Shang-chi

thor399

Is there a 4* I can champion to receive 5* Shang-chi covers & shards

Daredevil217

Colleen Wing / Iron Fist

Also, check my character rankings guide (thread is pinned on the character discussion page). I have all the feeders attached in my writeup for each character.

DAZ0273

Iron Fist

meadowsweet

But the fact that someone needs to come to the forums to ask such a basic question is really just pointing out the failure of the game to provide this information within Shang-Chi's character page. On the "Stats and More" page next to Affiliations it should list which characters feed and are fed by each character.

Bowgentle

@meadowsweet said:
But the fact that someone needs to come to the forums to ask such a basic question is really just pointing out the failure of the game to provide this information within Shang-Chi's character page. On the "Stats and More" page next to Affiliations it should list which characters feed and are fed by each character.

They'd have to touch that each time something changes.
They don't like touching things, and they might break stuff when they do.

sambrookjm

A Google Docs site you can check out that has the list of feeders is at:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1a8ldJsB_J0yFQXHarovugjI5c5i4ASJWKcaIgTGKHi4/edit#gid=479460470

I am in no way affiliated with the site, but I have used it a number of times myself to figure out who to Favorite to get any of the Classic 5-star characters champed.

bigjojo04

https://quietse7en.com/MOBILE/M_index.html

I like using this site more than the google doc now as this one lists them in alphabetical order whereas the google doc seems to have them in no order in particular making it easier to find who does what.

Punisher5784

@bigjojo04 said:
https://quietse7en.com/MOBILE/M_index.html

I like using this site more than the google doc now as this one lists them in alphabetical order whereas the google doc seems to have them in no order in particular making it easier to find who does what.

I like this page! It's cool very helpful to track recent rebalances! Thanks for sharing. You have made this post useful!

entrailbucket

@meadowsweet said:
But the fact that someone needs to come to the forums to ask such a basic question is really just pointing out the failure of the game to provide this information within Shang-Chi's character page. On the "Stats and More" page next to Affiliations it should list which characters feed and are fed by each character.

Honestly I'm not sure this matters to as many players as we might think it does. I think if it did, that information would probably be there.

meadowsweet

@Bowgentle all a programmer should have to do is create a data table and call up variables: list whom feeds them, list whom they feed. They shouldn't be writing 'new code' each time a feeder changes or is added, just updating the table. If I can do it for free, they can do it as part of their jobs (and feeders must already be coded into the software somewhere.)

@sambrookjm yeah, I know... I'm the one who created & maintains that. Apologies for the lack of updates lately, I've been busy and/or burned out on the game.

@bigjojo04 that was a complaint I received (and experienced myself.) That's why a while back I added the "Feeders 2" tab that lists them alphabetically within each tier in the center column.

@entrailbucket I mean, if you're focusing on champing Okoye or Shang-Chi, it would be silly not to favorite their feeders as well, especially if they're close to giving a cover or more shards. There's a reason the sources listed above exist and players have them at the ready.

Bowgentle

Never assume anything is "easy" with MPQ.

entrailbucket

@meadowsweet the number of players who are "focused" on championing a 5* is tremendously low, given that around 3% of all MPQ players will ever champion a 5* at all.

This information is obviously useful for the top rosters, of the sort that congregate on this forum, but it's probably not shown in-game because the vast majority of players couldn't care less.

Vhailorx

@entrailbucket said:
@meadowsweet the number of players who are "focused" on championing a 5* is tremendously low, given that around 3% of all MPQ players will ever champion a 5* at all.

This information is obviously useful for the top rosters, of the sort that congregate on this forum, but it's probably not shown in-game because the vast majority of players couldn't care less.

It may well be true that only 3% of mpq players will ever champ a 5*. But that number isn't very meaningful if the 3% also produce a significant % of MPQ's revenue (as well as thr daily play numbers that keep the game vibrant).

Feeder information is clearly important to developing a complete roster in this roster building game, so it IS a deficiency of demi/BCS that the only useful resources for this information are 3rd party options (think bungie/destiny and the 3rd party tools like destiny item manager. Those tools should be available from the 1st party!).

Updating a stats & info page frequently might be a lot of work, but they already do it for affiliations. And the fact that the info is only viewable in-game individually after champing each character is ridiculous.

DAZ0273

I could be wrong but I think the 3% figure does not apply to regularly active players, it applies to all players. As defined by MPQ/Ice, non casual is completing more than half (so 2 of PVE, PVP or DDQ every day) - I bet you that % figure goes up quite a lot when we are talking about those players who do play 2 or all of the major options daily and they may well be the ones interested in such a feature as they are seeking to grow and expand their rosters.

DAZ0273

We should also be aware that if there were a million players based on the logistics that the Devs count (I don't know if this is the case or what off top of my head), then 30,000 of them are 5* players. 30,000 regularly playing top tier customers is not an insignificant amount...

Even if that dropped to 100,000 that is still 3000 5* players which is still a lot of people who have achieved that level! They might be a minority but it isn't like it is an insignificant amount of actual human beings when you look at the potential actual numbers. The average capacity of a UK cinema is 150 seats so that is 20 cinemas worth of 5* players!

Bowgentle

@DAZ0273 said:
We should also be aware that if there were a million players based on the logistics that the Devs count (I don't know if this is the case or what off top of my head), then 30,000 of them are 5* players. 30,000 regularly playing top tier customers is not an insignificant amount...

Even if that dropped to 100,000 that is still 3000 5* players which is still a lot of people who have achieved that level! They might be a minority but it isn't like it is an insignificant amount of actual human beings when you look at the potential actual numbers. The average capacity of a UK cinema is 150 seats so that is 20 cinemas worth of 5* players!

And they've all been forced to watch Chasm reruns every day for almost a year now.

entrailbucket

@Vhailorx said:

@entrailbucket said:
@meadowsweet the number of players who are "focused" on championing a 5* is tremendously low, given that around 3% of all MPQ players will ever champion a 5* at all.

This information is obviously useful for the top rosters, of the sort that congregate on this forum, but it's probably not shown in-game because the vast majority of players couldn't care less.

It may well be true that only 3% of mpq players will ever champ a 5*. But that number isn't very meaningful if the 3% also produce a significant % of MPQ's revenue (as well as thr daily play numbers that keep the game vibrant).

Feeder information is clearly important to developing a complete roster in this roster building game, so it IS a deficiency of demi/BCS that the only useful resources for this information are 3rd party options (think bungie/destiny and the 3rd party tools like destiny item manager. Those tools should be available from the 1st party!).

Updating a stats & info page frequently might be a lot of work, but they already do it for affiliations. And the fact that the info is only viewable in-game individually after champing each character is ridiculous.

When the question is posed like "why is this extremely important feature missing, one that everyone obviously needs?" I think that those numbers provide some important context. The reason the feature is missing is most likely because it's not a priority.

As far as revenue, I'd be willing to bet that the 97% significantly outspend the 3%, collectively. Many of the 3%-ers on this forum spend nothing, ever, and in fact seem to view spending money as either a moral failing or cheating.

"Vibrancy" is something that cannot be measured (interesting!) but I doubt it's something that anyone cares about. This game doesn't need any of us.

Vhailorx

@entrailbucket said:

@Vhailorx said:

@entrailbucket said:
@meadowsweet the number of players who are "focused" on championing a 5* is tremendously low, given that around 3% of all MPQ players will ever champion a 5* at all.

This information is obviously useful for the top rosters, of the sort that congregate on this forum, but it's probably not shown in-game because the vast majority of players couldn't care less.

It may well be true that only 3% of mpq players will ever champ a 5*. But that number isn't very meaningful if the 3% also produce a significant % of MPQ's revenue (as well as thr daily play numbers that keep the game vibrant).

Feeder information is clearly important to developing a complete roster in this roster building game, so it IS a deficiency of demi/BCS that the only useful resources for this information are 3rd party options (think bungie/destiny and the 3rd party tools like destiny item manager. Those tools should be available from the 1st party!).

Updating a stats & info page frequently might be a lot of work, but they already do it for affiliations. And the fact that the info is only viewable in-game individually after champing each character is ridiculous.

When the question is posed like "why is this extremely important feature missing, one that everyone obviously needs?" I think that those numbers provide some important context. The reason the feature is missing is most likely because it's not a priority.

As far as revenue, I'd be willing to bet that the 97% significantly outspend the 3%, collectively. Many of the 3%-ers on this forum spend nothing, ever, and in fact seem to view spending money as either a moral failing or cheating.

"Vibrancy" is something that cannot be measured (interesting!) but I doubt it's something that anyone cares about. This game doesn't need any of us.

I don't feel like I need to provide a lot of support for the argument that "whales are a small % of the total player base, but provide a significant proportion of total revenue." That's the basic freemium business model. Even if it's not an outright majority it could still be a really important revenue source (e.g. the difference between profitability and end-of-support).

As for vibrancy, I agree that it's hard to define. But that doesn't mean it's not important. Having a large, active community is important to a game like this (you can tell because they still emphasize alliance play). The game as currently designed just won't work without enough players to fill up the slices/brackets, and having a community that produces forum/reddit/YouTube, etc content almost certainly helps with new player retention (imagine starting this game now without player-curated assistance). I don't mean to suggest the game couldn't survive in some form without that stuff, just that it's a non-zero value to mpq.

You are right that the game doesnt need any one of us. It does, however, benefit a decent amount from all of us, collectively.

entrailbucket

Ah, now that we've got confirmation that we're a tiny minority, we've reached step 2 in this argument -- "sure, casual players exist, but they just don't matter like we do, therefore we can safely ignore all of them and focus only on us."

This game has survived precisely because it doesn't depend on whales. They get a ton of low level players to spend a bit of money each, and that's how it's survived -- long past the time when whale-focused games have died.

They don't need us. Veterans are just freeloaders, taking ranking spots we don't deserve from those who actually pay to support the game. If the top 3% magically disappeared, the game would go on exactly as before.

DAZ0273

@entrailbucket said:
Ah, now that we've got confirmation that we're a tiny minority, we've reached step 2 in this argument -- "sure, casual players exist, but they just don't matter like we do, therefore we can safely ignore all of them and focus only on us."

This game has survived precisely because it doesn't depend on whales. They get a ton of low level players to spend a bit of money each, and that's how it's survived -- long past the time when whale-focused games have died.

They don't need us. Veterans are just freeloaders, taking ranking spots we don't deserve from those who actually pay to support the game. If the top 3% magically disappeared, the game would go on exactly as before.

Isn't this a logical fallacy in so much as you are counting the 97% as all acting the same? That 97% is made up of all sorts of different players. For all we know 90% of those players may also never spend a single dime. I doubt we have anywhere near the information available to us to start making any sort of definitive claims about who does what.

entrailbucket

@DAZ0273 said:

@entrailbucket said:
Ah, now that we've got confirmation that we're a tiny minority, we've reached step 2 in this argument -- "sure, casual players exist, but they just don't matter like we do, therefore we can safely ignore all of them and focus only on us."

This game has survived precisely because it doesn't depend on whales. They get a ton of low level players to spend a bit of money each, and that's how it's survived -- long past the time when whale-focused games have died.

They don't need us. Veterans are just freeloaders, taking ranking spots we don't deserve from those who actually pay to support the game. If the top 3% magically disappeared, the game would go on exactly as before.

Isn't this a logical fallacy in so much as you are counting the 97% as all acting the same? That 97% is made up of all sorts of different players. For all we know 90% of those players may also never spend a single dime. I doubt we have anywhere near the information available to us to start making any sort of definitive claims about who does what.

Interesting! Wouldn't it be just as fallacious/unfounded to assume that the game financially depends on the 3% to survive?