Discussion on PVP MMR

124

Comments

  • KGB
    KGB Posts: 3,755 Chairperson of the Boards

    @dianetics said:
    We can actually gauge it by looking at how commonly boosted characters show up in your tier.
    There are about 10-15 characters that never show up when boosted in the 5* tier. Some of them already had balance passes. Ghost Rider, Daken, Loki, Wasp, Gambit, Archangel, Hela, Black Widow, Yelena, Cap, Cap, Captain Marvel, Abigail Brand. There are probably others, but I never see these in pvp even boosted.
    I'm not sure about the 4* tier, but I guess it is wider. There are about 20 good to great 4s and like 5 top tier 4s.

    Again though, most of those characters you listed are quite old ones. We have no idea how many current players have those characters champed. In other words, if there are 100,000 players playing 5* PVP, how many have a champed Wasp or a champed Loki to even use if that character is boosted? If only 5% have the character champed then you won't see that character very much because they are rare to begin with so the balances may have been just fine for Ghost Rider but no one has him to use.

    The other thing about looking at your queue is that you only see someone's defensive team. That may not be the team they climbed with but rather the last one they used on defense and lots of players try to leave out strong defensive teams for obvious reasons. Lucky the dev's can see exactly what teams were actually used vs what other teams so they know for sure and don't have to rely on looking at queues.

    KGB

  • entrailbucket
    entrailbucket Posts: 7,013 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited May 2023

    Calculating character strength off usage is impossible for a certain type of player, which unfortunately includes most of us.

    Example: Civil War Cap is actually a murderer now, after his buff. I never see him, even when he's boosted, but not because he's bad. It's because he used to be bad, so "smart" players never bothered putting resources into him, so on their roster, even after the buff, he's still awful.

    They could've turned him into the best character in the game, and half the players wouldn't notice because they didn't champion him however many years ago.

  • Bowgentle
    Bowgentle Posts: 7,926 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited May 2023

    @entrailbucket said:
    Calculating character strength off usage is impossible for a certain type of player, which unfortunately includes most of us.

    Example: Civil War Cap is actually a murderer now, after his buff. I never see him, even when he's boosted, but not because he's bad. It's because he used to be bad, so "smart" players never bothered putting resources into him, so on their roster, even after the buff, he's still awful.

    They could've turned him into the best character in the game, and half the players wouldn't notice because they didn't champion him however many years ago.

    You're a bit unfair.
    Anyone who's not at your level of resources won't have everyone at a usable level.
    I champed my Cap when I could - he's still only 474.
    And I don't have a lopsided, min-maxed roster.

  • entrailbucket
    entrailbucket Posts: 7,013 Chairperson of the Boards

    At 474, with the boost, he should be pretty usable for you! Have you tried him out?

  • Bowgentle
    Bowgentle Posts: 7,926 Chairperson of the Boards

    I will next time he comes around.
    I'm impressed by Gambit this PVP though, he's actually a threat now!

  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 11,506 Chairperson of the Boards

    @dianetics said:
    We can actually gauge it by looking at how commonly boosted characters show up in your tier.
    There are about 10-15 characters that never show up when boosted in the 5* tier. Some of them already had balance passes. Ghost Rider, Daken, Loki, Wasp, Gambit, Archangel, Hela, Black Widow, Yelena, Cap, Cap, Captain Marvel, Abigail Brand. There are probably others, but I never see these in pvp even boosted.
    I'm not sure about the 4* tier, but I guess it is wider. There are about 20 good to great 4s and like 5 top tier 4s.

    I am seeing quite a bit of Gambit at the moment in Stay on Target. Ghost Rider to a less extent but he is there. Shang Chi and Jane Thor are the main teams I am seeing. My MMR is around 465-ish.

  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 11,506 Chairperson of the Boards

    Actually - thinking about Gambit I wonder if a lot of players might have cashed him in after his nerf back in the day? I kept mine but he only had a few covers anyway and is still only 5/3/2. I tried him out but it turned out playing cards are no match for hammers.

  • entrailbucket
    entrailbucket Posts: 7,013 Chairperson of the Boards

    @DAZ0273 said:
    Actually - thinking about Gambit I wonder if a lot of players might have cashed him in after his nerf back in the day? I kept mine but he only had a few covers anyway and is still only 5/3/2. I tried him out but it turned out playing cards are no match for hammers.

    Yep, that's exactly what happened. It's too bad, because the buff they gave him was really pretty good. He's not bad at all now -- not usable unboosted, but when boosted his powers hit hard. But selling him was a completely logical and arguably optimal thing to do at the time.

  • Bowgentle
    Bowgentle Posts: 7,926 Chairperson of the Boards

    Was it? Trading for random 5* covers didn't seem enticing to me at the time.

  • entrailbucket
    entrailbucket Posts: 7,013 Chairperson of the Boards

    If you were never going to use him for anything ever (remember this was before 5* boosts), then yeah -- trading in a useless guy for some % chance at getting something useful would be optimal.

  • Bowgentle
    Bowgentle Posts: 7,926 Chairperson of the Boards

    I learned from not getting anything useful from the OML tokens that selling a champed 5 was a very very bad idea.
    But you're right, at the time selling probably seemed optimal.

  • Alex502
    Alex502 Posts: 184 Tile Toppler

    I remember selling Gambit because I had like only one or two covers for him, and with the nerf I thought I'd have a better chance at someone more functional. I forget who I got. I still do not have Gambit rerostered. He's one of only 3 characters in the game I do not have any covers for, and yet I'm not mad about it.

  • pepitedechocolat
    pepitedechocolat Posts: 253 Mover and Shaker

    "Any topic that runs for too long will contain a part about nerfing Chasm" <- MPQ forum law

    @entrailbucket said:
    Great! I have a roster of 15 fully maxed out 550 5*, and another 40 or so over lvl 500. I've been playing for about 10 years. I am as far from a new player as it gets. On your scale from "clueless" to "serious," I'm about as serious as it gets.

    By your logic I should be rewarded with easier matches, correct? Why am I being "punished" for playing well?

    As far as power levels, if you seriously think the gap between Polaris and Spider-Woman isn't a massive discrepancy, I don't know what to tell you. There are tons of examples at the 4* and 5* tier -- these gaps in power level are not small.

    I am not sure why you say you are punished. because you only see double 550 in pvp ?

    You are free to call me clueless, but I think there can be situations were spider woman is better suited than Polaris. The issue is not power level, it is "speed meta". Polaris does damage fast, and it is all that matter in pve, and most of the time in pvp (luckily chasm in 5* land is an exception :D ).

    Unfortunately except for special event (puzzle, boss, welcome to shield), mpq is based on clear speed, which leads to overusing a certain type of chars, and neglecting others, and above all discourage creativity, as there are only a few char available at each tier that are "fastest clear".

  • entrailbucket
    entrailbucket Posts: 7,013 Chairperson of the Boards

    You said that players who play strategically and advance their rosters should be rewarded, instead of being punished with more difficult matches. I've played strategically and built my roster up to many maximum characters -- why am I shown more difficult matches than, say, a 4* player? Shouldn't I be rewarded with easier matches?

    If you're arguing that Spider-Woman is a better choice than Polaris in some particular situation, please provide video evidence of said situation.

    It's all well and good to complain about "speed meta", but that is the game that exists. When they introduce some mode that isn't based on speed, we can evaluate characters for that mode. Until then, it's a worthless exercise to hypothetically evaluate characters in a mode that doesn't yet exist.

  • Phumade
    Phumade Posts: 2,603 Chairperson of the Boards

    We could have a leaderboard/quests for puzzlequest type conditions, that could be a good incentive for early in the event. So Day 1, people could do flood the board with web tile quests, and then do their normal climb and shield hops on day 2-3. Tier 5 quests could be complete 4 protects in each corner in 100 matches for a 4*.

  • Scofie
    Scofie GLOBAL_MODERATORS Posts: 1,639 Chairperson of the Boards

    @entrailbucket said:
    You said that players who play strategically and advance their rosters should be rewarded, instead of being punished with more difficult matches. I've played strategically and built my roster up to many maximum characters -- why am I shown more difficult matches than, say, a 4* player? Shouldn't I be rewarded with easier matches?

    If you're arguing that Spider-Woman is a better choice than Polaris in some particular situation, please provide video evidence of said situation.

    It's all well and good to complain about "speed meta", but that is the game that exists. When they introduce some mode that isn't based on speed, we can evaluate characters for that mode. Until then, it's a worthless exercise to hypothetically evaluate characters in a mode that doesn't yet exist.

    Mod mode off

    Spider Woman was better during some GotG milestones. You could match 100 of each colour and still not kill the enemy...

  • entrailbucket
    entrailbucket Posts: 7,013 Chairperson of the Boards

    Sure, so in a case where the requirement is "be as terrible as possible," she wins. I don't think this is the gotcha you think it is.

    I'm just a little sick of this "well, that's not a bad character, you're just not being creative enough! There is definitely a situation where X terrible character is better than Y overpowered character!"

    Great, then provide a video demonstration of said situation and we can all figure out if you're right!

  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 11,506 Chairperson of the Boards

    @Scofie said:

    @entrailbucket said:
    You said that players who play strategically and advance their rosters should be rewarded, instead of being punished with more difficult matches. I've played strategically and built my roster up to many maximum characters -- why am I shown more difficult matches than, say, a 4* player? Shouldn't I be rewarded with easier matches?

    If you're arguing that Spider-Woman is a better choice than Polaris in some particular situation, please provide video evidence of said situation.

    It's all well and good to complain about "speed meta", but that is the game that exists. When they introduce some mode that isn't based on speed, we can evaluate characters for that mode. Until then, it's a worthless exercise to hypothetically evaluate characters in a mode that doesn't yet exist.

    Mod mode off

    Spider Woman was better during some GotG milestones. You could match 100 of each colour and still not kill the enemy...

    We had better hope there is never a Spider Woman milestone quest where we have to fire her red 100 times, we would need at least a month for that one...

  • Bowgentle
    Bowgentle Posts: 7,926 Chairperson of the Boards

    @entrailbucket said:
    Sure, so in a case where the requirement is "be as terrible as possible," she wins. I don't think this is the gotcha you think it is.

    I'm just a little sick of this "well, that's not a bad character, you're just not being creative enough! There is definitely a situation where X terrible character is better than Y overpowered character!"

    Great, then provide a video demonstration of said situation and we can all figure out if you're right!

    That guy was shown the door, though.

  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 11,506 Chairperson of the Boards

    @entrailbucket said:
    Sure, so in a case where the requirement is "be as terrible as possible," she wins. I don't think this is the gotcha you think it is.

    I'm just a little sick of this "well, that's not a bad character, you're just not being creative enough! There is definitely a situation where X terrible character is better than Y overpowered character!"

    Great, then provide a video demonstration of said situation and we can all figure out if you're right!

    It is definitely a gotcha coz he was obviously making a joke!

Categories