Is there actually a point in voting for who we want?

Pretty much the title. I was wondering what is the upside vs the downside of voting for a champion we want in the game or for a champion to get buffed because it honestly feels like it might be safer to not vote for who we really want in these votes.

Most of the time we vote for a champion it turns out either pretty solid, nothing spectacular or meh and mid.
After the first vote being Hercules (broccoli my goat) the power and care for these seemed to have noticeably decreased by the second vote being quicksilver. Yes Hercules is debatable too op. With a couple tweaks he'd be releaseable as a 7* though.
Quicksilver is great but if he didnt have high prestige i cant see many summoners ranking him up. His playstyle is weird, his combos dont feel good to input and his utility is out matched by a science champion no one asked for released on a random Tuesday in spring.
More examples that I wont go too in depth with are
Mr. Knight: genuinely horrible playstyle for the ai of the game.
Gladiator: great champion but also not a good playstyle for the ai
Guillotine: the didnt even really buff her. Just moved her kit a little to the left.
Cyclops: decent but has mechanics that dont mesh with the ai of the game and even if they did hes nothing special.
X-23: may have been the longest we've waited for a turnaround on one of these votes and she's meh. They nerfed her regen (she's literally wolverine?) Gave her utiliy that expires really fast that relies on intercepts which again doesnt mesh with the ai of the game.

Pretty much no notes on shathra though. Whoever designed her seemed to realize that she was someone we voted for.

Why is it that champions we vote for seemingly get the least amount of love, the weirdest new and untested mechanics, odd stats and playstyles that don't mesh with the game but on random Tuesdays on random months we can get champs like Nico Minoru, Karolina, Spiderwoman, Dark Phoenix, Yelena, Photon, Nefaria, Serpent, Cull, etc. Who are just undeniably great champions who just bust the meta for no good reason. Even buffs we dont vote for like Yondu blow anything we vote for out of the water.
Based on the track record why should we vote for a champion we actually want?
It's way more risky to do that than the just wait for Kabam to introduce them naturally or decide to buff them on their own. The only upside i can find is that we would just get that champion in the game or buffed faster but sacrifice their viability.
Im genuinely concerned that we voted for Ghost rider because he's already fighting a losing battle and the odds are stacked against him.

Thank God we didnt vote for Rogue is all I'll say

Comments

SirGamesBond

Offtopic. I want Ruby Thursday and as an anti blob voter, it's time he gets added.

ahmynuts

And I didn't even talk about the champions that lost but turned out better than the winner when they were just introduced randomly to the game

SirGamesBond

https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/comment/2905684#Comment_2905684

That is true. The loser champs got great treatment like Kush whiger etc.

Myrmidon

"She's literally Wolverine? "

(No need to tell me I don't have a life, I'm already aware of it, thx)

Myrmidon

On a more serious, less nitpicky, note, kits don't necessarily have to reflect 1:1 a character abilities. Otherwise Sentry would have like 10 immunities. Canon, lore accurate even, but absolutely broken.

And even before the buff, I think the in-game regeneration rate of X-23 was less than Wolverine's, but this is based on what I was told in the last, so I could be absolutely wrong. Which is something that unfortunately happens often.

Myrmidon

Personally, I (still) see a point in voting for characters to be added/buffed whenever the devs give us the option to. I'd rather have a mid/useful character I like than a God-tier character I didn't care for.

I tend to see the glass half-full:

1) A character I voted for wins the poll; the end result is between good and OP = I'm 100% satisfied.

2) A character I didn't vote for wins the poll; the end result is between good and OP = I'm mostly satisfied, if it has a good design, engaging playstyle, utilities etc.

3) A character I voted for wins the poll; the end result is meh = Disappointed, but still somehow happy than a character I like got the nice treatment and it's in the game/certainly more useful than before. There's always a slight change for a tiny buff anyway.

4) A character I didn't vote for wins the poll; the end result is meh = wasted occasion, but it makes no difference to me in all honesty.

So, from my point of view, there's a point in casting my vote: even the worst outcome (for me) it's not that tragedy tbh.

Of course that's my opinion, which doesn't encompasses all the playerbase, specifically the portion that cares for meta and champions' actual utility in BG, Endgame, Everest, etc.

Myrmidon

https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/comment/2905694#Comment_2905694

*Doesn't encompass.

I hate the edit time window.

MrSakuragi

https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/comment/2905684#Comment_2905684

This. Vote for people you don’t want I guess.

Chuck_Finley

my one hope for the Dr. Strange buff is that he lost.

My condolences to Ghost Rider fans…

GroundedWisdom

It's always fun to contribute to having a say. It's not about the outcome for me.

WednesdayLength

The vote promises who we get and nothing more. There's no indication that they're guaranteed to be the strongest, its just who the playerbase wants.

There's plenty to complain about and criticise but this just feels like you're looking to be in a bad mood

Dr. Crab

Rogue loosing that vote was maybe my number 1 disappointment for the whole year (aside from SW).