PVP Supports: Feedback Thread

Options
18911131422

Comments

  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 11,078 Chairperson of the Boards

    @entrailbucket said:

    We're feeding back, here! They asked to be fed back!

    Fair enough! But it sort of feels like we have now gone to a discussion about PvP itself not Supports?

  • LennoxHC
    LennoxHC Posts: 26 Just Dropped In

    @WiDoW0042 said:

    This is from an s1 cl10 bracket. I can’t remember the last time I didn’t make full progression, but watching opposing Riri/Mthor teams stun every turn because they started with a load of green ap, or growing old waiting for the infinite cascades to stop due to a boards shuffling support, or being dumb struck…err…love struck and causing no damage or being stunned over and over left me annoyed enough to not care to continue this event past 1048 points. On the other hand, 1048 would never have been enough for t10 before supports. I guess a lot other players stopped short as well, so…thanks? :/

    Hey, there I am! I think this was actually the S5 bracket. I have been indifferent to supports in PvP. I've got meta 5s at a baby champ level (~470), but mainly used Kang - Darkveil to get to 50 wins. That combo works a little better with supports, but also can work fine without them. I've also found it fun to play because I need to plan out who I need to send away and what AP I need for the next turn to either keep the combo going or knock out someone to win the match. I am an easy retaliation target but again I don't mind that since I'm mainly going for wins.

  • entrailbucket
    entrailbucket Posts: 6,711 Chairperson of the Boards

    @DAZ0273 said:

    Fair enough! But it sort of feels like we have now gone to a discussion about PvP itself not Supports?

    If the feedback they're getting is "I like supports in PvP," but someone digs a bit, and the reason is "I hate engaging with PvP, and supports are great because your game is awful and they let me avoid engaging with your game" is that good feedback or bad feedback?

    Isn't that more valuable than "I like supports in PvP?"

  • Borstock
    Borstock Posts: 2,957 Chairperson of the Boards

    @Tony_Foot said:
    I think there's a lot of exaggeration here to suit an agenda. I tried a 500 mthor with a lower level riri with supports that gave me 14 or so green. I often ran out of green, couldn't get more or had teams with lots of protect titles that made that team poor. It was far from quick too. I used plenty of health packs and winning wasn't a foregone conclusion.

    I certainly wouldn't run it against huge teams.

    It's literally all I ran up to 1200. I never lost. I attacked and easily defeated a 672 Knull, 620 Kaine, all characters with maxed supports, 4 times in a row. My alliance mate ran the team after I told him about it and trounced a 672 Knull and 672 YJ. He doesn't have maxed mThor like me and his RiRi is a baby champ.

    It's not exaggeration. It's what happened.

  • entrailbucket
    entrailbucket Posts: 6,711 Chairperson of the Boards

    @Borstock said:

    It's literally all I ran up to 1200. I never lost. I attacked and easily defeated a 672 Knull, 620 Kaine, all characters with maxed supports, 4 times in a row. My alliance mate ran the team after I told him about it and trounced a 672 Knull and 672 YJ. He doesn't have maxed mThor like me and his RiRi is a baby champ.

    It's not exaggeration. It's what happened.

    I'm beginning to suspect that some players aren't very good at the match-3 part of the game, and that may have something to do with their opinions.

    Like I said, I'm often running a million+ HP of very, very strong characters out there, with optimized supports, and I'm taking defensive losses to significantly worse teams than what these literal .01%ers are supposedly running. I'm really tired of hearing the "poor me, PvP is just too hard!" stuff from players who have the best characters in the game at very high levels.

    Someone with a lvl500 m'Thor + decent supports should be facerolling literally anything in the game. I know this, because players with characters in that range are facerolling my ridiculous teams! If it's not possible, how are they doing it?

  • entrailbucket
    entrailbucket Posts: 6,711 Chairperson of the Boards

    @KGB said:

    Sun Tzu would vehemently disagree with this idea. :)

    KGB

    I think saw that guy last event -- pretty sure I took about 700 points off him.

  • Pottsie1980
    Pottsie1980 Posts: 55 Match Maker

    The addition of supports has allowed me to get to 50 wins much faster. There is more chance for a rock-paper-scissors win than previously. The boost list determines if there are any teams I avoid each event more than before as well.

  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 11,078 Chairperson of the Boards

    @KGB said:

    Sun Tzu would vehemently disagree with this idea. :)

    KGB

    That also screws over Batman!

  • entrailbucket
    entrailbucket Posts: 6,711 Chairperson of the Boards

    @Tony_Foot said:

    Is it not possible for you to make your point without sly digs? Just because your team is getting beat by lower teams doesn't mean it's a consistent team to use with low health pack or damage taken. You have no idea how bad their team was hurt from beating your team.

    I just didn't get the consistent results using riri and mthor even with good green supports. It's not exactly a tough team to understands how to use, but I didn't find it particularly fast or felt I would consistently get good results like I can with Shang and Halfthor and supports.

    Is it right to state anyone else is not good at the match 3 part of the game when people spend to get an advantage? I mean why would a good player even need to do that if they are so superb at match 3 and knowing the game like the back of their hand?

    Spending money (and roster strength in general) has absolutely no correlation to in-game skill. Some of the biggest whales, historically, were pretty horrifically bad at the game, and plenty of low-spending/free to play players are great at it.

  • KGB
    KGB Posts: 3,582 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited July 2024

    @entrailbucket said:

    Spending money (and roster strength in general) has absolutely no correlation to in-game skill. Some of the biggest whales, historically, were pretty horrifically bad at the game, and plenty of low-spending/free to play players are great at it.

    Correct. It's strategy (roster management/team&support&boost selection/enemy matchup etc) vs tactics (in game gem matching/firing powers&combos/collecting AP etc).

    As Sun Tzu said, all battles are won (strategy) before they are fought (tactics). It may take longer if your tactics aren't great and it might even be possible to lose on occasion, but if your strategy is good, you are going to win.

    KGB

  • entrailbucket
    entrailbucket Posts: 6,711 Chairperson of the Boards

    @KGB said:

    Correct. It's strategy (roster management/team&support&boost selection/enemy matchup etc) vs tactics (in game gem matching/firing powers&combos/collecting AP etc).

    As Sun Tzu said, all battles are won (strategy) before they are fought (tactics). It may take longer if your tactics aren't great and it might even be possible to lose on occasion, but if your strategy is good, you are going to win.

    KGB

    That guy sure didn't know much when I was sniping him the other day!

    But seriously, I think that's a great summation of how I feel about this change. Before supports, and before the category of characters that I'd classify as "autoplay," tactics (to use your metaphor) mattered, and they mattered a ton. You couldn't buy your way to winning, and you couldn't hoard your way to winning. Roster was a bar you had to clear to compete, but once you cleared that bar your tactics determined how well you did. Plenty of players who tried to buy their way to the top failed because they couldn't play. Plenty of players with subpar rosters could still win.

    Supports, combined with certain characters, have de-emphasised the tactical component even further. I guess that's where these new devs have been heading for awhile, but I think we lose something important as a result.

  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 11,078 Chairperson of the Boards

    What does "couldn't play" mean? Were they physically incapable of swiping their screen to make 3 same colour tiles line up? Did they have some sort of condition where instead of pressing a flashing button to make super powers happen they instead hit the pause and retreat button? Could they even load the game?

    This sounds like something that needs investigating - is this an MPQ thing only? I think this might need some sort of warning put on the game - "MPQ may result in an inability to swipe". An inability to swipe on a game some play on the toilet could be disastrous.

  • BriMan2222
    BriMan2222 Posts: 1,593 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited July 2024

    Have you lost your ability to swipe or match 3 after being prescribed medications? If so you may be entitled to compensation.

  • Colognoisseur
    Colognoisseur Posts: 808 Critical Contributor

    I’ve enjoyed having supports enabled for PvP. I have played PvP for 50 wins since it was added as a way to full progression. For me supports make that go a bit faster. I enjoy playing the game enough to want to win 50 times. Supports have made it slightly easier. The biggest difference is I am getting more blues which tells me if my supports process when I am attacked there is more opportunity for the AI to win.
    My bottom line is I’ve enjoyed using them and would like them to continue.

    If there is going to be a middle ground I think I’d like to see a single support enabled for one character in the battle. It would perhaps make for a choice between free ap or annoying effect.

  • entrailbucket
    entrailbucket Posts: 6,711 Chairperson of the Boards

    @DAZ0273 said:
    What does "couldn't play" mean? Were they physically incapable of swiping their screen to make 3 same colour tiles line up? Did they have some sort of condition where instead of pressing a flashing button to make super powers happen they instead hit the pause and retreat button? Could they even load the game?

    This sounds like something that needs investigating - is this an MPQ thing only? I think this might need some sort of warning put on the game - "MPQ may result in an inability to swipe". An inability to swipe on a game some play on the toilet could be disastrous.

    I don't know! If I go through my history, I've got pages upon pages of screenshots of huge whales wiping to my teams, though. My alliance always prided ourselves on antagonizing the big spenders or the hackers, and we almost always won against them.

    If roster was the only thing that mattered, none of them would ever have lost a fight -- and they'd be able to beat us far faster than we could beat them. That often wasn't the case.

  • itsuka7
    itsuka7 Posts: 113 Tile Toppler

    I am a 5* player with a handful of 500+ 5*. I am one of those players that enters an event at the start, tries to get to 12 or 25 wins as quickly as possible, and doesn’t care about points, ranking or being hit. With the introduction of supports, I have played more, like playing for 50 wins instead (depending on who is boosted and if they have great support options). Some combinations are really fun to play, and then I continue beyond my minimum (which used to be 12 wins, but I’ve adjusted to 25 now).

    My preference is to keep the supports in. I can see a possible situation however where a support meta will just block any casual wins - in that case I prefer them removed from defense. I think the balance should make it possible for every player to be able to get to 25 wins or so with a little time, challenge and effort.

  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 11,078 Chairperson of the Boards

    @entrailbucket said:

    I don't know! If I go through my history, I've got pages upon pages of screenshots of huge whales wiping to my teams, though. My alliance always prided ourselves on antagonizing the big spenders or the hackers, and we almost always won against them.

    If roster was the only thing that mattered, none of them would ever have lost a fight -- and they'd be able to beat us far faster than we could beat them. That often wasn't the case.

    I think the one thing the Devs can take from this topic is this. Devs - please instigate some extra match 3 training. Maybe for the useless Whales give them some Match 3 tokens when they buy a Stark? Crazy we are taking about Supports when this terrible condition exists.

Welcome!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.