Toppler
    To Mayo, based on what you have said so far, 

    I have beaten 10 and 15 level difference okoye + ihulk using full boosts and luck but okoye lvl 500+ baby champ ihulk is almost a troll team that should not be usable."

    The only ones that would not like the nerfing  okoye are those who hoarded for months just to exploit the system.

    My initial impression is that it's a case of other players having a bigger toys and you are not happy that you don't have them. Also, you decided to challenge teams 50 levels higher than yours and you couldn't beat them. So, nerfing them is the easiest solution. All my 5* are baby champed. You can hoard for one or two years if you want 550 characters. You have a choice.

    What if you have 550 Okoye...

    If I had okoye at 550 it is likely i also have a bunch of other 550s and would not care if okoye is nerfed as i can continue playing without a hickup.

    So, it's a case of "it's not my business if other players are affected by the nerf. It's because I have backup."

    In my opinion, the above are very poor reasons asking for nerfs. If the majority of players think like this, it's purely an expectation problem. To prevent hoarding, why not get the devs to implement a system where all players with SR 100 and above have their LTs opened automatically every week, and half of their cp will be converted to LTs every month to preven high level characters. Or why not simply exclude 5* from champion system?


    The reasons for skipping team is to proof that iHulkoye is not everywhere.

    i just started the next pvp and half the teams are okoye +ihulk but where you will find the most of this team is when climbing with the rest of players and when many whales enter between 30 to 12 hours to finish the slice.

    What are the levels of your top 5 5* characters and what teams do you use to engage them? After reading the above, it seems like you are indirectly saying that it's not true that iHulkoye is everywhere, but they are "everywhere" only at a specific period. You are aware of the period where iHulkoye appears the most frequently, but you chose to play at a time where you see them frequently, and you also choose to fight those with levels ~50 higher than yours. You couldn't beat them, so they should be nerfed. I think this is an expectation issue. 



    My highest level 5*s are profx, apoc, brb, okoye, onslaught, kitty and ged between lvl 470 and lvl 465. I took my time to have a giod roster for my level.

    So I can hold my own by teams several levels above me and always get between t10 and t25 in all pvp in the last 6 months. With boosts and luck i can win over okoye+ihulk teams up to 15 levels over me. So no sir, your argument is not true.

    Do you think any player having a okoye 100+ levels over ihulk is not a good reason to ask for a nerf? If that player lost okoye + ihulk team would probably be a baby seal, yes?

    So we have 3 scenarios:
    1. You hoarded long enough to have at least 3 good 5*s and don't care about what happens to okoye. You win.
    2. You are a player that does not exploit the system, so you get wacked by players that should not be winning against your hard earned teams and playing fair. Nerfing okoye would be a good incentive to continue playing, probably investing money.... you know that it does not matter having a lonely lvl +500 okoye if there are no players playing  an unbalanced game, yes? Everybody loses.
    3. You are the player that exploited the system, probably does the same in real life and does not care about systems but getting that advantage no matter what happens. Well, there have been other 5*s nerfed for the same reasons so sorry, at some moment devs may nerf okoye and you could become a baby seal and in extreme cases you will have to sell her. You lose.

    It would be nice that every poster should mention their okoye and ihulk levels. Probably we would see a correlation between strength and reactivity to other posters opinion as the level difference between their ihulk and okoye is greater...
  • CharlieCrokerCharlieCroker Posts: 245 Tile Toppler
    Mayo said:

    Do you think any player having a okoye 100+ levels over ihulk is not a good reason to ask for a nerf? If that player lost okoye + ihulk team would probably be a baby seal, yes?
    Just on this point, does the fact that people are using a character ‘100+ levels’ below their highest level 5* suggest the bigger issue is the very lower level character (or at least the synergy) rather than the highest level character)?

    Examples - I run a 504/452 Okoye/Hulk whereas I have lots of 5*s in the 460-480 range that are left on the bench in favour of Hulk.   And I see plenty of rosters with 550 Okoye’s who use her with a 450-460 Hulk rather than their other 500+  options.

    I’ve also seen multiple posters say Ihulk is nothing without Okoye.  That may be true on offence where the player will boost and hunt boost team ups, but less so on defence.  The 5500 AOE every turn with board shake, 7ap nuke and immortality is no joke regardless of who Hulk is paired with.

    With regards to @Michael1957 comments on MMR and SCL, there are reasons why some players with deep 5* rosters play lower (in both PvP and PVE), one of which is the T10 and sometimes lower in CL10 is dominated by 550 rosters.  Just as you or 4* players might struggle to compete with deep but lower level 5* players in CL8 & CL9, most of us struggle to compete against 550s (in PvP hopping more might let you compete, in PVE it won’t).

    For the record I usually play CL10 in PVE and always in PvP and take whatever the bracket gives me.  But I can’t blame those who want to get maximum reward for the often substantial hours they put into the game.

    The only solution I can see to expand on your weight class analogy is setting CL entry by, for example, the average of your top 3/4 character.  However the rewards in the higher levels would have to be vastly increased to make it worthwhile for all the 550 players who are used to getting t5/t10 (most of whom have spent a lot onto get their superior rosters).

  • ThaRoadWarriorThaRoadWarrior Posts: 5,785 Chairperson of the Boards
    Just checking in that my Okoye is lvl 453, and I got that "the hard way" by using the old pre-shard Bonus Hero system chasing her directly and Shuri by pulling as I go. I was pulling out of Classic Legends when she came out, so I missed out largely on her, Thor, and Kitty until way later. My iHulk is lvl 451, I got him while he was in latest by pulling as I go. I'm in the "neither needs to be nerfed, we just need counter characters" camp to clarify my position. But I also don't really play either mode for placement, they are just tools to grind progression.

    For my roster, it's just another team, it's not THE team for me. Because of how much self-harm iHulk does, Okoye is basically the only "safe" character I have to run him with, otherwise I'd be trying to use him as a green battery or something else novel. Though I've been known to run him with Vulture to grind down challenge nodes in PVE (NOT a fast team, but sometimes it's all I've got).
  • 658_2658_2 Posts: 88 Match Maker
    Besides the fact Hulk hasn’t been in one store, which is kinda relevant, people are only baby champing him because a 450 Hulk is better than a 550 Hulk.  You can’t just wave that away when people are citing the level disparities as a reason to nerf. Anybody who busted hoard for Apoc and Hulk knows that a 550+ Hulk was only playable with new character boosted Apoc and his 200k health pool. At 550, Hulk very simply does too much self damage to your team. He’s a MASSIVE resource suck, even to a huge roster. I know a guy with a huge Hulk, iirc 550, who only uses him as a scarecrow above 1200. Doesn’t use him to climb or in pve at all, because it’s not worth the healthpacks, even with his 550 Okoye.


  • MayoMayo Posts: 148 Tile Toppler
    DAZ0273 said:
    Mayo,

    I don't understand this talk about "exploiting the system"? How have any players who chose to chase Okoye exploited anything? Tall rosters v broad rosters has always been a thing, no?  Pursuing an "all eggs in one basket" strategy is always risky (same for 4* players who exclusively chase Kitty, likewise see GAMBIT) but I can't see how it is an "exploit"? Your additional comments in point  3 seem to be also heading towards some strange place about relating a mobile phone game to people seeking a competitive edge in a competitive game as somehow making the player morally bad?!?!?

    Levels as requested: Okoye 5/3/3 lvl 390 and iHulk 2/2/1 lvl 300 but I don't really use either much. So I have no dog in this fight at all but your last post is verging on paranoid, matey!
    Hi, an exploit us anything that should not happen in a system, like parking your car in a place reserved for pregnants or having a winfinite with 5* captain marvel that worked flawlessly against almost any team.

    As it has been abundantly commented, okoye amplifies damage to unexpected levels. With half thor you have very good attack and poor defense but with ihulk attack and defense are supreme always.

    I am not pro okoye nerf, as stated from the start i prefer devs taking a mitigating acción,  why? Because the only way to counter that team consistently is with the same team. So go ahead, do so but in the way dont baby seal everyone else since it is bad for gameplay and business. 

    Would you play a game where you have no chance to win?
    Would you play a game where one day you are playing against other players qui pro quo and the next few weeks they got okoye 50+  levels up? Better offer a 50lvl boost for okoye at 1000usd and watch how it sells while the game shuts down.
    Can you play the game that way? Of course, but that does not make it correct or the way to go.
    Having so many teams and ways to play is this this kind of exploits that will end the game in the long run.

    Devs read all posts i guess and being repetitive is something i dont like. I myself have spent too much money for the season after spending no money since the first shardmagedon. I started putting some money until last week but now i will again return to making my target wins in pvp and do pve, i already have the roster to play without money and will probably start investing again when devs address this issue as they have done before.

    Devs have many options to mitigate any exploit as they have done before and even if the affected players leave the game (only the specialized ones will probably leave but as we all know evolution does not favour them)  is better to lose some fingers than lose an arm. 

    Cheers!
Sign In or Register to comment.