New Character - Toad (Mortimer Toynbee) 4*

entrailbucket

He's completely busted.

The problem is that ludicrous charged tile passive. Once you cast either of his active powers, the passive lets you just fire that power again forever. Any match damage booster or active damage power on that color means the game is over as soon as you cast purple or black once.

How did this get through testing?

Blackstone

@entrailbucket said:
He's completely busted.

The problem is that ludicrous charged tile passive. Once you cast either of his active powers, the passive lets you just fire that power again forever. Any match damage booster or active damage power on that color means the game is over as soon as you cast purple or black once.

How did this get through testing?

Why would it not get through testing?

While I agree with your assessment on what he can do, he's just another winfinite option from many already in the game.

To be clear, I'm also not saying that winfinites are good for the game, but when we already have several winfinite options, adding another isn't an issue. The game evolved behind a matching game into a turn zero game a while ago.

So...in testing he goes winfinite, which has become the norm, what reason would they have to change anything?

If anything they might see it as a good thing because he'll present another option that will be used in play, whereas anything that can't win quickly won't get used much due to better options.

"Busted" has become the norm. Possibly even a requirement. If they present a great character that is fun, with cool art, and does chille things, but that character doesn't promote a winfinite or turn zero win, they'll still be sitting on the bench because they can't compete.

Winfinite no longer means OP when there are so many winfinite options. It just becomes about going winfinite in a different way or with different characters than the other winfinites.

And we can't go back because of how slow the game would feel in comparison.

They could make specific hard counters to each winfinite character/team, I suppose, but I don't see any reason for a winfinite to be the cause for a character to fail any sort of testing in the current environment.

Which is why other recent nerfs weren't based on power, but usage. Nerfing over used (by the average player masses) characters and presenting new "busted" characters achieves the same goal. Diversifying who is actually being used.

HE is currently used a lot. Toad can both partner with HE and counter HE? While working well with several other characters? (All according to other commenters on this thread. I haven't done testing to confirm this myself) That all sounds like a win for the reality of where the game is at the moment.

To summarize: I'm not disagreeing with your assessment of him. I'm offering a counter argument to the question of testing. I could be way off and seeing things from a perspective that wasn't even considered. I can't speak for the devs or even other players.

entrailbucket

I wish we could stop saying "winfinite."

Capital-W Winfinite is a proper name that refers to the 2* Magneto/Mystique pick-2 team that went infinite, back before there were 3000 ways to do that (and BOTH ate pretty significant nerfs). Infinite teams are just infinite teams, "winfinite" makes us sound silly.

I guess Hawkeye at least requires you to place a critical tile somewhere. Toad is literally just "smash button, win game," in a way that the other infinites mostly aren't.

If this is what they want the game to be then that's ok, but too many of the game's systems still act like it's something else. Get rid of PvP entirely, or have every match be against seed teams. Get rid of leaderboards everywhere, turn everything into progression rewards.

Turn MPQ into a fully single player game, and then everybody can win every single fight in one move, and the metagame won't matter at all anymore.

Blackstone

"Winfinite" may have had an initial meaning, but it's evolved and people understand what it means in current context with zero thought to any 2* teams from back in the day. I don't mind using "infinite teams" when replying to you if that's your preference though.

I agree about Hawkeye. Your turn might never end but at least you're placing matches. Toad might allow you to continuously "smash button" but there are others that win (even defensively) by simply making a single match and watching as the cascade and extreme match damage just happens.

I don't know what they want the game to be, or if your suggestions are meant to be real or just express frustration.

When I started reading your last comment, I thought you were responding to me as I responded to you. But nothing you said actually responds to what I said so I may have been mistaken.

entrailbucket

@Blackstone said:
"Winfinite" may have had an initial meaning, but it's evolved and people understand what it means in current context with zero thought to any 2* teams from back in the day. I don't mind using "infinite teams" when replying to you if that's your preference though.

I agree about Hawkeye. Your turn might never end but at least you're placing matches. Toad might allow you to continuously "smash button" but there are others that win (even defensively) by simply making a single match and watching as the cascade and extreme match damage just happens.

I don't know what they want the game to be, or if your suggestions are meant to be real or just express frustration.

When I started reading your last comment, I thought you were responding to me as I responded to you. But nothing you said actually responds to what I said so I may have been mistaken.

Yeah it actually wasn't meant as a direct reply, more of an expansion or aside I guess. I was agreeing with you for the most part.

Mostly the cascade thing can't happen anymore, at least in PvP, after they banned Copter and Fantasticar.

Those suggestions are meant to be real. If any player can win any match against any enemies immediately, with no chance of a loss, a number of the game's systems just stop making sense.

Lots of folks already play MPQ like a single player game -- they don't compete and they'd prefer not to. That's why overpowered characters are viewed as a universal good. If there's no competition, though, the metagame doesn't matter, and balance doesn't matter. If they did this, they could introduce a character with a power like "Passive: every time you make a match, you win the game" and it'd have no impact on anyone else.

Gymp28

There are indeed many infinite teams out there, but most are exactly that, a team composition.
I’m not sure it’s particularly good for the game if we’re going to get progressively more 1 man bands, like 1* Hawkeye and Toad. It literally doesn’t matter who their other 2 teammates are, you’re still guaranteed a win once you have AP to fire off a power.
Sure, what teammates you pick will determine how fast you can win, but is that really the sort of character diversity/choice we want to be encouraging?

Personally I think it’s fine to be able to go infinite, so long as it requires a number of turns of setup on the players part. I have to agree with EB that ‘smash button’ repeatedly = win essentially renders the whole game engine obsolete.

@Blackstone i would absolutely argue we can, and should, go back to a place where everyone has to make a few matches to win a fight. It might feel a bit slower, but if everyone is needing to actually play the game I think that’s totally reasonable.
Otherwise, I’m sad to say, EB is right with his thought experiment thread, and we may as well all be pressing a button to skip all gameplay and just get the rewards…

entrailbucket

@Gymp28 said:
There are indeed many infinite teams out there, but most are exactly that, a team composition.
I’m not sure it’s particularly good for the game if we’re going to get progressively more 1 man bands, like 1* Hawkeye and Toad. It literally doesn’t matter who their other 2 teammates are, you’re still guaranteed a win once you have AP to fire off a power.
Sure, what teammates you pick will determine how fast you can win, but is that really the sort of character diversity/choice we want to be encouraging?

Personally I think it’s fine to be able to go infinite, so long as it requires a number of turns of setup on the players part. I have to agree with EB that ‘smash button’ repeatedly = win essentially renders the whole game engine obsolete.

@Blackstone i would absolutely argue we can, and should, go back to a place where everyone has to make a few matches to win a fight. It might feel a bit slower, but if everyone is needing to actually play the game I think that’s totally reasonable.
Otherwise, I’m sad to say, EB is right with his thought experiment thread, and we may as well all be pressing a button to skip all gameplay and just get the rewards…

I'd like to say, too, people will disagree with you here, and that's ok. Some players, and probably a majority of forum users, think "smash button win fight" is not only acceptable, it's actually preferred!

The problem is it's still a multiplayer game, so the teams others use affect me. If I want the game to be slower and you want it to be "win every fight immediately," we cannot both get what we want.

Gymp28

@entrailbucket said:

@Gymp28 said:
There are indeed many infinite teams out there, but most are exactly that, a team composition.
I’m not sure it’s particularly good for the game if we’re going to get progressively more 1 man bands, like 1* Hawkeye and Toad. It literally doesn’t matter who their other 2 teammates are, you’re still guaranteed a win once you have AP to fire off a power.
Sure, what teammates you pick will determine how fast you can win, but is that really the sort of character diversity/choice we want to be encouraging?

Personally I think it’s fine to be able to go infinite, so long as it requires a number of turns of setup on the players part. I have to agree with EB that ‘smash button’ repeatedly = win essentially renders the whole game engine obsolete.

@Blackstone i would absolutely argue we can, and should, go back to a place where everyone has to make a few matches to win a fight. It might feel a bit slower, but if everyone is needing to actually play the game I think that’s totally reasonable.
Otherwise, I’m sad to say, EB is right with his thought experiment thread, and we may as well all be pressing a button to skip all gameplay and just get the rewards…

I'd like to say, too, people will disagree with you here, and that's ok. Some players, and probably a majority of forum users, think "smash button win fight" is not only acceptable, it's actually preferred!

The problem is it's still a multiplayer game, so the teams others use affect me. If I want the game to be slower and you want it to be "win every fight immediately," we cannot both get what we want.

But if that’s the case why are people always asking for event timetables, weekly boost lists and character rebalances etc?
If we live in a world where ‘smash button = win’ is dominant, none of that even matters anymore, so there must be a decent amount of people who like playing the game?

Like, why even bother chasing any of the 6 star characters if they don’t go infinite on turn zero?
Admittedly Galactus shuts this nonsense down, which is a reason I’m keen to have him in a playable state!

entrailbucket

@Gymp28 said:

@entrailbucket said:

@Gymp28 said:
There are indeed many infinite teams out there, but most are exactly that, a team composition.
I’m not sure it’s particularly good for the game if we’re going to get progressively more 1 man bands, like 1* Hawkeye and Toad. It literally doesn’t matter who their other 2 teammates are, you’re still guaranteed a win once you have AP to fire off a power.
Sure, what teammates you pick will determine how fast you can win, but is that really the sort of character diversity/choice we want to be encouraging?

Personally I think it’s fine to be able to go infinite, so long as it requires a number of turns of setup on the players part. I have to agree with EB that ‘smash button’ repeatedly = win essentially renders the whole game engine obsolete.

@Blackstone i would absolutely argue we can, and should, go back to a place where everyone has to make a few matches to win a fight. It might feel a bit slower, but if everyone is needing to actually play the game I think that’s totally reasonable.
Otherwise, I’m sad to say, EB is right with his thought experiment thread, and we may as well all be pressing a button to skip all gameplay and just get the rewards…

I'd like to say, too, people will disagree with you here, and that's ok. Some players, and probably a majority of forum users, think "smash button win fight" is not only acceptable, it's actually preferred!

The problem is it's still a multiplayer game, so the teams others use affect me. If I want the game to be slower and you want it to be "win every fight immediately," we cannot both get what we want.

But if that’s the case why are people always asking for event timetables, weekly boost lists and character rebalances etc?
If we live in a world where ‘smash button = win’ is dominant, none of that even matters anymore, so there must be a decent amount of people who like playing the game?

Like, why even bother chasing any of the 6 star characters if they don’t go infinite on turn zero?
Admittedly Galactus shuts this nonsense down, which is a reason I’m keen to have him in a playable state!

I'm not sure.

The "why bother chasing anyone" is the point, though. This subset of folks (who I believe are a very small minority of players overall, but are massively overrepresented in social media) want to win every fight trivially forever, without having to chase anyone else, or ever use anyone else. It creates a problem in a game that sells characters.

Blackstone

@entrailbucket said:

@Blackstone said:
"Winfinite" may have had an initial meaning, but it's evolved and people understand what it means in current context with zero thought to any 2* teams from back in the day. I don't mind using "infinite teams" when replying to you if that's your preference though.

I agree about Hawkeye. Your turn might never end but at least you're placing matches. Toad might allow you to continuously "smash button" but there are others that win (even defensively) by simply making a single match and watching as the cascade and extreme match damage just happens.

I don't know what they want the game to be, or if your suggestions are meant to be real or just express frustration.

When I started reading your last comment, I thought you were responding to me as I responded to you. But nothing you said actually responds to what I said so I may have been mistaken.

Yeah it actually wasn't meant as a direct reply, more of an expansion or aside I guess. I was agreeing with you for the most part.

Mostly the cascade thing can't happen anymore, at least in PvP, after they banned Copter and Fantasticar.

Those suggestions are meant to be real. If any player can win any match against any enemies immediately, with no chance of a loss, a number of the game's systems just stop making sense.

Lots of folks already play MPQ like a single player game -- they don't compete and they'd prefer not to. That's why overpowered characters are viewed as a universal good. If there's no competition, though, the metagame doesn't matter, and balance doesn't matter. If they did this, they could introduce a character with a power like "Passive: every time you make a match, you win the game" and it'd have no impact on anyone else.

I think we're on same page then.

There's no reason to not plainly say "you win" in the description text at this point. I'm not saying it's good or bad, it is simply where we are.

What would your thoughts be on an event that put caps on the amount of damage that can be done, and the amount of AP that can be earned, per turn?

Blackstone

@Gymp28 said:
There are indeed many infinite teams out there, but most are exactly that, a team composition.
I’m not sure it’s particularly good for the game if we’re going to get progressively more 1 man bands, like 1* Hawkeye and Toad. It literally doesn’t matter who their other 2 teammates are, you’re still guaranteed a win once you have AP to fire off a power.
Sure, what teammates you pick will determine how fast you can win, but is that really the sort of character diversity/choice we want to be encouraging?

Personally I think it’s fine to be able to go infinite, so long as it requires a number of turns of setup on the players part. I have to agree with EB that ‘smash button’ repeatedly = win essentially renders the whole game engine obsolete.

@Blackstone i would absolutely argue we can, and should, go back to a place where everyone has to make a few matches to win a fight. It might feel a bit slower, but if everyone is needing to actually play the game I think that’s totally reasonable.
Otherwise, I’m sad to say, EB is right with his thought experiment thread, and we may as well all be pressing a button to skip all gameplay and just get the rewards…

I agree with EB as well, I think we just needed to clarify things align perspectives.

When I say there are things we can't undo, I'm referring to concern for the reaction from players.

Each time there's even as minor nerf on the average player's favorite toon (ex: Polaris, MThor, etc) there's a flood complaints from people who are ready to quit. If they nerf the meta for every level of play what would that look like for player retention?

My preference would be victories that feel more earned, which is why I don't generally use teams that zero turn win on PVE. That's not really an option in PVP though.

My concern for a complete roll back of busted characters is for the survivability of the game based on player retention.

entrailbucket

@Blackstone said:

@entrailbucket said:

@Blackstone said:
"Winfinite" may have had an initial meaning, but it's evolved and people understand what it means in current context with zero thought to any 2* teams from back in the day. I don't mind using "infinite teams" when replying to you if that's your preference though.

I agree about Hawkeye. Your turn might never end but at least you're placing matches. Toad might allow you to continuously "smash button" but there are others that win (even defensively) by simply making a single match and watching as the cascade and extreme match damage just happens.

I don't know what they want the game to be, or if your suggestions are meant to be real or just express frustration.

When I started reading your last comment, I thought you were responding to me as I responded to you. But nothing you said actually responds to what I said so I may have been mistaken.

Yeah it actually wasn't meant as a direct reply, more of an expansion or aside I guess. I was agreeing with you for the most part.

Mostly the cascade thing can't happen anymore, at least in PvP, after they banned Copter and Fantasticar.

Those suggestions are meant to be real. If any player can win any match against any enemies immediately, with no chance of a loss, a number of the game's systems just stop making sense.

Lots of folks already play MPQ like a single player game -- they don't compete and they'd prefer not to. That's why overpowered characters are viewed as a universal good. If there's no competition, though, the metagame doesn't matter, and balance doesn't matter. If they did this, they could introduce a character with a power like "Passive: every time you make a match, you win the game" and it'd have no impact on anyone else.

I think we're on same page then.

There's no reason to not plainly say "you win" in the description text at this point. I'm not saying it's good or bad, it is simply where we are.

What would your thoughts be on an event that put caps on the amount of damage that can be done, and the amount of AP that can be earned, per turn?

Well, that's what Galactus does, so in 5 years when we all have him I guess it won't be a problem?

I really have no idea. It feels like they've boxed themselved into a corner.

Restrictions like you describe would probably lead to lots more Kang/Multiple Man etc teams, and depending on how severe the damage limit was, I could see them becoming dominant.

entrailbucket

@Blackstone said:

@Gymp28 said:
There are indeed many infinite teams out there, but most are exactly that, a team composition.
I’m not sure it’s particularly good for the game if we’re going to get progressively more 1 man bands, like 1* Hawkeye and Toad. It literally doesn’t matter who their other 2 teammates are, you’re still guaranteed a win once you have AP to fire off a power.
Sure, what teammates you pick will determine how fast you can win, but is that really the sort of character diversity/choice we want to be encouraging?

Personally I think it’s fine to be able to go infinite, so long as it requires a number of turns of setup on the players part. I have to agree with EB that ‘smash button’ repeatedly = win essentially renders the whole game engine obsolete.

@Blackstone i would absolutely argue we can, and should, go back to a place where everyone has to make a few matches to win a fight. It might feel a bit slower, but if everyone is needing to actually play the game I think that’s totally reasonable.
Otherwise, I’m sad to say, EB is right with his thought experiment thread, and we may as well all be pressing a button to skip all gameplay and just get the rewards…

I agree with EB as well, I think we just needed to clarify things align perspectives.

When I say there are things we can't undo, I'm referring to concern for the reaction from players.

Each time there's even as minor nerf on the average player's favorite toon (ex: Polaris, MThor, etc) there's a flood complaints from people who are ready to quit. If they nerf the meta for every level of play what would that look like for player retention?

My preference would be victories that feel more earned, which is why I don't generally use teams that zero turn win on PVE. That's not really an option in PVP though.

My concern for a complete roll back of busted characters is for the survivability of the game based on player retention.

In general I think this is overblown but we don't have access to real metrics to know.

Regarding Toad specifically, the faster the better. Players get mad when they've put a lot of resources into a guy and he gets nerfed. If they're going to do something, they should do it before anybody blows hoards on him or whatever. He's not going to miraculously get worse if they wait a month or two, we all can see he's too strong, act now.

KGB

@entrailbucket said:

@Blackstone said:

@entrailbucket said:

@Blackstone said:
"Winfinite" may have had an initial meaning, but it's evolved and people understand what it means in current context with zero thought to any 2* teams from back in the day. I don't mind using "infinite teams" when replying to you if that's your preference though.

I agree about Hawkeye. Your turn might never end but at least you're placing matches. Toad might allow you to continuously "smash button" but there are others that win (even defensively) by simply making a single match and watching as the cascade and extreme match damage just happens.

I don't know what they want the game to be, or if your suggestions are meant to be real or just express frustration.

When I started reading your last comment, I thought you were responding to me as I responded to you. But nothing you said actually responds to what I said so I may have been mistaken.

Yeah it actually wasn't meant as a direct reply, more of an expansion or aside I guess. I was agreeing with you for the most part.

Mostly the cascade thing can't happen anymore, at least in PvP, after they banned Copter and Fantasticar.

Those suggestions are meant to be real. If any player can win any match against any enemies immediately, with no chance of a loss, a number of the game's systems just stop making sense.

Lots of folks already play MPQ like a single player game -- they don't compete and they'd prefer not to. That's why overpowered characters are viewed as a universal good. If there's no competition, though, the metagame doesn't matter, and balance doesn't matter. If they did this, they could introduce a character with a power like "Passive: every time you make a match, you win the game" and it'd have no impact on anyone else.

I think we're on same page then.

There's no reason to not plainly say "you win" in the description text at this point. I'm not saying it's good or bad, it is simply where we are.

What would your thoughts be on an event that put caps on the amount of damage that can be done, and the amount of AP that can be earned, per turn?

Well, that's what Galactus does, so in 5 years when we all have him I guess it won't be a problem?

I really have no idea. It feels like they've boxed themselved into a corner.

Restrictions like you describe would probably lead to lots more Kang/Multiple Man etc teams, and depending on how severe the damage limit was, I could see them becoming dominant.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Put cool downs on powers and all this goes away. If you can only fire Toads powers (active and passive) 1 or 2 times a turn he can't win on turn 0. Same for HE and all the other winfinites.

They really only need cool downs for PvP and they can not put cool downs on PvE (the solo game experience) so as to not annoy the entire player base.

Their is precedence for doing this. The original PQ game developed by Steve Fawkner patched the XBox PvP experience to add cool downs to powers to prevent players spamming to turn 0 wins (in a PvP where you really battled the other player, not an AI) which was every bit as bad there as it is here.

KGB

Gymp28

@KGB said:

@entrailbucket said:

@Blackstone said:

@entrailbucket said:

@Blackstone said:
"Winfinite" may have had an initial meaning, but it's evolved and people understand what it means in current context with zero thought to any 2* teams from back in the day. I don't mind using "infinite teams" when replying to you if that's your preference though.

I agree about Hawkeye. Your turn might never end but at least you're placing matches. Toad might allow you to continuously "smash button" but there are others that win (even defensively) by simply making a single match and watching as the cascade and extreme match damage just happens.

I don't know what they want the game to be, or if your suggestions are meant to be real or just express frustration.

When I started reading your last comment, I thought you were responding to me as I responded to you. But nothing you said actually responds to what I said so I may have been mistaken.

Yeah it actually wasn't meant as a direct reply, more of an expansion or aside I guess. I was agreeing with you for the most part.

Mostly the cascade thing can't happen anymore, at least in PvP, after they banned Copter and Fantasticar.

Those suggestions are meant to be real. If any player can win any match against any enemies immediately, with no chance of a loss, a number of the game's systems just stop making sense.

Lots of folks already play MPQ like a single player game -- they don't compete and they'd prefer not to. That's why overpowered characters are viewed as a universal good. If there's no competition, though, the metagame doesn't matter, and balance doesn't matter. If they did this, they could introduce a character with a power like "Passive: every time you make a match, you win the game" and it'd have no impact on anyone else.

I think we're on same page then.

There's no reason to not plainly say "you win" in the description text at this point. I'm not saying it's good or bad, it is simply where we are.

What would your thoughts be on an event that put caps on the amount of damage that can be done, and the amount of AP that can be earned, per turn?

Well, that's what Galactus does, so in 5 years when we all have him I guess it won't be a problem?

I really have no idea. It feels like they've boxed themselved into a corner.

Restrictions like you describe would probably lead to lots more Kang/Multiple Man etc teams, and depending on how severe the damage limit was, I could see them becoming dominant.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Put cool downs on powers and all this goes away. If you can only fire Toads powers (active and passive) 1 or 2 times a turn he can't win on turn 0. Same for HE and all the other winfinites.

They really only need cool downs for PvP and they can not put cool downs on PvE (the solo game experience) so as to not annoy the entire player base.

Their is precedence for doing this. The original PQ game developed by Steve Fawkner patched the XBox PvP experience to add cool downs to powers to prevent players spamming to turn 0 wins (in a PvP where you really battled the other player, not an AI).

KGB

Yeah, I could see this working. The AI already is capped at firing one of each power each turn, so why not the players?
Plus one vote from me!

entrailbucket

@KGB said:

@entrailbucket said:

@Blackstone said:

@entrailbucket said:

@Blackstone said:
"Winfinite" may have had an initial meaning, but it's evolved and people understand what it means in current context with zero thought to any 2* teams from back in the day. I don't mind using "infinite teams" when replying to you if that's your preference though.

I agree about Hawkeye. Your turn might never end but at least you're placing matches. Toad might allow you to continuously "smash button" but there are others that win (even defensively) by simply making a single match and watching as the cascade and extreme match damage just happens.

I don't know what they want the game to be, or if your suggestions are meant to be real or just express frustration.

When I started reading your last comment, I thought you were responding to me as I responded to you. But nothing you said actually responds to what I said so I may have been mistaken.

Yeah it actually wasn't meant as a direct reply, more of an expansion or aside I guess. I was agreeing with you for the most part.

Mostly the cascade thing can't happen anymore, at least in PvP, after they banned Copter and Fantasticar.

Those suggestions are meant to be real. If any player can win any match against any enemies immediately, with no chance of a loss, a number of the game's systems just stop making sense.

Lots of folks already play MPQ like a single player game -- they don't compete and they'd prefer not to. That's why overpowered characters are viewed as a universal good. If there's no competition, though, the metagame doesn't matter, and balance doesn't matter. If they did this, they could introduce a character with a power like "Passive: every time you make a match, you win the game" and it'd have no impact on anyone else.

I think we're on same page then.

There's no reason to not plainly say "you win" in the description text at this point. I'm not saying it's good or bad, it is simply where we are.

What would your thoughts be on an event that put caps on the amount of damage that can be done, and the amount of AP that can be earned, per turn?

Well, that's what Galactus does, so in 5 years when we all have him I guess it won't be a problem?

I really have no idea. It feels like they've boxed themselved into a corner.

Restrictions like you describe would probably lead to lots more Kang/Multiple Man etc teams, and depending on how severe the damage limit was, I could see them becoming dominant.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Put cool downs on powers and all this goes away. If you can only fire Toads powers (active and passive) 1 or 2 times a turn he can't win on turn 0. Same for HE and all the other winfinites.

They really only need cool downs for PvP and they can not put cool downs on PvE (the solo game experience) so as to not annoy the entire player base.

Their is precedence for doing this. The original PQ game developed by Steve Fawkner patched the XBox PvP experience to add cool downs to powers to prevent players spamming to turn 0 wins (in a PvP where you really battled the other player, not an AI) which was every bit as bad there as it is here.

KGB

This specific problem goes away, yes, but you'd end up really devaluing cheap active powers, many of which are appropriately costed for their effect.

There's no easy way out here. Any lever you move is going to have knock-on effects elsewhere.

Blackstone

I feel as though Quandary was an attempt to get around most of the things being discussed here.

That didn't go over well.

Toad feels more like embracing the things that are broken.

Borstock

I prefer gimmick events. Have an event or season where everyone is immune to stuns. Have one where no one does match damage. Have one where special tiles effect the opposite team. Have one where anyone who goes airborne is instantly downed. Have one where AoE heals the other team instead of hurts them.

No characters actually get nerfed or buffed, but the game forces you to try something different for a limited time.

KGB

@entrailbucket said:

@KGB said:

@entrailbucket said:

@Blackstone said:

@entrailbucket said:

@Blackstone said:
"Winfinite" may have had an initial meaning, but it's evolved and people understand what it means in current context with zero thought to any 2* teams from back in the day. I don't mind using "infinite teams" when replying to you if that's your preference though.

I agree about Hawkeye. Your turn might never end but at least you're placing matches. Toad might allow you to continuously "smash button" but there are others that win (even defensively) by simply making a single match and watching as the cascade and extreme match damage just happens.

I don't know what they want the game to be, or if your suggestions are meant to be real or just express frustration.

When I started reading your last comment, I thought you were responding to me as I responded to you. But nothing you said actually responds to what I said so I may have been mistaken.

Yeah it actually wasn't meant as a direct reply, more of an expansion or aside I guess. I was agreeing with you for the most part.

Mostly the cascade thing can't happen anymore, at least in PvP, after they banned Copter and Fantasticar.

Those suggestions are meant to be real. If any player can win any match against any enemies immediately, with no chance of a loss, a number of the game's systems just stop making sense.

Lots of folks already play MPQ like a single player game -- they don't compete and they'd prefer not to. That's why overpowered characters are viewed as a universal good. If there's no competition, though, the metagame doesn't matter, and balance doesn't matter. If they did this, they could introduce a character with a power like "Passive: every time you make a match, you win the game" and it'd have no impact on anyone else.

I think we're on same page then.

There's no reason to not plainly say "you win" in the description text at this point. I'm not saying it's good or bad, it is simply where we are.

What would your thoughts be on an event that put caps on the amount of damage that can be done, and the amount of AP that can be earned, per turn?

Well, that's what Galactus does, so in 5 years when we all have him I guess it won't be a problem?

I really have no idea. It feels like they've boxed themselved into a corner.

Restrictions like you describe would probably lead to lots more Kang/Multiple Man etc teams, and depending on how severe the damage limit was, I could see them becoming dominant.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Put cool downs on powers and all this goes away. If you can only fire Toads powers (active and passive) 1 or 2 times a turn he can't win on turn 0. Same for HE and all the other winfinites.

They really only need cool downs for PvP and they can not put cool downs on PvE (the solo game experience) so as to not annoy the entire player base.

Their is precedence for doing this. The original PQ game developed by Steve Fawkner patched the XBox PvP experience to add cool downs to powers to prevent players spamming to turn 0 wins (in a PvP where you really battled the other player, not an AI) which was every bit as bad there as it is here.

KGB

This specific problem goes away, yes, but you'd end up really devaluing cheap active powers, many of which are appropriately costed for their effect.

It's possible but quite unlikely if they do a reasonable job at it (everything doesn't have to be 1 or 2 times, some could be 3 or even 4). For example Ares Green is a cheap active power and if they set the cool down to 2 (max fire 2x a turn) would it really devalue that power? Has anyone fired it 3x in a turn (maybe as part of some winfinite)?

It should be possible to get the right values for cool downs fairly quickly (a couple of seasons). They can err on the side of caution (higher cool down values) and lower as needed to stop winfinites.

KGB

Read_Only

I'm fine with it, for years people keep telling me the thor okoye meta was so good because it was quick and then easy to beat.

Well so is HE and Toad. But I smashed all those cheese teams for 75 points that have spent ages swapping covers to get that 2* or 3* etc to 550 to sit aloft the peasants, so this will get reeled in.