***** Elektra (Woman Without Fear) *****

jp1

I don’t even care if she is mediocre, which isn’t so clear cut IMHO, I’m happy to have another A-List toon for a 5* release. 

bbigler

Can we please stop comparing every character to Apocalypse?  He’s good but he’s not super awesome amazing and outranks everyone else. He’s super easy on PVP defense and needs 21 AP (and waiting for his protects to be made) before firing his chain of attacks (which do major damage).  He’s slow and needs an AP battery like Thor.  If you use him just for his yellow damage increasing power, then he’s just like Okoye, and essentially a 1 trick pony.

In comparison to the other top 10 metas: 

Shang is much faster and hits harder than Apocalypse.  Matches end in 3 - 5 turns, and Shang is usually back to full health.  How many characters can do that? Protect tiles don’t stop 50K - 250K critical hits.  Even Colossus will fall against him.  

IHulk starts working right away dealing AOEs with board shake.  If you don’t have Electro, he’s a PVP deterrent (and downing him first doesn’t work).  He’s also a king in PVE clearing.  

Wanda works right away hitting back and protecting against cascades (a general PVP deterrent). Plus, she can also increase damage from powers.

Kitty works right away buffing specials, and if used on strikes, it also acts like a damage increaser, but increases match damage as well.  Then she has the passive to remove enemy specials that aren’t repeaters, then blow up afterwards. 

BRB works immediately placing protects, which can also fuel his powers to place more protects and do some good hits. He’s self fueling like Shang.  

Okoye is similar to Apocalypse except that her damage increase is not limited and can work immediately.  She can true heal but lacks a good hitting power herself, which means she’s a support character.  

Colossus is also a 1 trick pony and only useful for PVP defense (and possibly SCL 10 challenge nodes).  

Even Prof X and Onslaught work right away dealing damage and gaining AP.  So could we please stop the love affair with Apoc?

ThaRoadWarrior

Looks like the passive never steals more than one; 5/5/3 still feels like the build. Love the cover.

she might be fun with Kitty against special makers if you can proc the steal before circuit breaker.

entrailbucket

I don't think it's about Apocalypse specifically, I think he's generally just used as convenient shorthand for "a good character."  At least that's how I use him.


The math is a bit off there though... anyone using him at the upper levels is full boosting (+4 red/yellow), using Thor, or doing both.  7ap powers are a LOT better than 9ap because you can start one match-3 away 

ThaRoadWarrior

Cheap powers don’t show well in the AI’s hands because a player can spam them and the ai cannot. An offensive apocalypse with Thor is preeeettty good.

Vhailorx

entrailbucket said:

It's risk/reward.  You have to adjust the damage output by the risk that you won't get any damage.

One thing they seem to have stopped doing (that I applaud them for) is making powers where the floor is "do nothing at all."  Something like "12AP: create a 3-turn CD that does X damage."

Almost every modern power either does something else when you cast it, fortifies the CD, or does something while the tile is on the board.

This is a good point. IMO the best design philosophy for CD/repeater abilities is to have multiple possible outcomes that do different things, rather than 1 good and 1 bad outcome. So for a CD that's "Do X if the CD' resolves/is on the board, and Do Y if the tiles is matched or destroyed. One example would be DD's green.  That's a well designed power. The player may want it to do different things depend on the circumstances, but it rarely ever feels like a complete waste to cast.

Re: apocalypse. I agree that he is not the best meta character. But he is sort of the meta gatekeeper in that he defines the bottom of a meta for damage boosting and nukes. There are better boosters and better nukers, but no one who does both as well as him. Plus he is immune to stun, offers some defense, and has a large health pool. He is a rare character who is good because of his three actives and doesn't need a passive trick (though his passive trick actually quite good too).

And 7ap powers are way better than 9ap powers. Even if you don't max boost it is still much more likely thay you will pick up 1 ap from a match 4 or have one left over from casting another power than it is to find a 3rd whole match3 (especially when both teams are chasing the same color). Nor do you need to worry as much about losing out on ap when matching crit tiles.

bbigler

entrailbucket said:

I don't think it's about Apocalypse specifically, I think he's generally just used as convenient shorthand for "a good character."  At least that's how I use him.


The math is a bit off there though... anyone using him at the upper levels is full boosting (+4 red/yellow), using Thor, or doing both.  7ap powers are a LOT better than 9ap because you can start one match-3 away 

That’s my point, Apocalypse is slow without boosts and Thor.  Let’s say you fire his yellow on turn 2.  His red can hit right away with the boosted damage, but his black needs to wait 2 more turns for the protects to come out.  

If you full AP boost Shang, then he could go winfinite on the 2nd turn and end the match.  And he doesn’t need Thor to help him.  With Valkyrie, Shang can go off on the 2nd turn without boosts.  Nevertheless, Shang requires more thinking and is more board dependent.  

As for Elektra, I think her Red is good, solid, 3 out of 5 stars.  If her partner has a better red power, then use theirs, otherwise it’s useful.  

HoundofShadow

Ronan's cd has some drawback that reduces his match damage and it targets random opponent, and his red is conditional for extra damage.  But I still like him a lot, for his blue power.

Actually, my point about 20k damage being ~27% of average 5* hp is to point out that there's not a lot of difference between dealing damage now and dealing damage 2-turn later since the opponent won't be downed anyway. It's not like you can finish every match on the 5th turn, unless you are using iHulkoye. If the average 5* hp is 20k, then it makes sense to consider why putting a 2-turn cd that deals 20k damage later is bad or not good.

I think we have different risk tolerance level and the risk tolerance level for some of you seem low. She creates a red cd which you can calculate the probability of getting matched within 2 seconds in the next 2 turn before you fire it. The risk is virtually non-existent. On the other hand, i I understand that some prefer guaranteed direct damage over such powers. 

I don't think I ever say she'll be meta. I already guessed that she won't be considered favourably because she has already failed the meta test for all her powers.  Given that ~85% of the new 5*  released won't be meta, I wonder why every 5* has to be compared with meta. It's like always comparing some average person's wealth with Elon Musk's when that person is not Jeff Bezos.

And I'm surprised that 8ap is not considered expensive and 9 is expensive. Do some really min-max ap usage/gain as well? I end up with excess aps most of the time at the end of each match. What's the standard for cheap power nowadays? 8 or even fewer? Also, how many of you can guarantee match-4 every time by your second turn without using specific characters' abilities, seeing how match-4 is brought up when comparing ap cost.

A cd with multiple outcome is likely to be bad, based on past powers and dev's philosophy. I remember the dislike for powers with multiple out incomes because it'll be weak. Even in real life, multi-tasking is not as productive as single tasking.

entrailbucket

What is this utter nonsense about 85% of characters won't be any good?  What rule says that?  In the game, how do they indicate which characters are meant to be good and which are meant to be bad?  Does Elektra have a big "BAD" stamp on her cover and Okoye has a "GOOD" one? 

We compare 5* characters to other 5* characters because they have the same number of stars.

HoundofShadow

I said meta, not good. I have statistics to back me up. 

Edit: you always compare 5* with meta and always use finishing matches in <2min to determine usability of 5*. Did you have a change of mind suddenly? 

Meta 5* Release for 2018

May - Okoye (Warrior General)

Sep - Kitty Pryde (Uncanny X-Men)

Meta 5* Release for 2019

15 Aug - Professor X (Classic)

5 Dec - Beta Ray Bill (Korbinite Cyborg)

Meta 5* Release for 2020

26 Mar - The Hulk (Immortal)

7 May - Apocalypse (Classic)

Meta 5* Release for 2021

11 Mar - Colossus (Phoenix Force)

8 Apr - Scarlet Witch (WandaVision)

The % for 2018 and 2019 is much higher because the release back then was 4/4/5/4 instead of 4/5/4/5, but it still doesn't change the fact that only 2 metas are released.

On top of that, the dev has been  living this philosophy since the game existed.

Q: At the top of the leaderboards, Versus is geared towards playing fast (to avoid being hit while unshielded) rather than playing creatively with diverse rosters. The 'fastest' teams dominate. Are you comfortable with this element of the game?

A: Yes and no: In any multiplayer game, high-end competition is going to be a somewhat different game than what most people are playing. There are fewer viable strategies and they’re typically a little less expressive and creative. We’re comfortable with the fact that some of the characters we release won’t find a role in that environment and are just there to be fun and interesting for folks that are less focused on being at the top. We do want the top of the leaderboards to be an interesting place to be, and intend to continue shaking things up with new characters and balance changes when we see a single team composition dominating. But speed will probably always be more important at the top than it is for most players.

entrailbucket

Ok, where's Shang-Chi on that list?  Where's Onslaught?  Where's Adam Warlock?  Is the rule 2 good characters per calendar year?  Or a rolling year?  Or their fiscal year?



Your completely made up "schedule" has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of characters released or the intentions of the dev team, and everything to do with the fact that the hoarders earn enough resources to max out exactly 2 characters per year.

HoundofShadow

I'm have been stating verifiable facts whereas you are the one making things up about me making things up. All those release month and year can be verified by anyone.

What I did was to use those facts and histories and state the probability of something happening. It looks made up to you because you don't analyse such stuff.

Onslaught and Adam Warlock are not meta in pvps. Apart from boost weeks, when was the last time you see Adam Warlock?

Edit: As for SC, his status as meta is glass cannon in pvp and I don't think top players use SC to get T1 or T5.

I'm not sure why you got triggered by my facts and statistics. Do you even remember that you said there are only 7-8 meta 5*? 8/65= 12.3%

Please show me some facts that 50% or majority of the 5* are meta.

entrailbucket

What you've done is go back through each calendar year, pick the two best characters from that year, then say "see, we only get two good characters a year!" That is not how that works at all.

HoundofShadow

I'm not sure why you got so triggered when you are one who said that there are only 7-8 meta characters in the game. I'm not sure why it's so difficult for you to understand 8/65 =12.3%. And besides I state meta multiple time, not good. So I'm not sure why you keep putting different adjectives into what I said.

Like I said, if anyone disagree with the list of meta characters I pointed out, they can point that out. 

bbigler

I disagree, Shang is meta, no doubt, I see him everywhere.  Onslaught is also seen frequently in PVP. Even Ghostpool.  

The meta is not defined by the top 0.1% of players.  The most frequently used characters at each level of the game define the meta.  

entrailbucket

I see.  So now the had and fast rule is that they release two characters who are "meta in PvP" (whatever that means).

So you went back to 2018, chose the best two characters from each year, then claimed that it shows that the developers release only two good characters each year, *and* that this is clearly their intention going forward. 

You then calculated your artificial two characters per year divided by the total number of characters, to show that the developers clearly only intend a certain number of characters to be good.

When presented with evidence counter to your "facts" (other good characters that have achieved a high percentage of the metagame) you simply dismiss that or move the goalposts.


If course I analyze such stuff.  Which characters were you using to win PvPs in 2018?  Forgive me if I disagree with your historical recollections of a time when you weren't even playing the game.

HoundofShadow

The reason why I'm hesistate to put SC into the list is because he's glass cannon in pvp. If he's released in 2018, he will be in there. I think I'm the only who was super hype for his release because I know he will be awesome, like Karnak. 

Even if we place him there, meta release last year is only 25%.

As for Onslaught, I don't remember players comparing every 5* release to him, which means player don't use him as a benchmark to compare the metaness. I do see players comparing new 5* release to Okoye/Apocalypse/Kitty very often.

HoundofShadow

I'm not sure why you are arguing about "good" when I'm talking about meta. Meta is different from good. Onslaught is good. Adam Warlock is good. How many players here compare every new 5* release and measure them against Onslaught or Adam Warlock? 

I'm still waiting for you to list out meta characters for each year from 2018 onwards. Given that you said that there are only 7-8 meta characters, I don't think it's too difficult to do that. 

Like said, simple maths say that 8/65 = 12.3%. 12.3% of the 5* are meta to you. 87.7% therefore are not meta. What's so difficult to comprehend about this?

entrailbucket

The number of good characters released per year is totally random and is not set or predetermined in any way. 

Which characters will take over the metagame is often related to circumstance as much as it is to power level, and again, there is no rule, law, or developer goal that says the metagame must change at any particular rate.

In 2018 and 2019 Okoye/Thor was the entire 450+ PvP metagame.  Professor X made no impact whatsoever until Onslaught was released.  Kitty didn't show up in any real numbers until Beta Ray Bill was released.

entrailbucket

"Meta" is a silly word that's being misused for this purpose and I'm consciously choosing to use it as little as possible, or derisively if I absolutely must. 

From now on characters are "good."