20three wrote: So maybe it's a good thing that when my day starts getting ruined by Silver Surfer penetrations
20three wrote: Are things like this allowed on the board?
deiXide wrote: Silver Surfer is my favorite Marvel character, so I am elated over his inclusion in MPQ. That said, as someone on the bottom end of the spectrum, the continued tweaks to the top end are disheartening. I am fortunate enough to be able to play frequently enough, and am currently slogging (trudging? wallowing? stumbling?) my way to a single cover-maxed 3-star. Right now, I use 2-star characters for 90% of the matches I play. My goal right now is to get as many 3-star covers as possible, without dropping the price of an Xbox game for a chance at a single needed cover. I get one cover on average every ~4 days from progression rewards in PVE (barring the gauntlet it seems), I do Deadpool's TBE and get 2 tacos daily, I get as many heroic tokens as possible through progression in PVP and placement in PVE, I hit the 10-pack Season progression reward, get three out of the four 3* covers from the Simulator, and I play every PVP event and aim for a top-100 finish when I roll a lucky bracket. On the surface, this seems like a pretty varied system for beginners. Build your 2*s, get lucky and get heroic tokens that yield gold covers, spend $$$ on slots, get lucky some more, and get one guaranteed (if you previously got lucky) cover per day. The problem is, outside of this, I'm competing against people who have been playing much longer and have been much luckier than myself (my 3-star conversion rate has been 9% on heroic+ tokens). It seems like the more that's added to the top end, the worse the odds get for the bottom end, and the more players compete to shove the beginners out of any bracket that gives a 3-star cover. I have all 40 3-stars with at least one cover, and most of the ones I have decently (halfway+) covered are considered terrible. The game is structured so it actually hurts you to level up without knowing what you're doing. To date, I haven't seen a single patch balancing crummy characters (rag, qs, iw, 2*bullseye, bagman, etc) since I started playing in earnest, although I do recognize it happened in the past. To me, the existence of characters that can't compete just worsens the odds and dilutes the pool. Furthermore, the game has actually "punished" me for doing well and/or getting lucky, giving me a 4* cover I won't be able to use for years. Yeah, I'm told those 2 Elektra covers are great to have, but they don't help me compete right now. I would love to get a glimpse into the numbers behind this game. I'd like to see where the power curve really is, what the truly average player is working with, how much the whales pay, etc. I can't imagine anyone but the top 1% is seriously fighting over 4-star covers, and now 5-star covers. I'm certainly not asking for a handout, but when the majority of the current 4-star playerbase was trudging through the 3-star transition, they weren't competing against players 2-3 tiers higher than them, begging for table scraps that the top end doesn't eat. I know I have no shot at 3* placement awards competing against fleshed out 3* rosters, much less 4* and 5*. Let me compete against my own weight class. TLDR: If the goal moving forward is to continually add to the top-end, the barrier to entry will continue to grow. Further consideration to insulating or segregating players at the bottom and middle would be welcomed.
Linkster79 wrote: I did read it and watch the video. I didn't see or hear anything about any new story events. I dunno maybe I am missing it somewhere. I see legendary tokens as progression rewards, Deadpools Daily and as part of a 40 pack but no news on new story events for the release. Is there a new story to accompany Silver Surfers release?
Stax the Foyer wrote: TLCstormz wrote: PVP THIS........PVP THAT. 1300 THIS.........1300 THAT. Gosh that gets old. Why is no one talking about how **** this will be for 2 > 3 Transitioners or even stagnant 3* players who CANNOT make a dent in PvP, because they flounder with their 100 leveled rosters, for the sake of keeping their PvE enemies manageable? Ice, what is being done for THEM? If the only option / suggestion / plan / means that you all have concocted is "lol, hit the double progression, cuz people do it all the time", that sounds extremely lackluster...........
TLCstormz wrote: PVP THIS........PVP THAT. 1300 THIS.........1300 THAT. Gosh that gets old. Why is no one talking about how **** this will be for 2 > 3 Transitioners or even stagnant 3* players who CANNOT make a dent in PvP, because they flounder with their 100 leveled rosters, for the sake of keeping their PvE enemies manageable? Ice, what is being done for THEM? If the only option / suggestion / plan / means that you all have concocted is "lol, hit the double progression, cuz people do it all the time", that sounds extremely lackluster...........
TLCstormz wrote: So, you and your 11 bros, INCLUDING two message board community building "examples", enjoy insinuating that people are mentally ****, and making fun of the possibilities? Congrats!!! :+D
TLCstormz wrote: Stax the Foyer wrote: TLCstormz wrote: PVP THIS........PVP THAT. 1300 THIS.........1300 THAT. Gosh that gets old. Why is no one talking about how **** this will be for 2 > 3 Transitioners or even stagnant 3* players who CANNOT make a dent in PvP, because they flounder with their 100 leveled rosters, for the sake of keeping their PvE enemies manageable? Ice, what is being done for THEM? If the only option / suggestion / plan / means that you all have concocted is "lol, hit the double progression, cuz people do it all the time", that sounds extremely lackluster........... So, you and your 11 bros, INCLUDING two message board community building "examples", enjoy insinuating that people are mentally ****, and making fun of the possibilities? Congrats!!! :+D
deiXide wrote: To date, I haven't seen a single patch balancing crummy characters (rag, qs, iw, 2*bullseye, bagman, etc) since I started playing in earnest, although I do recognize it happened in the past. To me, the existence of characters that can't compete just worsens the odds and dilutes the pool.
Furthermore, the game has actually "punished" me for doing well and/or getting lucky, giving me a 4* cover I won't be able to use for years. Yeah, I'm told those 2 Elektra covers are great to have, but they don't help me compete right now.
Der_Lex wrote: I think Deixide is bringing up a far more pressing issue, that the placement reward structure needs looking at, especially in PvP. The 2-3*transitioners that really need those 3* covers are not getting them, because the playerbase has 'leveled up' enough that the top 50 of players are in the 3-4* transition. I don't think anything needs to be added for the top players, but I do think the reward categories for covers need to be extended to top 250 at least.
Lemminkäinen wrote: Making Rags or 2*Bullseye better would make the PvE a lot more difficult since you face those characters a lot. I mean, the optimal solution would be to have way more varied PvE characters but then the difficulty level would need some looking into.
Lemminkäinen wrote: Four-stars are going to languish for a really, really long while un-used since there are so many of them and the covers are so hard to get. (cut) And I'm expecting more four-stars to be released at a rapid pace throughout the fall.
Stax the Foyer wrote: The fundamental problem that transitioners face is the dilution of those covers. With 40 3* characters instead of just a handful, it's easy to get a whole mess of covers, but it's hard to completely cover any of them.
deiXide wrote: I would love to get a glimpse into the numbers behind this game. I'd like to see where the power curve really is, what the truly average player is working with, how much the whales pay, etc. I can't imagine anyone but the top 1% is seriously fighting over 4-star covers, and now 5-star covers. I'm certainly not asking for a handout, but when the majority of the current 4-star playerbase was trudging through the 3-star transition, they weren't competing against players 2-3 tiers higher than them, begging for table scraps that the top end doesn't eat. I know I have no shot at 3* placement awards competing against fleshed out 3* rosters, much less 4* and 5*. Let me compete against my own weight class. TLDR: If the goal moving forward is to continually add to the top-end, the barrier to entry will continue to grow. Further consideration to insulating or segregating players at the bottom and middle would be welcomed.
SnowcaTT wrote: But as newbies get 5*'s - supposedly much, much better than 4* - they'll be able to jump the previous transitions and use their low covered, high level, high attack 5*'s against anyone who has been in the game for a long time. Why wouldn't the vets get frustrated and leave? And the newbies will be excited if they can jump quickly into the highest tier....until they are vets, and 6* is introduced, and they are over-taken by six-month players. Vicious cycle to create vet burn-out.