Upcoming Change: Character Level Shift

mohio

To the guy asking about LT (and to sort of confirm Ice's reply) in the previous PvE where LT had a 30 level buff (so 171), he was doing like 2301 and 2301. So, if it's roughly linear he'll be doing about 2240 and 2240 (so a little closer to 4500 than 4400, but Ice is pretty close, and it might not be linear).

As for another question, Will PvE enemies get this instant bump up some amount of levels? or is the idea to slowly adjust scaling naturally to fit with the new higher leveled rosters? I guess if scaling is at all level-based, it will be automatically accounted for, but I don't exactly expect you to admit to that if it's the case.

IceIX

Spoit wrote:

Do you have a statline for 2*s? I specifically underleveled my laken so that OBW would still be able to take the purple, so if this pushs her under...

Black Widow (Original) is currently looking like:
85: At Max Level: HP: 3315 Tile damage: 10/11/45/50/9/39
94: At Max Level: HP: 3430 Tile damage: 10/11/49/55/9/43

wade66

With how roster levels affect mmr, will the push to the new levels be automatically taken into account or be left to work itself out. I have a couple of 3*s that I have at 85 so I didn't get put up against max teams early in tournaments like so many forumites.

My plan was to wait until I could field a team as opposed to have a single tentpole character I was reliant upon. Will this change put me against higher teams right off the bat or is this an unknown factor at the moment ?

On a side note: the change to healing caused me to use some of my 3*s to place, and I actually have to admit that coming up with new teams and seeing them in action helped break up some of the monotony that was setting in.

Kiera13

So, this isn't gonna happen on the third, right? I really don't want this to go wrong and us all have to wait until Monday for a fix because of the three day weekend.

NorthernPolarity

Hey iceix, ive heard some firsthand accounts from players who were making the 2->3* transition, and were being matched up with relatively reasonable teams, and then levelled a 3* to 100 and started seeing walls of 141s after. Do you know if this is common in the current system? If so, then wouldnt that be an even bigger deterrent against people transitioning into 3*s? I feel like general fear of increasing mmr as a result of starting this transition is going to be big amongst the forumgoers. I only see this affecting the general population, which is probably what the intended audience of this fix was supposed to be anyways.

IceIX

mohio wrote:

To the guy asking about LT (and to sort of confirm Ice's reply) in the previous PvE where LT had a 30 level buff (so 171), he was doing like 2301 and 2301. So, if it's roughly linear he'll be doing about 2240 and 2240 (so a little closer to 4500 than 4400, but Ice is pretty close, and it might not be linear).

As for another question, Will PvE enemies get this instant bump up some amount of levels? or is the idea to slowly adjust scaling naturally to fit with the new higher leveled rosters? I guess if scaling is at all level-based, it will be automatically accounted for, but I don't exactly expect you to admit to that if it's the case.

Remoted in to check on the statline for Black Widow. Thor is currently set at 2259/2259 or 4518 to the main target on Call the Storm.

Scaling is 0% level based. Enemy levels will very likely stay the same, but since everyone including yourself will get a boost your personal scaling and community scaling will bring the enemy levels back in line.

Spoit

IceIX wrote:

Spoit wrote:

Do you have a statline for 2*s? I specifically underleveled my laken so that OBW would still be able to take the purple, so if this pushs her under...

Black Widow (Original) is currently looking like:
85: At Max Level: HP: 3315 Tile damage: 10/11/45/50/9/39
94: At Max Level: HP: 3430 Tile damage: 10/11/49/55/9/43

Sadness . Oh well, I guess I might as well max him then, since I doubt taking away levels will be possible

IceIX

wade66 wrote:

With how roster levels affect mmr, will the push to the new levels be automatically taken into account or be left to work itself out. I have a couple of 3*s that I have at 85 so I didn't get put up against max teams early in tournaments like so many forumites.

My plan was to wait until I could field a team as opposed to have a single tentpole character I was reliant upon. Will this change put me against higher teams right off the bat or is this an unknown factor at the moment ?

On a side note: the change to healing caused me to use some of my 3*s to place, and I actually have to admit that coming up with new teams and seeing them in action helped break up some of the monotony that was setting in.

It's an unknown factor in that your MMR depends entirely on your performance. If you're sitting pretty against other 85s and not pushing further, I would imagine that holding the same strategy would just be putting you against other 94s afterwards. We're not making any adjoining MMR changes so it really comes down to what you do and how others react to the change. What I *could* see happening is that you'll start seeing some of your current MMR bubble buddies moving out of that area though as they start to level up other characters and increase their MMR as a result.

mohio

Is anyone (not just devs, literally anyone) worried about this change overpowering 4* (well, only Fury, but others if they're ever any good) and making Fury even more P2W than he currently is? I don't actually know if he'll be a problem, and he's only 1/3 of a team, so maybe it's not so big of a deal (plus we don't even know what his yellow does).

IceIX

Kiera13 wrote:

So, this isn't gonna happen on the third, right? I really don't want this to go wrong and us all have to wait until Monday for a fix because of the three day weekend.

We don't have a date for it at the moment, hence the fairly vague date in the OP. We want the staff to enjoy their 4ths as well and just monitor the servers in case the hamsters running them run out of food over the break, so it's less likely that we'd push it in at a volatile time.

kensterr

2 questions for ICEIX

1. Scott, Emma, Piotr or Anna Marie as the next X-Men cover
2. Is this level shift going to affect someone like Flo98 who has a one page roster only, but 2 141s? Is this going to make them want to get more 3* or going to make more people follow his tactic of having 2 maxed 141s?

IceIX

NorthernPolarity wrote:

Hey iceix, ive heard some firsthand accounts from players who were making the 2->3* transition, and were being matched up with relatively reasonable teams, and then levelled a 3* to 100 and started seeing walls of 141s after. Do you know if this is common in the current system? If so, then wouldnt that be an even bigger deterrent against people transitioning into 3*s? I feel like general fear of increasing mmr as a result of starting this transition is going to be big amongst the forumgoers. I only see this affecting the general population, which is probably what the intended audience of this fix was supposed to be anyways.

I can see some players having run into exactly that situation. It's a result of the 3x85 band of players having a relatively small swathe of MMR ratings, so it's easy to hop out of that area and into the wide expanse afterwards and the very large swathe of MMRs that 3* players have. There are a number of completely legitimate (IE have never tanked) 141 style players that just don't do so well in Versus and as a result their MMR is sitting pretty low. Then freshly hatched Post 85s run into them. Add tanking players to that mix and that's a recipe for disaster for transitions. This is lessened however whenever we get batches of 85s moving on up at the same time since the bubble widens. Which we're fully expecting this change to do.

IceIX

mohio wrote:

Is anyone (not just devs, literally anyone) worried about this change overpowering 4* (well, only Fury, but others if they're ever any good) and making Fury even more P2W than he currently is? I don't actually know if he'll be a problem, and he's only 1/3 of a team, so maybe it's not so big of a deal (plus we don't even know what his yellow does).

His Yellow is fairly chaotic, a lot of fun, and requires a different concept of AP management. Definitely interesting. As for him being OP, it's possible that there will be a few people that will level him to max and dominate through IAPs. However, that cost is purposefully prohibitive so that doesn't happen. It's also one of the reasons that brackets exist, so that the very very small numbers of people that could possibly do that would be spread out throughout the player population instead of placing the entire group that could do so at the top spots of a combined leaderboard.

Unknown

IceIX, another way to differentiate veterans from transitionary players is to allow us to apply covers we have won to marginally increase their stats.

This would also help with the fact that many veterans are tiring of having to compete to win our 100th Punisher cover that we just end up selling. At least it could go towards increasing his HP or increase dmg. It would bring the thrill back in 'getting lucky' from a token pull.

Please stick that idea into someone's ear.

Spoit

IceIX wrote:

mohio wrote:

To the guy asking about LT (and to sort of confirm Ice's reply) in the previous PvE where LT had a 30 level buff (so 171), he was doing like 2301 and 2301. So, if it's roughly linear he'll be doing about 2240 and 2240 (so a little closer to 4500 than 4400, but Ice is pretty close, and it might not be linear).

As for another question, Will PvE enemies get this instant bump up some amount of levels? or is the idea to slowly adjust scaling naturally to fit with the new higher leveled rosters? I guess if scaling is at all level-based, it will be automatically accounted for, but I don't exactly expect you to admit to that if it's the case.

Remoted in to check on the statline for Black Widow. Thor is currently set at 2259/2259 or 4518 to the main target on Call the Storm.

Scaling is 0% level based. Enemy levels will very likely stay the same, but since everyone including yourself will get a boost your personal scaling and community scaling will bring the enemy levels back in line.

So the power damage goes up by the same percent, but it's nowhere near the amount of health gained with the extra levels. One of the math-y people want to do some stuff with the match damage to work out if that actually means longer games? (and the conspiracy theory of more damage=health packs)

DD-The-Mighty

IceIX wrote:

Ghast wrote:

IceIX wrote:

Right now, many many players get to having 3 Level 50 1*s and never level up 2 stars. Why would they? They would have 44 levels before they even became possible replacements for their 1*s. As well, a 3* is only level 15, so they're going to take a ton of work to even get to the 1* max level. So they sit with their 1*s until they get bored with the game since there's "nothing else to do". With this change, suddenly 2*s are more viable at start, and 3*s suddenly become completely viable *and* worthwhile to level up if they get extra covers since they'll be somewhat comparable to a maxed 1*. Gameplay options open up for the people lower down on the totem pole. Repeat this process for the 2* players who look at the 70 level differential to even get started in replacing a 2* and it's a really rough sell for many players who don't see the further value. Cut that differential down significantly and suddenly that's not such a hard thing to do.

That's simply not true. One of the biggest rookie mistakes players make in this game is assuming that a higher level character with 1-2 covers is better than a lower-level character with 10-13 covers. On match damage maybe, but powers win the battle. A single 3* cover becomes a de facto Hulk in the eyes of a 1* player - a harmless giant to one-shot after mopping up the real threat.

This is true, but these same players that we're trying to unstick are also sitting on 2*s that could easily be leveled and viable with perfectly feasible power sets. Same goes for those with 85s with 3*s that are something like 3/2/2 or greater that just don't want to put in the effort to make that extra jump.

perfect example.
a 3/2/2= 7 cover character thats tops (currently) at 64

a 7 cover 64 3* cleanly loses to ...
a 15 cover 60+ pve character
a 7+ cover 2* at level 64 or higher
a max cover 2 star
any higher built 3 star
most pve goons as they tend to deal damage way above their levels given the right board layout (which is a lot easier to come by than you think)

and running that in a pvp enviroment filled with maxed ares/daken/storm/Obw/thor/wolverine and all of the random 85-141 3*s is defensive suicide. theminute you go above 300 points your begging to get an inbox full of crippling point losses. and being perfectly honest the odds of a player (not tanking hard) that has a 7 cover 64 3 star and is still in a max 1* mmr bracket is an anomoly and he/she wont stay there for long.

The number of things a half covered, half leved 3 star lose to FAR outweigh what they can contribute. Only a select number of 3 stars can have such low levels across every colour and still be damaging/useful. Most require 4-5 on one power to even have that power be damaging (like a 5r/0b/2y 3*Cap) and short of lucky win streaks what are the odds of having that build.

I get that you want to give the general impression to new players that the 3 star will be more powerful level up, but It doesn't beat having more covers.

TL:RD -Is there an eta on/or any further plans to address the significantly low availability of 3 star covers relative to the number of ones we keep getting?

Nonce Equitaur 2

The comment on OBW's tile match damage does bring up the issue of level-specing. Many people have their characters carefully leveled so that they'll tank for each other in a particularly way.

Easiest fix -- some sort of mechanism for putting a character at a lower level. For example, I might want to drop my Hood eight levels for awhile. On the character screen showing the stat block, there could be a "-1" and "+1" button, with the "+1" button initially grayed out. If they press "-1", then the "+1" button is activated, along with "1 available level", which would increment each time "-1" was pressed.

IceIX

kensterr wrote:

2 questions for ICEIX

1. Scott, Emma, Piotr or Anna Marie as the next X-Men cover
2. Is this level shift going to affect someone like Flo98 who has a one page roster only, but 2 141s? Is this going to make them want to get more 3* or going to make more people follow his tactic of having 2 maxed 141s?

1) No, no, no, no. All good guesses though, and all on our short list.
2) Flo's a weird situation since he (she?) does everything in their power to maximize their MMR and minimize required fights. It works really well for PVP if you've got the time, but it also means that outside of some luck on Heroic character selects and careful roster management on Episodes, PVE Events are extremely difficult to place well in. Flo definitely works off an edge case for gameplay styles.

Xeonic-Ice

Hey IceIX,

I'm one of those that hoards ISO. Mostly because I get really excited every time a new character is released, play a lot to get it, then it sits there because it's practically unusable. It typically stays that way for months. I'm not sure if this level change will help anyone in the 3* realm. I've got three 141's now and by the time I get most of them covered, I've lost interest in whatever they may bring to the table because there's something new within reach.

So my question is: Will this level shift make lower covered heroes usable to someone who has a couple maxed 141's or will it largely remain the same?

NorthernPolarity

IceIX wrote:

NorthernPolarity wrote:

Hey iceix, ive heard some firsthand accounts from players who were making the 2->3* transition, and were being matched up with relatively reasonable teams, and then levelled a 3* to 100 and started seeing walls of 141s after. Do you know if this is common in the current system? If so, then wouldnt that be an even bigger deterrent against people transitioning into 3*s? I feel like general fear of increasing mmr as a result of starting this transition is going to be big amongst the forumgoers. I only see this affecting the general population, which is probably what the intended audience of this fix was supposed to be anyways.

I can see some players having run into exactly that situation. It's a result of the 3x85 band of players having a relatively small swathe of MMR ratings, so it's easy to hop out of that area and into the wide expanse afterwards and the very large swathe of MMRs that 3* players have. There are a number of completely legitimate (IE have never tanked) 141 style players that just don't do so well in Versus and as a result their MMR is sitting pretty low. Then freshly hatched Post 85s run into them. Add tanking players to that mix and that's a recipe for disaster for transitions. This is lessened however whenever we get batches of 85s moving on up at the same time since the bubble widens. Which we're fully expecting this change to do.

So you're saying that roster level is not directly factored in when matchmaking assigns opponents to you? Based off of what you said in the last two comments, the scenario then is that the 3x85 guy is at some random MMR, gets a level 100 3*, which lets him win more games and is enough to propel him to the next, shark infested MMR pool? I've just heard a bunch of stories where the level of 3* seemed like the direct reason why their MMRs jumped as opposed to what you're implying, which is that the 3* won them more games instead.