***** Abigail Brand (Commander of S.W.O.R.D.) *****

HoundofShadow

That depends on how you define "do well". If both players have different goals but they hit the goals they set for themselves, did both players do well?

entrailbucket

HoundofShadow said:

That depends on how you define "do well". If both players have different goals but they hit the goals they set for themselves, did both players do well?

If one player's goal is to win matches and the other player's goal is to use Abigail, then yes, both will meet their goals.

Sekilicious

dianetics said:

I don’t know how to design. As I have said before I don’t care about characters, I care about mechanics.

if she comes out to be top tier I will happily take the L.

I was wrong about Col5 before, but I used him. I wasn’t wrong about Odin though. I like Knull who entrail doesn’t. 

This isn’t a conversation about elitism, but about perceived value. I do like Ultron I’m certain circumstances. But Abby isn’t even on that level to me.

People say the same about Heimdall yet people (like you) can make SCL10 with him as a solo champ. They would have utility together when a character comes out that can spam fortification tiles. Still not top-tier though. We are really talking about 9 of 60 characters when discussing top tier. There will always be a best-of-the-best no matter how it is balanced. 

entrailbucket

There will always be a best of the best, and it's really fun to debate that and argue about it when that argument is close or you can make the argument on a lot of different dimensions or criteria.  The problem is that that argument is not close in MPQ.

There's the top tier, and then there's a bunch of guys who are just designed for a completely different game.  The gap between the top tier and everyone else is so massive that even if there's some value to be found in the bottom tier, or they fill some niche, there's no reason for anyone to use them.

Sekilicious

entrailbucket said:

HoundofShadow said:

A lot of gamers who strive to be at the top are usually "elitists". New players who come into forums have been seasoned to believe that when the "pro" thinks that x is bad, thinking otherwise makes you a "noob". I see this in many rpg(-like) games that I've played in the past. Likewise, for MPQ, only sharding Polaris, Juggernaut, R4G, Apocalypse, Okoye etc are the "right" choices. Other scenarios are choices of characters in "special" special stores, like Anniversary stores. When Dr Strange or OML are part of the choices, the players don't know how to play. 

Likewise, when dev creates characters that don't fit this group of players criteria, the dev are thought to be not knowledgeable about what they are doing, and, only top players know how to design and create the "right" characters.

So you think a new player whose only champion 5* is Abigail will be able to do as well as a new player whose only champion 5* is Shang-Chi?

This is treading into ‘if you’re not first you’re last’ territory. If all characters that aren’t as good as Shang-Chi need a rework then the entire 5* tier outside 9 characters is trash tier. Which I get that some here think. I think the point some are trying to make isn’t that Brand will change the meta. It’s that not every character that is released needs to be meta to be a good addition to a balanced roster. 

HoundofShadow

You did not define what it means to "do well". 

The point is,  you have your personal definition of what "do well" means, and other players have their personal definitions as well. One player's definition shouldn't be seen as more superior than other players' definitions.

Players play game for their own enjoyments, and how players enjoy it are subjective. There are players who have played MPQ for over 7 years and they have only 1 or 2 5* champed. They are still enjoying themselves and they think they are doing well. On the other hand, there are those who don't enjoy this type of progress.

Likewise, players shouldn't be "shamed" or "looked down on" just because they didn't make Okoye/Apocalypse/Shang Chi/Polaris/Juggernaut their first choice, or use them majority of the time.

Blackstone

Abigail is trash.

When the clue came out I hoped for fantomex. They didn't happen.

When the powers were shown without the numbers, I hoped she could be a partner for Hawkeye. Then the numbers were released...

And I just tried to figure out what I was missing.

Seeing her in her pvp, I'm completely unimpressed. She does things, she just doesn't do them well... Or even mediocre.

The upside is I'll have a good long while to save LL tokens for after she leaves.

dianetics

Yes you are right, but Heimdall had compelling teams with 4* characters.
He was also a support tank with a damage ability, true healing, and damage reduction. Not to mention his top tier health pool.

These are not comparable characters at all. I would not recommend any player jumping into to 5* with this kit. They would suffer in PvP and pve.

Heimdall is a character you can build around and abigail appears to be a weak third. I think even in a 1v1 she would lose to be4st.

entrailbucket

HoundofShadow said:

You did not define what it means to "do well". 

The point is,  you have your personal definition of what "do well" means, and other players have their personal definitions as well. One player's definition shouldn't be seen as more superior than other players' definitions.

Players play game for their own enjoyments, and how players enjoy it are subjective. There are players who have played MPQ for over 7 years and they have only 1 or 2 5* champed. They are still enjoying themselves and they think they are doing well. On the other hand, there are those who don't enjoy this type of progress.

Likewise, players shouldn't be "shamed" or "looked down on" just because they didn't make Okoye/Apocalypse/Shang Chi/Polaris/Juggernaut their first choice, or use them majority of the time.

Are you serious?  I have OML, Phoenix, and Silver Surfer at 550.  Every week in PvP I play every single fight with random boosted 5* over lvl600.  In PvE I play off the clock and spend time working out fun combos with underused characters.  I love finding weird synergy. 

If you think I'm shaming players for doing exactly what I do, and what I encourage everyone to do, I don't know where you would get that. 

If anything I'm shaming the players who go all in on the "meta" characters and use nothing else ever.  Players should be able to compete and win using any character.  I should be able to win fights against lvl550 SW/Colossus with lvl600+ Kingpin/Wasp, and win them easily.  If you think that's possible now, and those characters are underappreciated or overlooked, you are simply wrong.  I've tried.

dianetics

Clearly this convo needs to slow down some since it appears to be straying away from Abigail.

Lets move on from the discussion and meta implications and continue on with her kit and how it can be potentially be used effectively with other characters.

i apologize for my hand in derailing this thread.

HoundofShadow

I'm not singling you out. Such shaming do happen in reddit, and I'm stating what I observed.

I don't agree that level should be the main factor on whether a fight should be won easily or not. Every RPG archetype has their own strengths and weaknesses. To make it easier, these four elements are pretty common in RPG games: fire, water, earth and wind. Typically, fire is weak against wate and water is weak against earth etc. So, if I bring a level 600 fire team against a level 550 water team, I'm expected to lose or have a hard time winning.

Knowing the strengths and weaknesses of each team is important in certain matches, especially against meta teams or boss battles. In many rpg games, it's quite common that to beat certain bosses only a specific type of team need to be used tp beat them and using other teams will have difficulty beating them.

Sekilicious

dianetics said:

Clearly this convo needs to slow down some since it appears to be straying away from Abigail.

Lets move on from the discussion and meta implications and continue on with her kit and how it can be potentially be used effectively with other characters.

i apologize for my hand in derailing this thread.

I do think this has everything to do with Brand. It developed because of a comment that the developers didn’t know what made characters good or bad. Some people think every character outside the top-PvP meta isn’t worth rostering and, by extension, when they aren’t worth rostering they get flabbergasted they are released at all.  It is ok if some of us push back on that meme a little bit. There is enough of that on Line, Discord, and Reddit.

entrailbucket

Yes!  That's exactly what they should do! 

The problem now is that Kingpin and Wasp etc are weak against every element and strong against nothing, while SW Colossus etc are strong against everything and weak against nothing. 

There is plenty of space to make the game deep in that way and I would love for them to do it, but -- here's the thing, *they haven't*.  The good characters are just good and the bad characters are just bad.  There are no classes or Pokemon-style element matching because the good characters beat everything every time.


What "element" is Abigail?  What sort of team is she exceptionally strong against?  What is her niche that can't be filled by any other character?  Why would I choose to bring her into battle over a character like SW who is good against every enemy team?

ThaRoadWarrior

The only thing she can do nobody else can is force a repeater to 0, but since she does it on an active power that drops a 2-turn CD and it only targets a random thing, that is a power that is way under tuned to be worth using. It is equivalent to Bag Man being the only character that can extend a friendly CD.

Sekilicious

entrailbucket said:

Yes!  That's exactly what they should do! 

The problem now is that Kingpin and Wasp etc are weak against every element and strong against nothing, while SW Colossus etc are strong against everything and weak against nothing. 

There is plenty of space to make the game deep in that way and I would love for them to do it, but -- here's the thing, *they haven't*.  The good characters are just good and the bad characters are just bad.  There are no classes or Pokemon-style element matching because the good characters beat everything every time.


What "element" is Abigail?  What sort of team is she exceptionally strong against?  What is her niche that can't be filled by any other character?  Why would I choose to bring her into battle over a character like SW who is good against every enemy team?

SW is weak against stuns, countdowns that stop damage reduction, and tile removal, not to mention characters that do massive damage in a single shot. As for Brand, she still needs to be tested with the current and future released characters. If Maggia Muscle were released as a playable character her stock rises immediately.

entrailbucket

Sekilicious said:

dianetics said:

Clearly this convo needs to slow down some since it appears to be straying away from Abigail.

Lets move on from the discussion and meta implications and continue on with her kit and how it can be potentially be used effectively with other characters.

i apologize for my hand in derailing this thread.

I do think this has everything to do with Brand. It developed because of a comment that the developers didn’t know what made characters good or bad. Some people think every character outside the top-PvP meta isn’t worth rostering and, by extension, when they aren’t worth rostering they get flabbergasted they are released at all.  It is ok if some of us push back on that meme a little bit. There is enough of that on Line, Discord, and Reddit.

You're responding to an argument that no one here is making.

I will roster Abigail and I will champion her.  I will have fun using her in a combo, probably with Hawkeye or some 4*.  I will try to use her against the very best characters in PvP, and I'll try to win the CL10 challenge node with her, and I will probably fail at it.  That means that she is bad.

A lot of players will roster 1 cover of her to do essentials, and they will continue to win everything despite that decision.  They won't miss anything, because there will never be a situation where you need her to win.

KGB

entrailbucket said:

Players should be able to compete and win using any character.  I should be able to win fights against lvl550 SW/Colossus with lvl600+ Kingpin/Wasp, and win them easily.

Yes and No.

If the game is designed around an Iron Golem/Rust Monster/Mind Flayer (I prefer that over rock/paper/scissors) model and you bring scissors against a rock team you should lose virtually every time (minus big time luck). So any 2 random characters you pick should not necessarily beat any other 2 characters and definitely not easily.

But yes, you should definitely be able to form a team with Wasp/Kingpin and beat some other pick 2 teams if the matchup is right. The problem is you just don't get to see those teams because no one is using them and even if a few players are, they make sure to leave out the Colossus/SW team on defense.

KGB

P.S. And yes, I'm fully aware the gulf between the best and worst characters is too wide (this is true in 3*, 4* as well as 5* land).

Sekilicious

entrailbucket said:

Sekilicious said:

dianetics said:

Clearly this convo needs to slow down some since it appears to be straying away from Abigail.

Lets move on from the discussion and meta implications and continue on with her kit and how it can be potentially be used effectively with other characters.

i apologize for my hand in derailing this thread.

I do think this has everything to do with Brand. It developed because of a comment that the developers didn’t know what made characters good or bad. Some people think every character outside the top-PvP meta isn’t worth rostering and, by extension, when they aren’t worth rostering they get flabbergasted they are released at all.  It is ok if some of us push back on that meme a little bit. There is enough of that on Line, Discord, and Reddit.

You're responding to an argument that no one here is making.

I will roster Abigail and I will champion her.  I will have fun using her in a combo, probably with Hawkeye or some 4*.  I will try to use her against the very best characters in PvP, and I'll try to win the CL10 challenge node with her, and I will probably fail at it.  That means that she is bad.

A lot of players will roster 1 cover of her to do essentials, and they will continue to win everything despite that decision.  They won't miss anything, because there will never be a situation where you need her to win.

I wasn’t responding to an argument. I was pointing out the validity of the argument in the  Brand thread. 

Sekilicious

Sekilicious said:

If Maggia Muscle were released as a playable character her stock rises immediately.

Speaking of Maggia Muscle I wonder how Brand will work with Sersi and Shang-Chi. I can think of a 30k AoE countdown that would be awesome if resolved in the middle of a winfinite. Maybe we are lucky only one can be resolved at a time…

entrailbucket

KGB said:

entrailbucket said:

Players should be able to compete and win using any character.  I should be able to win fights against lvl550 SW/Colossus with lvl600+ Kingpin/Wasp, and win them easily.

Yes and No.

If the game is designed around an Iron Golem/Rust Monster/Mind Flayer (I prefer that over rock/paper/scissors) model and you bring scissors against a rock team you should lose virtually every time (minus big time luck). So any 2 random characters you pick should not necessarily beat any other 2 characters and definitely not easily.

But yes, you should definitely be able to form a team with Wasp/Kingpin and beat some other pick 2 teams if the matchup is right. The problem is you just don't get to see those teams because no one is using them and even if a few players are, they make sure to leave out the Colossus/SW team on defense.

KGB

P.S. And yes, I'm fully aware the gulf between the best and worst characters is too wide (this is true in 3*, 4* as well as 5* land).

I agree with this.  I was using those characters as examples, you've stated my argument more clearly and generally than I did.