Upcoming Change: Character Level Shift

13468917

Comments

  • HailMaryHailMary Posts: 2,179
    locked wrote:
    My plea to the character designers as an avid Magneto lover/abuser (I stil run him a lot in PvP against all these maxed Hulks and Dakens):
    do not completely ruin him, for the love of Marvel! He's the only good board control character among 3*s and even 4*s (Mororo? IW? Loki? Ragnarok? Laughable. GSBW is decent-ish but so horribly slow. Sentry and She-Hulk are too new and rare.)
    Hulk's Clap also provides good board control. Nothing's going to measure up to 2-AP cascade triggers, but Clap probably comes closest in 3* land.
  • IceIX wrote:
    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.
    Having levels of characters directly influence your PVE scaling or PVP MMR directly penalizes you for leveling if you can figure out the right balance ahead of time. So we simply don't do that. But what *does* happen is that since we have these people sticking out at 1* or 2*, they start to accrete around certain MMR values. As more 85s hit this area, there becomes less of a reason for the matchmaker to look outside that to anyone else. So you hit this pocket where all the 85s are all you really see. Then you put in a level 100 3* and with a few wins and maybe a few successful defenses, boom. You've broken the bubble. Now you're sitting out in the big pond beyond, where it's scary. You'll still get a few of your old buddies back in 85 land sometimes as the matchmaker looks backward in MMR a little, but it's also looking into the jaws of that one player who has a whole 25 points in the Tourney, 3x 141s, and low MMR since no one ever wants to attack him at that level.

    Please, someone can point me a link that I can read about MMR and understand it?
    The more I saw people talking about it, more I need to clarification.
    My 85 team is constantly been attacked by 141lvl that can't defend them. I need to understand which is wrong: my play style or the MMR (or whatever).

    thank you.
  • killerkoalakillerkoala Posts: 1,185 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited June 2014
    one quick question, say my 3* is at level 77, and the level bump get him to level 102, will that put me into the next level MMR bucket called "MMR Hell", where you fight level characters higher that my 2* roster and that one level 100 can handle? will MMR bucket be adjusted or will I be in hell?
  • over_clockedover_clocked Posts: 3,961
    edited June 2014
    HailMary wrote:
    locked wrote:
    My plea to the character designers as an avid Magneto lover/abuser (I stil run him a lot in PvP against all these maxed Hulks and Dakens):
    do not completely ruin him, for the love of Marvel! He's the only good board control character among 3*s and even 4*s (Mororo? IW? Loki? Ragnarok? Laughable. GSBW is decent-ish but so horribly slow. Sentry and She-Hulk are too new and rare.)
    Hulk's Clap also provides good board control. Nothing's going to measure up to 2-AP cascade triggers, but Clap probably comes closest in 3* land.
    Hulk's Clap is good, but you need to get hurt for that (either through Anger or triggering Daken's passive). When I think of board control, only few characters come to mind: cHawkeye, Bag-Man, Magneto, modern Storm, IW, GSBW, Captain America, that's about it.
    When I think 'strong and reliable board control', only Magneto is left, and while he's abusable, it does say something about the lack of options.
  • mohiomohio Age Unconfirmed Posts: 1,690 Chairperson of the Boards
    There is nothing magical about level 100, in fact you could do it to yourself with just 85s if you were to try (as evidenced by the people who level up their 3* and don't even use them). It's all based on how much you're winning and losing. To collect those 3* covers to get a guy up to 100+, you must be doing your fair share of winning, so the game adjusts by increasing your MMR, which eventually will raise you past the 85 range and into the higher end where people have much varied rosters, sometimes even including multiple 141s.
  • IceIX wrote:
    1. Yep. We have quite a lot of players that are sitting on mounds of growing Iso-8 and maxed 1*/2* characters. Every now and then a new character release will make a couple people level one, then we see them suddenly blow the rest of the Iso-8 on leveling others as they figure out that there's a whole new world out there.
    2. They don't get what they should because they don't invest the Iso-8 that they have in them when that's available. We've got a not insignificant percentage of players sitting there with 3-5 85s and a half dozen or so completely viable 3*s that have enough covers to overtake those 85s. Those same users also tend to be hoarding Iso for... I dunno, the Isopocalypse or something. Users that don't crunch the numbers or read guides simply don't realize that with a relatively minimal Iso-8 expenditure, the characters that they already have could give them a strong boost.
    So you have a preconceived notion of how the game should be played, and wish for your players to follow that path. Fair enough, especially because someone sitting in 1* or 2* land forever isn't spending any $. However, have you thought about WHY these players do this? I repeat, the people that you want to target - those that will most likely spend $ - are NOT "capping out" by choice.

    Two possible reasons:
    1. For 2* players, they have experienced the uphill battle of 2*-3* MMR and realize that 85s are better than underleveled 3*s. So they are biding their time, saving their HP for shields, trying their best to win covers of the 3*s they want until they are able to level them to a competitive level. This change does nothing to address that struggle, which is continually increasing in difficulty.
    2. For 1* players, they enjoy dominating PvE with their low level rosters. In this case, they are able to use their single-covered super-buffed featured chars to steamroll the level 30 mobs. After the change, their super-buffed chars will steamroll even harder, making them less likely to feel the need to level them.
    A Level 40 Punisher base shows a 1* holdout that these 3* characters without much of a push will be stronger than their current roster. They then have something to work for and will likely start down the path of leveling 2*s and 3*s to do so. 2* players similarly suddenly have less than half the deficit to make up to start pushing into 3* land. As for shift in power levels, a 15 vs a 141 will get thwomped more than a 40 versus a 166. Tile damage and ability damage don't scale linearly. The difference isn't night and day, but there is a tad more survivability there.
    Not sure what you mean by "less than half the deficit to make up."

    You nailed the issue here: Getting the player "to start down the path of leveling 2*s and 3*s." This change isn't doing it; it's just a "gentle nudge" to start on that path. But the HOW is much more important, wouldn't you say? HOW does a player get his desired 3* covers in a timely manner such that he can be competitive, enticed, and entertained? Changing starting levels seems irrelevant.

    Regarding 15 vs 141 and 40 vs 166, my point was that the underleveled 3* will get similarly stomped each time, so it won't feel like your chars have become more powerful relative to the rest of the field. Compared to your 1*s yes, but not compared to what you'll be facing in PvP.
    Nope. The people we're targeting are generally sitting on hoards of unused/unusable Iso. They're not likely to suddenly buy more if they haven't figured out a use for it by now. Of course, a few weeks down the line when they're again down to normal levels of Iso-8 in the bank, who knows. Our main goal here is to get people that have stalled to realize that there's more to the game than the little tiers they've set for themselves and continue to play as a result.
    ISO is only half the equation. If they don't have the covers, no amount of ISO will be usable. This is why I said this was a "gentle push" to spend $. They will still need to get the covers somehow. So they will have to shield, buy boosts, and maybe buy health packs now. Or, like many a foolish casual, they will start buying tokens.

    Thanks for replying.
  • HailMaryHailMary Posts: 2,179
    gobstopper wrote:
    ...1. For 2* players, they have experienced the uphill battle of 2*-3* MMR and realize that 85s are better than underleveled 3*s...

    ...ISO is only half the equation. If they don't have the covers, no amount of ISO will be usable...
    Boosting 3* levels relative to 2* levels would reduce the "L94s are better than underleveled 3*s" issue, since 3*s, as an entire tier, are less underleveled now.

    It would simultaneously reduce the "I don't have enough covers to get my 3*s past my 2*s, so I'm gonna hoard Iso" problem, since, if I'm reading it correctly, it reduces the number of covers needed to make a 3* surpass a maxed 2*.

    The same logic applies to semi-covered 2*s vs. 1*s.
  • HailMary wrote:
    gobstopper wrote:
    ...1. For 2* players, they have experienced the uphill battle of 2*-3* MMR and realize that 85s are better than underleveled 3*s...

    ...ISO is only half the equation. If they don't have the covers, no amount of ISO will be usable...
    Boosting 3* levels relative to 2* levels would reduce the "L94s are better than underleveled 3*s" issue, since 3*s, as an entire tier, are less underleveled now.

    It would simultaneously reduce the "I don't have enough covers to get my 3*s past my 2*s, so I'm gonna hoard Iso" problem, since, if I'm reading it correctly, it reduces the number of covers needed to make a 3* surpass a maxed 2*.

    The same logic applies to semi-covered 2*s vs. 1*s.
    But using those non-maxed 3*s instead of 85s will only make a minuscule difference for those people whose MMR matches them up with max 3* teams on occasion. I consider everyone trying to make the 2*-3* transition in this group.

    Yes, this change will make people see that 2*s outclass 1*s much more easily, I'll give you that. I don't understand 1*-2* transition so I can't really comment there. But I also don't think we need to discuss this part of the issue, since 2* covers fall like rain these days and 2* land is not the ultimate progression goal.
  • mohiomohio Age Unconfirmed Posts: 1,690 Chairperson of the Boards
    You might be missing the fact that now that there are more levels it might be easier for the MMR formula to distinguish between you with the 94s and 110s, and the guys with all the 166s. So even if you "graduate" from 2* land, you will just be grouped with other transitioning teams.
  • Uh, let me guess, whoever this far carefully leveled his characters for team work, i.e push up someone on color damage just to be under someone else will suddenly get screwed bigtime without possibility to adjust levels down?
  • raziel777 wrote:
    1085RzY.jpg

    It is not random. Since w/o healing your Iso-8 collection is much slower, you need to buy more Iso-8 too. A level cap raise is a good way to make people want to amass a lot of Iso-8 in a short amount of time.
  • I see no real point to this change at all. An under-covered 3* is still going to be weaker than a max level 2* even if they start at a slightly higher level. They will still need to top 100 (well now over 100) to be more useful than a max level 2* and all we're really getting out of it is longer regeneration times.

    I think I can summarize this entire change as:

    We saw 1*/2* players saving ISO and not levelling up characters so we decided to try and make a 1 cover 3* look less useless by increasing their starting level even though they are still completely useless and would still need the same number of covers AND additional levels to be of any real use. Oh...... and everyone will take longer to heal (only real, genuine gameplay change).

    Am I missing anything?

    I guess there's now a bigger difference between a maxed 1* and 2* with 1* level caps remaining the same. I imagine +10% max levels to a 2* is roughly equivalent to +17% max levels to a 3* meaning no real difference for someone who's got 1 3* maxed and is relying on a lvl 85 to pair with them (would have to crunch some numbers to be sure but I reckon it's probably about right). As far as both 3* and 4* getting 17% ish increases it probably means a maxed 4* will now have less of an advantage over a maxed 3*, not by tons but by a bit.

    Don't get it at all but won't really affect me (apart from regen timers I guess) so.... ??
  • IceIX wrote:
    We've got another X-Men coming somewhat soon...

    Naz!! You ruined this news for me! icon_cry.gif
  • mohio wrote:
    locked wrote:
    Still reading, but LYCRA MAX OUT YOUR GAZILLION OF 140s, STAT!

    edit: although the ISO should be the same?.. Still, no reason to underlevel a character now, nice!
    well, 165 is more of a nice looking number than 166 right? We have one of these guys in our alliance too and I joked he was going to have to delete all his 2* and re-level them cause 94 is just too unsightly.

    That was literally the first thing I balked at. "94" wat the random!?!
  • bonfire01 wrote:
    I see no real point to this change at all. An under-covered 3* is still going to be weaker than a max level 2* even if they start at a slightly higher level. They will still need to top 100 (well now over 100) to be more useful than a max level 2* and all we're really getting out of it is longer regeneration times.

    I think I can summarize this entire change as:

    We saw 1*/2* players saving ISO and not levelling up characters so we decided to try and make a 1 cover 3* look less useless by increasing their starting level even though they are still completely useless and would still need the same number of covers AND additional levels to be of any real use. Oh...... and everyone will take longer to heal (only real, genuine gameplay change).

    Am I missing anything?

    I guess there's now a bigger difference between a maxed 1* and 2* with 1* level caps remaining the same. I imagine +10% max levels to a 2* is roughly equivalent to +17% max levels to a 3* meaning no real difference for someone who's got 1 3* maxed and is relying on a lvl 85 to pair with them (would have to crunch some numbers to be sure but I reckon it's probably about right). As far as both 3* and 4* getting 17% ish increases it probably means a maxed 4* will now have less of an advantage over a maxed 3*, not by tons but by a bit.

    Don't get it at all but won't really affect me (apart from regen timers I guess) so.... ??
    This was exactly my reaction. "Most players" aren't going to put in the grind required to amass 3* covers with any speed, so OF COURSE their 2* chars are going to be more useful than their 3*s, and this doesn't change that.

    That, and the idea that some abilities probably ought to be adjusted for the new level caps, and probably won't be
  • As long as the overall ISO cost is THE SAME (170K for a 3* and 430K for 4*), that's OK with me.

    Cool thing for the new 2* character, as long as the covers are included the same way they are with other 2* characters.

    Thing is something will have to be done for Healing after that shift.

    Also, when I see the Scaling for me on the current PvE, I just wonder what's it going to be after the shift...

    Glad to read you are listening to us. Sheer logics lead to think you don't want to lose your jobs, so you'll do what's best to keep the game running...

    I just think that this shift is quite close after the True Healing chaos, and a really fun change or announcement would have been more welcome.
  • IceIX wrote:
    [
    Yes, we're aware that some of the 4* star characters are sub-optimal. Invisible Woman can definitely be powerful in certain situations though, as seen in a couple of the Sim Challenges.

    Freaking DAREDEVIL can "definitely be powerful" when goons give him all of his abilities for free

    That doesn't make him viable for players
  • morghmorgh Posts: 533 Critical Contributor
    IceIX wrote:
    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.

    Hmmm... at least 3 people only in my alliance are going to have max level 3/5/5 Fury the moment Season 3 ends... now I bet that the percentage going to be at least similar if not higher in top tier alliances and what you are seeing is an astonishing number of max level fully covered Nick furies (furries? icon_e_smile.gif ) that you are going to see in every damn event ;/
  • over_clockedover_clocked Posts: 3,961
    Fury has high AP costs and doesn't have obnoxious passives like Hulk and Daken do, the yellow is unlikely to fire on defense, the blue is trap-based, so he should be okay-ish on defense and maaaaybe very good on offense thanks to a viable purple and high health.
Sign In or Register to comment.