The great days of Po(op)laris

Mr_F

@entrailbucket That synergy is strong but I can do full progression SCL10 with any 4* or 5* who can spam special tiles and Polaris. BRB just happens to be safest and easiest option. Sure, anybody else would be a challenge, very challenging to be more specific.

So It's like I wrote: it's not Polaris added to BRB, It's BRB added to her makes it a possibility.

HoundofShadow

Polaris is not needed for SCL 10 because I completed SCL 10 without her when it was first introduced in Feb/Mar 2020

Speed aside, I remember using different 2* to 4* characters to complete SCL 10. Here's who I can remember:

2* Storm, 3* Ironman, 
4*: America Chavez, Karnak, Juggernaut, Gamora, Shuri, Rogue, Riri, Spider-Ham, Valkyrie

You can't complete winfinite without Polaris AND BRB.  Polaris can't find someone who can feed her blue aps consistently to stun opponents. BRB won't be able to multiply his protect tiles quickly.

However, theoretically speaking, 4* Beast, Magik and Red Guardian could work together to replace Polaris or BRB to create pseudo-winfinite (via stunning opponents). I have not tested this out yet but Beast can help you increase your ap by 3 per match that has at least one friendly special tiles. All three creates protect tiles passively.  

Bad

Dbeast is a bit slow however is super funny to play and also he can stun so polaris should not be needed.
With apocalypse and SW is a solid team as SW can turn the TUs and make it easy to gain yellow for apocalypse opening the AP Spa.
The tricky move of this team is to try to match the mystical feedback tile on the beginning, as Dbeast will grant 3 extra AP, and if the foe matches it, some protects for free.
Once Dbeast gains his green, he can match blue charged tiles and spam the board with atack tiles and possibly stun.
In a polaris grocket team he should shine.

dianetics

You can complete a winfinite with heimdall be4st and Polaris pretty easily.
You end up taking more damage but by the end of the fights heimdall can usually heal up back to full.
this was the team I used to when I first started getting into the cl10 challenge nodes.
I don’t use it too much anymore but it’s still pretty cool to pull off.

ThaRoadWarrior

hothie said:

Polaris is the bane of 3* players, the crutch of 4* players, and the cakewalk of 5* players.

^ I think this is exactly how "good" characters in a tier should work. It would be ideal if there were multiple such characters per tier, and perhaps their are, but I don't see it as overly problematic outside of transitioners. The tier transition experience is always a right of passage, and its pain is more acute moving up into the higher tiers of play due to how long it takes to make meaningful changes to the shape of your roster compared to 2 and 3* character growth. Like when I was moving up from 4 to 5, it was Kitty/4ocket everywhere, and the "answer" to that team was Black Suit Spider-Man who was effectively un-attainable to me short of trying to bonus hero him for what...an actual human year of hardcore daily play? Eventually counter-characters were released, some more effective and attainable than others, and that meta went away, but that was a hard 6 months? something like that. Felt like forever.

It's less bad now with the amount of fed characters and the reliability of shard-based growth, but it's still at best a months-long process to grow a specific counter character if you're flat-footed.

skittledaddy

@hothie said:

Polaris is the bane of 3* players, the crutch of 4* players, and the cakewalk of 5* players.

Perfectly stated!!
And don't most people consider it social unacceptable to take away an old man's crutch?

As a proud and determined permanent member of the 4* tier (I soft cap all my 5s with zero intentions of ever champing them) I have and will continue to use Polaris every chance I can.
Does it make the game boring? Maybe.
Does it make the game fast? Yes.
Does it allow me to punch above my weight class? AND HOW!!

So what?? You play your game, I'll play mine. Some say I may be "stealing" CL10 placement rewards (and I can get T20 when I actually try hard) from a "more appropriate" earner of them, but at least acknowledge that I'm putting in the work, too (perhaps more work/time than those who choose to ride 5* champs), surely that deserves something.

Personally I welcome the counters to her; I'll use them when needed and avoid them when needed.

Long Live Queen Polaris!!

Akoni

entrailbucket said:

Sure, but players wouldn't lose on offense if they brought the "right" team to the fight.  If the enemy is Rock, you don't attack them with Scissors, you attack them with Paper. 

The match would be unwinnable if they didn't have the Paper team rostered at all, of course, but that's what the devs should want. 

Right now, you could have a roster with two slots and win every fight in PvP as long as those two were the right characters at the right levels.  That's very bad, in a game where the business model is selling roster slots, and it's 100% fixable. 

If they don't want to reduce the power of the overpowered guys (And players hate nerfs!  They want counters!) then they need to give us effective defensive counters.

Just as devs don't want players to lose too often, they also don't want players to win all of the time. The same research I mentioned also stated that players who win too often quit soon after those who lose too often. A true rock, paper, scissors approach would create a scenario where the player will always win if they know which rock to choose for the opponent's scissors. I think what you are describing is closer to a tic-tac-toe scenario where one character successfully cancels out the other as long as the player makes no mistakes. I know that tic-tac-toe results in a draw most of the time, whereas MPQ does not, but the goal of the second player is to end the match in a draw and, therefore, counts it as a win, if successful. The essence of tic-tac-toe is that everything is known and you just have to make the right move.

With that said, the essence of rock, paper, scissors is the element of the unknown. If you know your opponent will choose rock, then you will always choose paper. If they are going to choose paper, then you will always choose scissors. This would make for a boring game. Not knowing which your opponent is going to pick makes it exciting. MPQ has a few components of the unknown implemented in terms of tile placement as well as team combinations. The biggest element is how tiles will fall, but occasionally (ok, rarely), we will come across a team that works much better than anticipated. This can only occur if there are no true rock, paper, scissor characters. Characters with weak counters to others require creative thinking and experimentation. 

This minuscule, but important element adds a pinch more excitement to the game. With a game like this where numbers and match-ups can be calculated for maximum win opportunities, I would rather keep as many interesting elements as possible.

entrailbucket

Akoni said:

entrailbucket said:

Sure, but players wouldn't lose on offense if they brought the "right" team to the fight.  If the enemy is Rock, you don't attack them with Scissors, you attack them with Paper. 

The match would be unwinnable if they didn't have the Paper team rostered at all, of course, but that's what the devs should want. 

Right now, you could have a roster with two slots and win every fight in PvP as long as those two were the right characters at the right levels.  That's very bad, in a game where the business model is selling roster slots, and it's 100% fixable. 

If they don't want to reduce the power of the overpowered guys (And players hate nerfs!  They want counters!) then they need to give us effective defensive counters.

Just as devs don't want players to lose too often, they also don't want players to win all of the time. The same research I mentioned also stated that players who win too often quit soon after those who lose too often. A true rock, paper, scissors approach would create a scenario where the player will always win if they know which rock to choose for the opponent's scissors. I think what you are describing is closer to a tic-tac-toe scenario where one character successfully cancels out the other as long as the player makes no mistakes. I know that tic-tac-toe results in a draw most of the time, whereas MPQ does not, but the goal of the second player is to end the match in a draw and, therefore, counts it as a win, if successful. The essence of tic-tac-toe is that everything is known and you just have to make the right move.

With that said, the essence of rock, paper, scissors is the element of the unknown. If you know your opponent will choose rock, then you will always choose paper. If they are going to choose paper, then you will always choose scissors. This would make for a boring game. Not knowing which your opponent is going to pick makes it exciting. MPQ has a few components of the unknown implemented in terms of tile placement as well as team combinations. The biggest element is how tiles will fall, but occasionally (ok, rarely), we will come across a team that works much better than anticipated. This can only occur if there are no true rock, paper, scissor characters. Characters with weak counters to others require creative thinking and experimentation. 

This minuscule, but important element adds a pinch more excitement to the game. With a game like this where numbers and match-ups can be calculated for maximum win opportunities, I would rather keep as many interesting elements as possible.

So you're saying they shouldn't give us overpowered characters who have 100% winrates on offense?

Akoni

Well, they already have according to many, but that isn't the ideal. It will happen from time to time, but I don't think that should be on purpose. 

entrailbucket

Akoni said:

Well, they already have according to many, but that isn't the ideal. It will happen from time to time, but I don't think that should be on purpose. 

I believe we are in agreement then. 

What should happen if they do it by accident?

Akoni

This is where nerfs are supposed to come in, but only if a character is obscenely overpowered. Something above the curve can be a good thing, but something that morphs the curve like a massive gravity well shouldn't exist. The problem usually isn't the nerf itself, but how a character is nerfed. That's a different discussion.

BeetleGeorge

I don't know why these anti Polaris threads are popping up so often. I like it to win against Polaris teams because most of the time it does not even cost me health packs.
What I think much worse and what I skip regularely are SWitch/Colossus and IHulk/Okoye teams when they are championed because they really eat up my health packs if I fight them.

Anon

I still giggle everytime I see the thread title.

Pooplaris... lol

Mr_F

BeetleGeorge said:

I don't know why these anti Polaris threads are popping up so often. I like it to win against Polaris teams because most of the time it does not even cost me health packs.
What I think much worse and what I skip regularely are SWitch/Colossus and IHulk/Okoye teams when they are championed because they really eat up my health packs if I fight them.

Because, judging from your post, you are not in 4* or transitioning land when she is dominating and literally can take everything on offence while still being flipcoin on defence. If you were in those land you will not that happy to see her. But like many other 4* I had/have problems with all it takes to looking for options we already have in game. Yes, we already have all we need to deal with her.

TLDR: a matter of different POV.

Of course, I know why people are complaing etc. Reasons are two:

1. She is "everywhere".

2. She is annoying.

Timemachinego

Mr_F said:

Because, judging from your post, you are not in 4* or transitioning land when she is dominating and literally can take everything on offence while still being flipcoin on defence. If you were in those land you will not that happy to see her. But like many other 4* I had/have problems with all it takes to looking for options we already have in game. Yes, we already have all we need to deal with her.

TLDR: a matter of different POV.

Of course, I know why people are complaing etc. Reasons are two:

1. She is "everywhere".

2. She is annoying.

I'm a 4* player, outside of her boost week polaris teams are all free wins with correct counter-play. Yes, she is definitely everywhere but I'm always happy when I see her.

entrailbucket

Timemachinego said:

Mr_F said:

Because, judging from your post, you are not in 4* or transitioning land when she is dominating and literally can take everything on offence while still being flipcoin on defence. If you were in those land you will not that happy to see her. But like many other 4* I had/have problems with all it takes to looking for options we already have in game. Yes, we already have all we need to deal with her.

TLDR: a matter of different POV.

Of course, I know why people are complaing etc. Reasons are two:

1. She is "everywhere".

2. She is annoying.

I'm a 4* player, outside of her boost week polaris teams are all free wins with correct counter-play. Yes, she is definitely everywhere but I'm always happy when I see her.

She's not overpowered on defense.  She's not even particularly good on defense, and there are a ton of counters for her. 

She's overpowered on offense.

Bad

If the Al matched special tiles on sight she would be perfect on defense. 
But it's not the case and the player has the upper hand.
If I was starting in the game now I wouldn't have the slightest problem winning her.