**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Options
Honest question: Isn't the low Attack Rating for StarkTech characters outdated now?
ESF
Posts: 1,944 ★★★★★
Hi, folks!
As always, there's gonna probably be a few too many words in this thing, but I'm going to try to keep it short.
Also, if this thing gains any traction: My preference is to keep this thing honest, positive and constructive. I can't control what people say, but I do know this: Anybody from Kabam who reads this is a person. A human being. Being rude...well, I'm asking for them to look at something and potentially change it. Being nasty to the people who read this and can change it...welp, that isn't helpful. Right?
So. It's no secret that a chunk of people would really like some full-scale adjustments made to OG Iron Man, Superior Iron Man and Iron Patriot, and likely War Machine, as well.
But to date, since no adjustments have been made in a few years to these characters, it's likely that the powers that be don't see a need for such a thing -- I'd love to be wrong, but that's how it looks.
I understood, to some degree, why the StarkTech characters had lower base attack, years ago: You were trading some attack for longevity, with the regeneration burst of the characters when they were awakened, at least for the Iron Men and Iron Patriot. OK. And when the game didn't have four-stars, that made total sense -- an awakened, three-star Iron Man back in the day was useful for questing. Could take punishment in the days where the cap was Act 3 and there were fewer characters overall, especially ones with significant amounts of utility.
Then four-stars came, and so did Act 4. You could kinda see some of the game's heavier hitters begin to pull away from the StarkTech characters, the Star-Lords and Thors and SWitches, Captain Marvel and Storm, etc. But even then, though it was a little disappointing, again, you could squint and see how the lower attack/regeneration burst could be viewed as an OK tradeoff.
This all changed, to me, with the introduction of Hyperion, and has only gotten worse and worse for the StarkTech characters.
Please, if anyone from Kabam is reading this, I am speaking for myself, but I think it is possible that I might also be speaking for a decent chunk of the player base when I ask this question, and with all due respect:
In a game where we now have Spark, Corvus Glaive, Proxima Midnight who just do incredible amounts of burst damage and also have higher base attack ratings...and characters like Green Goblin and X-23 who have reliable Regeneration and higher attack ratings....and characters like the Captain America characters who, if played properly, are every bit as sustainable as the Iron Men characters but have higher attack ratings...is there really a great reason to have the StarkTech characters so far below the average attack of the game roster?
I don't have every character and don't have them all ranked up, as three-stars. But my look around my roster, with about 90 three-stars fully ranked up, shows that only Old Man Logan has a worse attack rating that OG Iron Man and Iron Patriot. Superior Iron Man is only slightly better; he beats Dr. Strange and is tied with Dormammu in base attack rating, but, again, for the characters who I have ranked up, trails everyone else.
My request would be this, for those who have made it this far:
If we simply aren't going to get a revamp of the StarkTech characters, OK. That is kinda disappointing, but if that is the way it's going to be, then that's just the way it is.
But the game has clearly advanced, with Act V and Labyrinth of Legends, the Boss Rushes and Challenges, as well as the newer and better characters...if there isn't a desire to revamp the StarkTech characters, can we at least remove the restriction on their Attack Rating that is outdated and bring them up to at least the median attack average of the game roster?
With where the game is right now, would such a thing truly be that bad, if those older characters aren't slated for improvements?
Thanks for the time, whoever might read this! Remember, try to keep it positive, as best you can!
As always, there's gonna probably be a few too many words in this thing, but I'm going to try to keep it short.
Also, if this thing gains any traction: My preference is to keep this thing honest, positive and constructive. I can't control what people say, but I do know this: Anybody from Kabam who reads this is a person. A human being. Being rude...well, I'm asking for them to look at something and potentially change it. Being nasty to the people who read this and can change it...welp, that isn't helpful. Right?
So. It's no secret that a chunk of people would really like some full-scale adjustments made to OG Iron Man, Superior Iron Man and Iron Patriot, and likely War Machine, as well.
But to date, since no adjustments have been made in a few years to these characters, it's likely that the powers that be don't see a need for such a thing -- I'd love to be wrong, but that's how it looks.
I understood, to some degree, why the StarkTech characters had lower base attack, years ago: You were trading some attack for longevity, with the regeneration burst of the characters when they were awakened, at least for the Iron Men and Iron Patriot. OK. And when the game didn't have four-stars, that made total sense -- an awakened, three-star Iron Man back in the day was useful for questing. Could take punishment in the days where the cap was Act 3 and there were fewer characters overall, especially ones with significant amounts of utility.
Then four-stars came, and so did Act 4. You could kinda see some of the game's heavier hitters begin to pull away from the StarkTech characters, the Star-Lords and Thors and SWitches, Captain Marvel and Storm, etc. But even then, though it was a little disappointing, again, you could squint and see how the lower attack/regeneration burst could be viewed as an OK tradeoff.
This all changed, to me, with the introduction of Hyperion, and has only gotten worse and worse for the StarkTech characters.
Please, if anyone from Kabam is reading this, I am speaking for myself, but I think it is possible that I might also be speaking for a decent chunk of the player base when I ask this question, and with all due respect:
In a game where we now have Spark, Corvus Glaive, Proxima Midnight who just do incredible amounts of burst damage and also have higher base attack ratings...and characters like Green Goblin and X-23 who have reliable Regeneration and higher attack ratings....and characters like the Captain America characters who, if played properly, are every bit as sustainable as the Iron Men characters but have higher attack ratings...is there really a great reason to have the StarkTech characters so far below the average attack of the game roster?
I don't have every character and don't have them all ranked up, as three-stars. But my look around my roster, with about 90 three-stars fully ranked up, shows that only Old Man Logan has a worse attack rating that OG Iron Man and Iron Patriot. Superior Iron Man is only slightly better; he beats Dr. Strange and is tied with Dormammu in base attack rating, but, again, for the characters who I have ranked up, trails everyone else.
My request would be this, for those who have made it this far:
If we simply aren't going to get a revamp of the StarkTech characters, OK. That is kinda disappointing, but if that is the way it's going to be, then that's just the way it is.
But the game has clearly advanced, with Act V and Labyrinth of Legends, the Boss Rushes and Challenges, as well as the newer and better characters...if there isn't a desire to revamp the StarkTech characters, can we at least remove the restriction on their Attack Rating that is outdated and bring them up to at least the median attack average of the game roster?
With where the game is right now, would such a thing truly be that bad, if those older characters aren't slated for improvements?
Thanks for the time, whoever might read this! Remember, try to keep it positive, as best you can!
4
Comments
Actually, I disagree with your contention about Cyclops, pretty strongly.
Here's why, backed by data:
I have a four-star, 4/40 Cyclops (NXS). With my Mastery setup, he has 11,806 health and a 977 attack rating.
My four-star 4/40 OG Iron Man has a health pool of 10,548 and an attack rating of...900.
My four-star 4/40 Superior Iron Man has a health pool of 11,121 and an attack rating of 947.
So not only is Cyclops' attack rating measurably better, his base Crit Rating is exactly the same as the StarkTech characters...but when awakened, Cyclops' Crit Damage rating is increased AND beam attack damage isn't reduced by blocking above 15 hits.
In other words:
Cyclops isn't worse than the StarkTech characters, if you know how to play and don't get hit. In reality, Cyclops hits quite a bit harder than the StarkTech characters and the only thing capable of even making it close is the fact that with enough Sig Levels, an awakened StarkTech character can simply Regen.
But for a skilled player, Cyclops isn't worse than the StarkTech characters. At all
I checked out stats for my maxed 3*s, and IM has significantly more damage on specials, guaranteed armor break (cyclop has 55% chance only). As for his dupe — I still believe it's better. First, of you're skilled, you don't waste your specials in block. But may have to take some block damage, and here arc overload will help you. I cleaned most of act 4 with im, he's great to get you to the boss though all map long without spending any heal potions. And the damage difference is not that high. And if you don't play very well, im is better for sure. I don't say im is god compared to cyclop, but I always would prefer him over cyclops and over many other trash champs. He is also more difficult in defence, couse you have to fight him longer.
The problem is almost all old champs are equally useless atm.
btw, I have 4/55 ultron and not satisfied with him either
No cyclops is an effective option for alliance war (sarcasm by the way)
Red Cyclops sucks anyway. OG is where it’s at. He looks better (maybe nostalgia) and has better abilities. He gains an L1 quicker than any other champ other than Loki or synergies. His armor breaks last much longer, and his sig makes his specials unblockable instead of just reducing BP to 0. This means that even through block OG Cyclops can still inflict armor break with a combo of 15 or higher. That being said, OG Cyclops still falls short of most other champs.
It would be nice if they revamped older champs a little bit to make them relevant. Obviously they don’t have to give them all abilities of newer champs but even tweaking them like they did LC and Rulk would be great.
I am not necessarily disagreeing with you. I just think that at some point, if we never ask for even a bit of balance between new and old, the game really suffers from it.
I get it: We, as players, have to want new characters. We have to want to upgrade our rosters and grind, invest time and money, for some players.
My concern is when the gap gets so big between the haves and have-nots...I mean, I think everyone understands that at some point, some characters aren't going to be the best.
But I think it's a tough thing to swallow when you see the gap get so large that you feel like the work you already put in is pretty devalued. Know what I mean?