The Irrelevant 7: The 4*'s released since January 2016

2

Comments

  • wymtimewymtime Posts: 3,531 Chairperson of the Boards
    Are any of the new characters not worth a roster spot at all? Are they all better than, say, Devil Dinosaur? Quake and Nova are well-regarded, it seems. What about the others?

    If you don't have two good 5*s then all of them except Howard and Drax are worth a slot in my opinion. If you're in 5* land then none of them offer a lot.

    I'm in the 3 to 4 transition
    A lot of them are very good they are just irrelevant because of all the 4* in the game. None of the releases are broken good 4* so if you have the top 5 already maxed you don't really need these 7. Punisher Nova and Quake are really well designed and play well with others. The problem is with iceman, HB, JG, Cyclops, XFDP who have all been out for my longer you migh have a decently covered 5* before these characters are relevant for players.

    I am personally just a couple covers short of leveling Pun and Nova and think Thry will both be fun but I already have close to 10 max 4* so adding more 4* will not change the game play.
    If you get them keep them a lot of them are very good
  • SandwichboySandwichboy Age Unconfirmed Posts: 193 Tile Toppler
    For the most part I agree, in terms of the meta game the continued release of both 4 AND 5* characters is making for an ever growing roster of characters that will rarely if ever see much play. But personally, as someone whose highest 5* is a 2/2/1 OML I am still very excited to max out Pun, Nova and Quake in particular since those 5* covers are slooooooooooow in coming (not to mention spread thinner and thinner with each subsequent character release.) At the rate I've been getting 5* covers, I'll probably have every current 4* championed before I have a single 5* fully covered, so they're not completely irrelevant yet for a lot of people.
  • VhailorxVhailorx Posts: 5,168 Chairperson of the Boards
    Tc's post is largely correct, but is really only 1/2 of the problem.

    Colog has succinctly stated the plight of veterans. The 4* tier is full, so without rampant power creep, the new releases offer very little to existing deep rosters.

    But there is an other problem facing newer players: the unassailable fourth [tier]! As stated above, the 4* tier is full, and it's now pretty large. So players who don't have a 4* bench already really don't have a reasonable path forward. With so many 4*s out and so few ways to earn fixed covers, transition is a real slog. In the 3*s, it definitely took months to build the first 3*. But once the first one Or two were finished, players could join a stronger alliance and start,competing in pvp. With as many as 4 covers available in each event, it was possible to target key characters.

    Now it takes longer to build the first 4* or two. But then what? Top 10 in pve is very difficult and hardly reliable. 1K covers rotate every 90 days or so now. Its almost pure rng, which sucks.

    I don't think we should talk about one side,of the problem without discussing both. The root problem is that the 4* tier is saturated because of the constant release rate. But introducing new tiers to relieve the pressure just creates the rproblems (c.f. the 5*s). Demiurge is chasing profits by keeping the release rate very high and the rewards quite low. But it is undermining the long term health of the game.
  • bobbyfishbobbyfish Age Unconfirmed Posts: 299
    so I gained 5 quake covers and 3 punisher covers this weekend

    Now:

    icon_quake.png 1/4/3
    icon_punisher.png 1/2/4

    Are either of these worth bringing up to the 160ish range to sit with my 3*s? I feel like quake's 4 yellow might be a handy defensive wall against AOE teams, and might be better short term until I hit some more black on Punisher.

    I'll just bring another green user to make up for her one green so far. Sound about right?
  • VhailorxVhailorx Posts: 5,168 Chairperson of the Boards
    bobbyfish wrote:
    so I gained 5 quake covers and 3 punisher covers this weekend

    Now:

    icon_quake.png 1/4/3
    icon_punisher.png 1/2/4

    Are either of these worth bringing up to the 160ish range to sit with my 3*s? I feel like quake's 4 yellow might be a handy defensive wall against AOE teams, and might be better short term until I hit some more black on Punisher.

    I'll just bring another green user to make up for her one green so far. Sound about right?

    Iso is so precious that prioritization is always a tough choice. But both of those characters are very good. In the long run, you will not regret leveling either of them. Quake will likely be useful earlier, since your build for her is superior (blue is pun-max's weakest power).
  • bobbyfishbobbyfish Age Unconfirmed Posts: 299
    Vhailorx wrote:
    bobbyfish wrote:
    so I gained 5 quake covers and 3 punisher covers this weekend

    Now:

    icon_quake.png 1/4/3
    icon_punisher.png 1/2/4

    Are either of these worth bringing up to the 160ish range to sit with my 3*s? I feel like quake's 4 yellow might be a handy defensive wall against AOE teams, and might be better short term until I hit some more black on Punisher.

    I'll just bring another green user to make up for her one green so far. Sound about right?

    Iso is so precious that prioritization is always a tough choice. But both of those characters are very good. In the long run, you will not regret leveling either of them. Quake will likely be useful earlier, since your build for her is superior (blue is pun-max's weakest power).

    That's what I thought, thanks. I've just blown my ISO champing XFDP, so it'll be a while anyway, so I'll also keep an eye on Clash of the Titan levels (might need to level Thor a bit when she comes round, for example)
  • LuciferianXLuciferianX Age Unconfirmed Posts: 163 Tile Toppler
    Here's something I would like to say more often: That was a very good, insightful post. Thank you for sharing your thoughts, which are well reasoned and logical. In response:

    * Spider-Gwen fails not because she doesn't have some use, but because if you compare her to Miles Morales, his power kit is much more intuitive, and much more unified. It pairs very well with Parker (3), and opens multiple tactical options.

    * This is now a 4/5 star game, and agreed, we're in 3 star reward land. I forget if the OP made this point or if it was elsewhere stated specifically, but this goes back to what the OP mentioned. You have 5 - 7 "best of" characters (I would put Deadpool on that list, along with X-23, because their True Heal is invaluable in the right team) and a whole lot of noise that no one has the time or inclination to build. For example (great example, by the way) Nova. Nova is fantastic. He has single target control, deals plenty of damage and can generally interfere with any and all plans. He's great. No one uses him. Why? Because we're drowning in new characters and no consistent rewards.

    * Quake is fantastic. I'd love to tell those who are upset by not having her that they aren't missing anything, but the truth is she's best in class (Yellow/Green/Blue: Defense/Utility). With a 4400 AOE + Board Shake, and single color disruption. I run her with Deadpool, which is about as funny as you think it is.

    * Drax. Here's a word: "Wow." Here's a few more: "What? Wow. OMG. Just. I can't. I'm allergic." Drax has one great ability: backstab. Sadly, it steps on a lot of other people's non-turn ending abilities, like CDFW. He uses the same color spectrum as Deadpool, but lacks his defense, regen, and panache. What? Wade's got game. Have you seen Morena Baccarin? Just sayin'.

    All of this points to the general problem with MPQ: No one seems to have ever asked themselves (at the development level), "How should this progress to last for years?" This isn't an MMO, but it needs to take lessons from MMOs in terms of development, longevity and structure. We really need:

    * A permanent ongoing story mode, i.e., an open world PVE with weekly rewards. Sort of like a single player MMO, and rewards scaled appropriately. Pick a dungeon/plot/instance, pick a difficulty with modifiers, go in, go H.A.M.

    * DDQ needs to double its reward drop for ISO-8, and start giving one Command Point a day. Yes, I said it. Nothing insane, but 1 Command Point per day. Add a sixth node. Add a third tier to the first 2* eligible fight. I don't care how. I'm off topic. I'll post this part elsewhere.
  • LuciferianXLuciferianX Age Unconfirmed Posts: 163 Tile Toppler
    But compare this to say, Warframe, where new content is in events, cosmetics (yep, I know cosmetics don't apply here, but you get the idea) and a new major release is every 90 days.

    90. For an all new thing to chase, get keys for, and so on.

    "Lucifer, what's your point? This isn't an MMO shooter, it's an FTP phone game."

    Agreed, but it does need all of the sub mechanics and much, much improved pacing of a more complete game. It started as an FTP puzzle quest game and has since turned into this weird monstrosity of constant (and too quick) releases, where no one has a chance to earn the rewards and catch up.
  • carrion_pigeonscarrion_pigeons Age Unconfirmed Posts: 942 Critical Contributor
    I'm pretty sure the release rate has been every 14 days since the game's inception. The difference now is that the requirements to level that flood of characters has gone up more than the actual amount of iso you can farm has.
  • VhailorxVhailorx Posts: 5,168 Chairperson of the Boards
    I'm pretty sure the release rate has been every 14 days since the game's inception. The difference now is that the requirements to level that flood of characters has gone up more than the actual amount of iso you can farm has.

    There have been some (very) rare breaks in the release rate, but it's more or less 1 new character every 14 days as a basline, with more releases periodically for special events (se.g. 4 characters this may). But as carrion says. The problem is that rewards have changed little since the days when 3*s (capped at lvl 140) reigned supreme. The cost of covering and leveling a 4*, let alone a 5*, in time or money is early 3x what it was for 3*s. But the release rate has stayed fixed.

    I have been posting about this problem ever since demiurge clearly announced their intentions to transition to a 4* endgame in December 2014. And I have been actively criticizng demiurge for their failure to address this problem since 4*s became the norm starting with carnage in June 2015. I am still playing the game, but my investment level is way down and I haven't played competitively since the summer of 2015. Nor have I spent any money on the game in that time. This issue would be #1 on my personal list of grievances; it is a breathtakingly player-unfriendly move to triple the cost of end-game content while increasing the rewards only marginally. 4* covers for top 10 pve finishers, even LTs and the champion system, are nowhere near enough
  • BlackBoltRocksBlackBoltRocks Posts: 2,401 Chairperson of the Boards
    I think the title should be updated to the Irrelevant 10 to add in Winter Soldier, War Machine and Kate Bishop

    Bucky is quite decent. Jimmy is decent as well, although you're really losing out on the colour that you go 3 in. His best build is definitely 5/5/5. And from the looks of it, Kate is around the level of Hulkcho and Drax
  • Philly79Philly79 Posts: 422 Mover and Shaker
    need to add Kate Bishop to this list for sure, terrible design......and choice of character
  • PeterGibbons316PeterGibbons316 Age Unconfirmed Posts: 1,063
    For me these characters are largely irrelevant (although I do think I could find a spot for a Quake in my roster), but my wife is just transitioning into 3* land. I'm constantly catching myself when she asks questions like "so what about this 4* punisher cover I just got, he any good?" My initial reaction is "yeah, he's decent but why would you use him over the top 5 4* characters that are already out there." Forgetting that those earlier characters aren't necessarily more developed on her roster. There are still new players to the game every day and for those new players - getting covers for these newer characters before the others will make them very relevant.

    A 4* PvP would also bring all of these characters into relevance. I love all the new mechanics they have been adding to the game with some of these new releases, but agree that for the time being those mechanics go largely unused, and do little to change the meta.
  • mazeratmazerat Age Unconfirmed Posts: 118
    For me these characters are largely irrelevant (although I do think I could find a spot for a Quake in my roster), but my wife is just transitioning into 3* land. I'm constantly catching myself when she asks questions like "so what about this 4* punisher cover I just got, he any good?" My initial reaction is "yeah, he's decent but why would you use him over the top 5 4* characters that are already out there." Forgetting that those earlier characters aren't necessarily more developed on her roster. There are still new players to the game every day and for those new players - getting covers for these newer characters before the others will make them very relevant.

    A 4* PvP would also bring all of these characters into relevance. I love all the new mechanics they have been adding to the game with some of these new releases, but agree that for the time being those mechanics go largely unused, and do little to change the meta.

    The problem for people who are transitioning into the 3-star tier or getting ready to transition out is that a large part of moving upward from there is cracking token_legendary.png which contain both 4 and 5 stars at roughly the same rate per character. And not only are 5*s better than 4*s at the same level of coverage, they start 185 levels higher for free. To put it another way--if you crack 100 CL tokens, you'll get on average about 3 covers of each 4 and 5 star. Granted, you might have a few extra 4-star covers from elsewhere, but how many would it take to match a 3-covered 5 star?
  • PolaresPolares Posts: 2,531 Chairperson of the Boards
    mazerat wrote:
    For me these characters are largely irrelevant (although I do think I could find a spot for a Quake in my roster), but my wife is just transitioning into 3* land. I'm constantly catching myself when she asks questions like "so what about this 4* punisher cover I just got, he any good?" My initial reaction is "yeah, he's decent but why would you use him over the top 5 4* characters that are already out there." Forgetting that those earlier characters aren't necessarily more developed on her roster. There are still new players to the game every day and for those new players - getting covers for these newer characters before the others will make them very relevant.

    A 4* PvP would also bring all of these characters into relevance. I love all the new mechanics they have been adding to the game with some of these new releases, but agree that for the time being those mechanics go largely unused, and do little to change the meta.

    The problem for people who are transitioning into the 3-star tier or getting ready to transition out is that a large part of moving upward from there is cracking token_legendary.png which contain both 4 and 5 stars at roughly the same rate per character. And not only are 5*s better than 4*s at the same level of coverage, they start 185 levels higher for free. To put it another way--if you crack 100 CL tokens, you'll get on average about 3 covers of each 4 and 5 star. Granted, you might have a few extra 4-star covers from elsewhere, but how many would it take to match a 3-covered 5 star?

    Yes that is a fundamental flaw in the current design of the game, and it is affecting A LOT of people. I am the only firm 4 player in my alliance (4->5), all my other teammates are 3->4 or now more precisely 3->5

    The problem as you mentioned is that there are so many 4s, that even though they constantly win some 4s none is fully covered (they are in this limbo 3-10 covers where they are not very useful), so it is not worth for them to invest iso past the 170 point. Then they are also winning 5s, and those are instantly stronger than their 3s, so they are covering and using those 5s more than any other 4. A 5 cover OML or Phoenix is much better than any 3, so why bother with the 4s for now?

    Edit: The only 4 most of my teammates have covered is IMHB, with the last CW a lot of people finally max covered him.
  • VhailorxVhailorx Posts: 5,168 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited June 2016
    Polares:

    A 5 cover OML is clearly better than any 3*, but a 5 cover Phoenix isn't that good unless she has 4 or 5 covers in purple. I know this as the slightly sad owner of a 2/2/2 Phoenix. She doesn't really excel until she has the cascade generating potential she gets with more purple covers. Her other two powers are just meh.
  • PolaresPolares Posts: 2,531 Chairperson of the Boards
    Vhailorx wrote:
    Polares:

    A 5 cover OML is clearly better than any 3*, but a 5 cover Phoenix isn't that good unless she has 4 or 5 covers in purple. I know this as the slightly sad 2/2/2 Phoenix. She doesn't really excel until she has the cascade generating potential she gets with more purple covers. Her other twonppwers are just meh.

    Well yeah, nobody said you need to start using them right away, you can wait until you get 7-9 covers. With the new ratios, it is probably not going to be that long. And if you play PvE you really have no reason to level them earlier.

    And then there are other 5s like GG and IM46 that are also good with a smaller number of covers than Phoenix (witch I agree depends a lot on the number of purple covers she has, I know, mine is 5/1/5 Phoenix icon_razz.gif). A 3/1/1 or 1/3/1 GG is scary for any 3.
  • LemminkäinenLemminkäinen Posts: 378 Mover and Shaker
    Vhailorx wrote:
    A 5 cover OML is clearly better than any 3*, but a 5 cover Phoenix isn't that good unless she has 4 or 5 covers in purple.
    She is still better than any 5 cover four-star.
  • VhailorxVhailorx Posts: 5,168 Chairperson of the Boards
    Vhailorx wrote:
    A 5 cover OML is clearly better than any 3*, but a 5 cover Phoenix isn't that good unless she has 4 or 5 covers in purple.
    She is still better than any 5 cover four-star.

    True, but kind of meaningless. The design intent of 5* was to make lower-cover characters more relevant. This was done with a higher base level, massive match damage, and powers that scale more with levels and less with covers (at the cost of ruining scaling for 3* rosters). So an X-cover 4* Will always be weaker than 5I with the same number of covers. But the comparison was a 5-cover 5* and a max (champed) 3*. IMO, the more useful abilities, and higher potential health of the 3* outweigh the match damage of the 5* most of the time (but not for OML)
  • PolaresPolares Posts: 2,531 Chairperson of the Boards
    Vhailorx wrote:
    Vhailorx wrote:
    A 5 cover OML is clearly better than any 3*, but a 5 cover Phoenix isn't that good unless she has 4 or 5 covers in purple.
    She is still better than any 5 cover four-star.

    True, but kind of meaningless. The design intent of 5* was to make lower-cover characters more relevant. This was done with a higher base level, massive match damage, and powers that scale more with levels and less with covers (at the cost of ruining scaling for 3* rosters). So an X-cover 4* Will always be weaker than 5I with the same number of covers. But the comparison was a 5-cover 5* and a max (champed) 3*. IMO, the more useful abilities, and higher potential health of the 3* outweigh the match damage of the 5* most of the time (but not for OML)

    I don't think it is just OML, a 330 level 2/2/1 GG is probably better than any champed 3, and it is the same for a 2/1/2 IM46. Phoenix is very dependent on her purple, and SS is rubbish. Then the other two need a little bit more level probably.
Sign In or Register to comment.