Debate on Character Valuation

@entrailbucket said:

What does this have to do with MPQ? Well, we're all playing "Eternal" MPQ. In most events, all characters back to 2013 are technically legal, but if you actually want to win, you need to use the most powerful ones. I can't bring any old guys to shield sim against 550 Chasm/Hulk/Colossus -- I'd lose without getting a turn. At the highest levels, only a few teams are truly viable.

The barrier to entry for competition is massively high. New characters that are competitively playable are rare, because we're evaluating them against the strongest possible strategies from the entire history of the game. If we had some kind of rotating format (and the boosts kind of do that), then someone like Magik might be more playable -- she'd be compared to a weaker set of characters, so she'd look much stronger.

This is an appealing explanation but it feels wrong both sides .

MTG : MTG had to deal with early card creation with really strong cards and wonky rules on set whose availability is extremely limited (no reprint). So the barrier of entry is between for vintage is 50K$ and 100k$ and noone plays that. However if you pick modern (cards printed since 2003) , it is actually evolving regularly with cards from latest set being picked up.
MPQ : if you look at 2022 5*releases, many of them are meta. Only recently (wong, magik probably jeff) have we got "weaker" chars. Besides magik or jeff could be strong chars with only number changes. I bet that with all the ops issues they are having, their QA metrics are also inaccurate and number nerfs are due to botched tests.

Also the games economy are very different (and also physical vs digital ). I'm pretty sure MPQ is able to keep releasing new competitive chars for a long time.

@entrailbucket

Just so you know, I've played MtG professionally, casually, and in almost every format available. I don't have legacy cards, so no I don't play vintage tournaments, but I've been around the block with set releases and how they play out.

I honestly think, at the reduction point, these games are incredibly comparable. Think of the investment to receive boosts, vaults, and other offers. Very comparable to buying box sets, or even the 5,000 random card box. The reality is that a single character here is about equal to a full set mechanic from MtG. Roughly equating to one set from MtG = a character release in MPQ, and the reason I say that is because of the integration, the front selling, the playtesting, and player reception.

There's been so many times that a single card in MtG has upheaved all kinds of formats for wins, and its been banned or limited very quickly. Other times, its a card mechanic that overcomes play styles, but the grouping of those cards aren't banned, they're countered by a new release. MPQ has not paid attention to this same kind of reception. Furthermore, the legacy characters vs current meta vs new releases is actually very comparable again. Legacy characters are incredbily hard to build, their very rare in the game, and they only really bring up the play styles that match them. Attempt to bring them to the modern tournament, and you'll lose handily.

However, in their own setting or comapared to similar sets, these cards/characters begin to shine. Same thing here, the kind of characters released that require synergy with legacy characters to be really good are at a huge disadvantage, where as the ones that hit biggest get the biggest hype and attention, and everyone brings them to tournament.

The similarities are actually more numerous than the differences, but here's the biggest catch around that. Because MtG has such an incredbile wealth of cards and characters to build from, they have an incredible range of "path to victory." MPQ is naturally limited more by design, but its even more limited when combating the same PvP teams over and over, and they require the same tactic to beat them, over and over, and when I don't have those mechanic specific characters maxed, I'm at even MORE of a disadvantage.

Honestly, the boost list helps, and playing for wins instead of points helps too, but by the time I'm reaching 18-20 wins, its damn exhausting because I'm facing the same mega meta teams over and over. MtG has a path to overcome any other play style, but MPQ has a much more limited vein for that.

If you don't use exactly the right counter to a situation, you will not win. Period. MtG allows for a much greater range of luck meets investment meets creativity. Here, we're limited in creativity, we are hamstrung in the luck department (thanks Chasm's instant turn 1 stun) and to pile on these meta team players have been at meta top for so long that they've built rosters that could absolutely stomp mine into the ground. Its the worst of pay-to-win meets legacy players dominating the game.

@Scofie said:

My heart falls for you! He best be getting you a new house too when they sell!

It's a bit easier when you have more than one designer.
I'm guessing at this point there's maybe two people working on characters in MPQ and they have to release 3 each and every month.
You are seeing the effects that causes - Chasm, not enough playtesting, Chasm, Borked events, Chasm, Magik nerfed before release, Chasm, no communication.

Oh, did I mention Chasm?

Can you talk about how dota does balance? How often do heroes get adjusted? Are there multiple "best" strategies? From a quick search, it seems like it's maintained pretty well, but I've never played it.

You gave me a very interesting idea.

What if they had Affiliation styled PvP?? Where only characters from a selected list of affiliations are allowed? This would really change up the dynamic, and to avoid Mirror Matching the whole way, it could be as simiple as "Pick either 3 Heroes OR 3 Villains" but could go to something like "Pick 3 'Hero Spider-verse' OR 3 Symbiotes".

Really introducing the idea of 'sets' to PvP. Could also do a theme on year released, even.

This brings a new dynamic to PvP they can rotate in to give some relief to the Meta, doesn't punish or change any characters, and they can keep the current dynamics to PvP as well.

I've been trying to think of an all positive change that doesn't punish anyone or any character as they are, even if I (and many others) think Chasm (or revives in general) need addressed. This answer brings fresh interest to the affiliations they're doing, while being a win - win for every involved otherwise.

@Alex502 said:
You gave me a very interesting idea.

What if they had Affiliation styled PvP?? Where only characters from a selected list of affiliations are allowed? This would really change up the dynamic, and to avoid Mirror Matching the whole way, it could be as simiple as "Pick either 3 Heroes OR 3 Villains" but could go to something like "Pick 3 'Hero Spider-verse' OR 3 Symbiotes".

Really introducing the idea of 'sets' to PvP. Could also do a theme on year released, even.

This brings a new dynamic to PvP they can rotate in to give some relief to the Meta, doesn't punish or change any characters, and they can keep the current dynamics to PvP as well.

I've been trying to think of an all positive change that doesn't punish anyone or any character as they are, even if I (and many others) think Chasm (or revives in general) need addressed. This answer brings fresh interest to the affiliations they're doing, while being a win - win for every involved otherwise.

Honestly doing a pvp of full spiderverse or full "gamma mutate" seems narrow with current affiliations. That said maybe with a pick 2 with affiliation restriction +1 open spot it could add enough variety. Also it needs to be workable for people with smaaler rosters, because mirror loaners would be gruelingly boring.

That also reminds me of heroic PVE (I think it is how it was called) where you can use only a list of char. It looked nice at first but was a pain to play, the more so with incomplete rosters

So they used to run limited-roster events all the time, but in PvE. They called them "Heroic" events. Some of us loved them, because we had everyone rostered. And back then PvE enemies scaled to your full roster, but Heroic events only scaled to your roster of allowed characters.

Everybody else pretty much hated them though. For newer players with lots of gaps in their roster, they might find themselves totally locked out, or limited to 1* and 2* characters (if they didn't have any of the allowed 3* rostered).

They have occasionally run "Heroic" type PvPs over the years, but they're really rare. I'm not sure why that is. There was a Heroic boss event a few months ago, and I don't think that was very popular.

Really, the boosted list pretty much does the same thing, without the unfortunate side effects of locking players out if they don't have a featured character rostered. The boosted list isn't as effective as it could be, though, because some characters are better than the boosted guys.

So we return to their initial problem -- there's no variety because some characters are way too good.