HoundofShadow said: If you have 550 Okoye, would you still be saying the same thing?My slice is ending soon and I just checked who my opponents are, and this is after crossing 900 points in the current SCL 10 PvP:Note: I record every team per skip, up to first 10 teams.Polaris/R4GYelena PolarisBaby champed iHulkoyePolaris/KarnakPolaris/R4GBaby champed IHulk/ 500 OkoyeApocalypse/OnslaughtApocalypse/BRBChamped iHulkoye, level 480.340 Carbage/MedusaOut of 10, 3 teams are iHulkoye. I hardly call them being around everywhere. I think I have figured it out: iHulkoye is everywhere, but they are not everywhere in pvp, but they are everywhere in that player's mind.
Mayo said: The only ones that would not like the nerfing okoye are those who hoarded for months just to exploit the system. What are your okoye and i hulk levels?
Phumade said: 1200 is no longer a meaningful benchmark on comp vs casual. The goal should be to speed all players past the 1-3* phases into 4* land where 1200 is the default expectation. To facillate that player acceleration, let’s ease the road to 1200. Longer matches that allow people to acquire and fire powers is okay for this tier of play
Sekilicious said: Phumade said: 1200 is no longer a meaningful benchmark on comp vs casual. The goal should be to speed all players past the 1-3* phases into 4* land where 1200 is the default expectation. To facillate that player acceleration, let’s ease the road to 1200. Longer matches that allow people to acquire and fire powers is okay for this tier of play As someone in four-star land without Polaris I get hit a lot and skip her unless she is with teammates that leave her vulnerable. I would love the progression rewards as well. I don’t think multiple mmr will help someone like me though. I would just get hit more often. I personally wish they didn’t value wins at 16pts for max progression. Ideally they would only count points I earn without subtracting those I lose. Or value wins at 30pts per lowering the win total to 40 wins for max progression. Either of these choices are pretty reasonable which probably means the developers do not agree with my assessment for how my four star experience should be.
HoundofShadow said: Players are able to progress even more quickly with Shards, Daily Quests, Milestone quests etc. So, how fast do you think it should take for new players to hit 4* land? What's the timeframe, and for what kind of players is that time frame for?
Phumade said: Sekilicious said: Phumade said: AS a 4* player you should be seeing and hitting 3* teams to 700-800. The hope is that other peer level 4* players should start filling in those Q for 40-60 points and give you a better shot at hitting 1200. I’ll certainly acknowledge that lots of testing needs to happen to see the real world effects on ques. I’ll also acknowledge that the 5* players will hit your team, but again: 1. ELO design limits your real point losses and below 1000 your actually generating shard points.. 2. The ideal scenario is that those 5* roster start using a wider diversity of 5* chars creating more chances that you have an ideal 4* counter play team, while they wait for an ideal opportunity to catch point waves to 2000, 3000 etc.
Sekilicious said: Phumade said:
Phumade said:
Michael1957 said: I’d prefer instead of castrating characters we shut out each SCL in proportion to roster strength . The top 4 SCL could be limited by quantity of 5 stars on roster. SCL 7, you can’t have more than two 5*, for example , 10 for 8, 20 for 9, and 21 plus you MANDATORY play SCL 10. This would keep the cowards who don’t want to play against their peers from bullying much weaker rosters ( Please don’t insult me with the lame excuse , “ I’m not a coward , I’m just not interested in the reward vs time and resources required ). This way MMR levels would be more balanced and competitive, you’d be facing tons of mirror matches most likely , which is great because it would stop players from bringing a gun to a knife fight .
HoundofShadow said: To Phumade, Also, by fast tracking players to 4* land, you are increasing the pressure to gather ISO-8 and hero points to champ and roster them in time. Given that new 4* appear 4-5 times before rotating out, it's really easy to fully cover them with decent placement. Your solution will require the number of HP gain for new players to be increased substantially, which I don't think the dev or the finance will be agreeable to. At the end of day, what benefits does the dev gain by reducing their revenues and increasing rewards for players substantially?
acescracked said: Michael1957 said: I’d prefer instead of castrating characters we shut out each SCL in proportion to roster strength . The top 4 SCL could be limited by quantity of 5 stars on roster. SCL 7, you can’t have more than two 5*, for example , 10 for 8, 20 for 9, and 21 plus you MANDATORY play SCL 10. This would keep the cowards who don’t want to play against their peers from bullying much weaker rosters ( Please don’t insult me with the lame excuse , “ I’m not a coward , I’m just not interested in the reward vs time and resources required ). This way MMR levels would be more balanced and competitive, you’d be facing tons of mirror matches most likely , which is great because it would stop players from bringing a gun to a knife fight . SCL & MMR have nothing to do with each other in PvP. You'd face the same opponents no matter which SCL you choose. Thought maybe you meant placement rewards until your last statement.Btw, I'm not a coward, I'm just interested in the reward vs time and resources required. Not trying to insult you with a lame excuse.
Michael1957 said: acescracked said: Michael1957 said: I’d prefer instead of castrating characters we shut out each SCL in proportion to roster strength . The top 4 SCL could be limited by quantity of 5 stars on roster. SCL 7, you can’t have more than two 5*, for example , 10 for 8, 20 for 9, and 21 plus you MANDATORY play SCL 10. This would keep the cowards who don’t want to play against their peers from bullying much weaker rosters ( Please don’t insult me with the lame excuse , “ I’m not a coward , I’m just not interested in the reward vs time and resources required ). This way MMR levels would be more balanced and competitive, you’d be facing tons of mirror matches most likely , which is great because it would stop players from bringing a gun to a knife fight . SCL & MMR have nothing to do with each other in PvP. You'd face the same opponents no matter which SCL you choose. Thought maybe you meant placement rewards until your last statement.Btw, I'm not a coward, I'm just interested in the reward vs time and resources required. Not trying to insult you with a lame excuse. I’m saying stop basing SCL levels on MMR and base them on roster strength , both by quantity and quality of champed 5*. Other players in my alliance playing SCL 9 with 0-1 5* see rosters of 12 5* and 250 total characters. Those players take placement 1-25 every event . So divide SCL 7 through 10 into levels restricted by the roster . It’s done in all competitive sport levels from boxing to wrestling, you don’t battle outside a very narrow class where opponents are essentially equal and someone weighing 250 isn’t fighting someone 120, which is analogous to most PvAI battles here .
Dogface said: Mayo said: The only ones that would not like the nerfing okoye are those who hoarded for months just to exploit the system. What are your okoye and i hulk levels? That's a bold statement. First of all, what do you mean by exploiting the system? It's a regular power, no tricky play. If you want to talk exploit, I'd consider getting Thor to half health more of an exploit.Second, Okoye has never been too much of a problem until iHulk came along. I can tell you out of experience that my regular Okoye/Medusa team was/is no match for no one whatsoever. Great to win, awful on defense.Third, as many seem to forget. There's more than just PVP in this game. Nerfing Okoye would make PVE harder/take longer. Maybe if you're a veteran with a sh*tload of highleveled champs you can afford to have a character nerfed. I'm not in that boat. And just FYI, my Okoye is 457, my iHulk is 315.
HoundofShadow said: To Mayo, based on what you have said so far, I have beaten 10 and 15 level difference okoye + ihulk using full boosts and luck but okoye lvl 500+ baby champ ihulk is almost a troll team that should not be usable."The only ones that would not like the nerfing okoye are those who hoarded for months just to exploit the system.My initial impression is that it's a case of other players having a bigger toys and you are not happy that you don't have them. Also, you decided to challenge teams 50 levels higher than yours and you couldn't beat them. So, nerfing them is the easiest solution. All my 5* are baby champed. You can hoard for one or two years if you want 550 characters. You have a choice.What if you have 550 Okoye...If I had okoye at 550 it is likely i also have a bunch of other 550s and would not care if okoye is nerfed as i can continue playing without a hickup.So, it's a case of "it's not my business if other players are affected by the nerf. It's because I have backup."In my opinion, the above are very poor reasons asking for nerfs. If the majority of players think like this, it's purely an expectation problem. To prevent hoarding, why not get the devs to implement a system where all players with SR 100 and above have their LTs opened automatically every week, and half of their cp will be converted to LTs every month to preven high level characters. Or why not simply exclude 5* from champion system?The reasons for skipping team is to proof that iHulkoye is not everywhere.i just started the next pvp and half the teams are okoye +ihulk but where you will find the most of this team is when climbing with the rest of players and when many whales enter between 30 to 12 hours to finish the slice.What are the levels of your top 5 5* characters and what teams do you use to engage them? After reading the above, it seems like you are indirectly saying that it's not true that iHulkoye is everywhere, but they are "everywhere" only at a specific period. You are aware of the period where iHulkoye appears the most frequently, but you chose to play at a time where you see them frequently, and you also choose to fight those with levels ~50 higher than yours. You couldn't beat them, so they should be nerfed. I think this is an expectation issue.
Mayo said:Do you think any player having a okoye 100+ levels over ihulk is not a good reason to ask for a nerf? If that player lost okoye + ihulk team would probably be a baby seal, yes?
DAZ0273 said: Mayo,I don't understand this talk about "exploiting the system"? How have any players who chose to chase Okoye exploited anything? Tall rosters v broad rosters has always been a thing, no? Pursuing an "all eggs in one basket" strategy is always risky (same for 4* players who exclusively chase Kitty, likewise see GAMBIT) but I can't see how it is an "exploit"? Your additional comments in point 3 seem to be also heading towards some strange place about relating a mobile phone game to people seeking a competitive edge in a competitive game as somehow making the player morally bad?!?!?Levels as requested: Okoye 5/3/3 lvl 390 and iHulk 2/2/1 lvl 300 but I don't really use either much. So I have no dog in this fight at all but your last post is verging on paranoid, matey!