2* Rosters vs 3* Rosters in PVE is Counter Productive

veneretio

Firebat86 wrote:

benben77 wrote:

I think it is ok in PVE as higher your roster level higher the enemy levels

those 166ers are facing 200+ nodes and we 2* roster face 100 something.

200+ Ares / Daken / Ragnarok is totally different from 100 something

Couldn't agree more.

Now let's look at this from another angle: The three stars boosted this time around are all BRAND NEW.

So unless you've paid to cover and then subsequently power leveled any of these characters you are basically screwed... 2 people fighting lvl 100 nodes with lvl 134 boosted characters = incredibly manageable and fun. But, since I have 3 characters leveled I'm facing crazy 200+ nodes where those boosted 2 characters are 70+ lvls short. Add to that it's over scaled Daken/Ares/Jugs etc etc... It's really draining tbh... And my minimal covers on the 3 characters who are boosted makes them unusable...

On top of why are ALL the nodes required SG yet the scaling is through the roof? My one cover SG is gimping the team to the point where the essential nodes are basically impossible...

I'm not sure at what point you guys are measuring, but as a 2* myself, I'm very quickly hitting nodes well over 140. One that just ended had characters at 180+. So things maybe aren't as unbalanced as you think relative to a true 2* transition lineup. It's pretty clear that many players have optimized lineups for PvE. I don't see anything wrong with it. They're basically forgoing PvP progression in favor of this path. No one said the game had to be fair for everyone at every stage. It certainly isn't even close to fair for new players until you have numerous maxed 2*s.

Dauthi

fmftint wrote:

In case you missed it, EVERYONE needs new characters. At least if you want to do the essentials in the next event. A has no more need for them than anyone what

Wouldn't it be nice if new characters weren't used for essentials? Instead it was whatever old character was in the second PVE, as I proposed?

Firebat86 wrote:

Now let's look at this from another angle: The three stars boosted this time around are all BRAND NEW.

So unless you've paid to cover and then subsequently power leveled any of these characters you are basically screwed... 2 people fighting lvl 100 nodes with lvl 134 boosted characters = incredibly manageable and fun. But, since I have 3 characters leveled I'm facing crazy 200+ nodes where those boosted 2 characters are 70+ lvls short. Add to that it's over scaled Daken/Ares/Jugs etc etc... It's really draining tbh... And my minimal covers on the 3 characters who are boosted makes them unusable...

On top of why are ALL the nodes required SG yet the scaling is through the roof? My one cover SG is gimping the team to the point where the essential nodes are basically impossible...

This is a great point too. Two star rosters never have to worry about their buffed 2* characters not being fully covered (unless they are really really new). This event is awful since they picked 2 characters that most 3* wont have fully covered, but our scaling is still crazy. It blatantly puts 3* rosters at a disadvantage.

rednailz

Why not keep diluting and segregating even beyond that until we get the competitiveness of the game down to 0?

rednailz

Dauthi wrote:

fmftint wrote:

In case you missed it, EVERYONE needs new characters. At least if you want to do the essentials in the next event. A has no more need for them than anyone what

Wouldn't it be nice if new characters weren't used for essentials? Instead it was whatever old character was in the second PVE, as I proposed?

Firebat86 wrote:

Now let's look at this from another angle: The three stars boosted this time around are all BRAND NEW.

So unless you've paid to cover and then subsequently power leveled any of these characters you are basically screwed... 2 people fighting lvl 100 nodes with lvl 134 boosted characters = incredibly manageable and fun. But, since I have 3 characters leveled I'm facing crazy 200+ nodes where those boosted 2 characters are 70+ lvls short. Add to that it's over scaled Daken/Ares/Jugs etc etc... It's really draining tbh... And my minimal covers on the 3 characters who are boosted makes them unusable...

On top of why are ALL the nodes required SG yet the scaling is through the roof? My one cover SG is gimping the team to the point where the essential nodes are basically impossible...

This is a great point too. Two star rosters never have to worry about their buffed 2* characters not being fully covered. This event is awful since they picked 2 characters that most 3* wont have fully covered, but our scaling is still crazy. It blatantly puts 3* rosters at a disadvantage.

you get a chance to earn and win the cover for the essential in the previous pve and usually in the middleish of the pve in a pvp event.

FierceKiwi

Phantron wrote:

I decided to check my bracket's top 10 and out of the 7 or 8 guys that don't have anyone higher than about level 110, only one of them has just 3 pages of heroes (2.5 pages). Everyone else has at least 4 pages of heroes which implies at least 40 slots (14 per page).

So now I'm pretty convinced it's not 2*/transition dominating the top, unless you think it is normal for a transition guy to have enough HP to buy 40 slots while never leveling anyone past level 110. People are definitely gaming the system in some way. We know the scaling was never fair for high rosters, but even if it was perfectly fair, if you're running level 100 and I'm running level 200 against equally difficult opponent, it still takes me twice as long to regen, which matters a lot in the longer refresh format where you've a lot of time to incorporate into the final clear.

There's probably a lot more than you think. I know I had 1 copy of every character long before I had a viable 3* (there where probably ~40 total at that time). Then again I didn't really have much success in PvE until I got a few maxed 3*.

Dauthi

stephen43084 wrote:

I would agreed with you for a special PVP format similar to BOP or CA, but not PVE.

To me, PVP is where the best players/rosters should win. PVE should be an equal playing field (if not titled slightly to newer players and less developed rosters).

I agree PVE should be even, or even tilted towards lower levels. It is a system that promotes growth towards 2* players.

The problem is when a new cover or 4* is dumped into it. It doesn't make sense to do that to the 3*s and 2*s in the game. If PVE is going to be even or tilted towards new players it should not be giving out rewards that would give 3* an incentive to come into an event geared towards low level rosters.

Arondite

Dauthi wrote:

stephen43084 wrote:

I would agreed with you for a special PVP format similar to BOP or CA, but not PVE.

To me, PVP is where the best players/rosters should win. PVE should be an equal playing field (if not titled slightly to newer players and less developed rosters).

I agree PVE should be even, or even tilted towards lower levels. It is a system that promotes growth towards 2* players.

The problem is when a new cover or 4* is dumped into it. It doesn't make sense to do that to the 3*s and 2*s in the game. If PVE is going to be even or tilted towards new players it should not be giving out rewards that would give 3* an incentive to come into an event geared towards low level rosters.

I'd be fine with them not offering 4* rewards in PvE and just doubling up on 3* rewards.

But I say that as a transitioner, and there are those in PvE who are in fact, transitioned. While I'd be perfectly happy with the change listed above, the good of the scorpion is not the good of the frog.

Unknown

I know this is off-topic, but did anybody else notice this thread started as a conversation between Dauthi and Shadow?

That's funny.

Unknown

I have 39 roster slots, and 7 maxed 2*'s, so 94 is my highest level...my Let's dance node in Alaska is all level 152 on the very first clear. My Bullseye 3 in Savage is pushing 160. Ares can pretty much one shot anyone I have for only 5 green.

This game scales on roster strength to slow your progression and that's really the key to "gaming the system".

If I had to do it all over again I would -
- Unlock 7 roster slots total
- Max 1* IM/Juggs/Widow/Storm
- Sell anyone not named Xforce/4Thor/Hood
- Join late and crush beginner brackets for easy 4* covers.

Congrats you just transitioned from 1-4* without building any 2 or 3*s and in probably a fraction of the time the real transition would take. You can now top 25 every PvP and begin the 4*->3* transition.

Sure it's dumb, but so is banging your head against the wall of PvE scaling and failing to crack even top 200 in PvP with 500 points (around what a 2* roster can achieve).

(You could also make an argument for adding a softcapped (around 40-50) Daken/Wolverine for sustain.)

Seasick Pirate

This a why I think there should be some sort of player rank/level system in this game. Who is to say when a player has made the 2* translation or the 3* transition? Maybe some players don't want to collect all characters so only have for or five 2* and are already collecting 3*s.

If each player had a rank (probably based off he amount of iso-8 they have used) it would be easier to segregate the different classes of players. From there finding reasonable opponents would be easy. Rank 1 will see rank 2; rank 2 will see 1-3; 3 will see 2-4, and so on. This way, if a rank 7 (when a rank 15^ is average) player manages to max out an X-Force while having no 3*s, they're not going to be thrown to the lions because of that one character. They still might face tougher opponents, but not teams of 4*s, and they still have the a slight advantage over rank 7s who don't have him.

^These are only example ranks

Unknown

veneretio wrote:

Firebat86 wrote:

benben77 wrote:

I think it is ok in PVE as higher your roster level higher the enemy levels

those 166ers are facing 200+ nodes and we 2* roster face 100 something.

200+ Ares / Daken / Ragnarok is totally different from 100 something

Couldn't agree more.

Now let's look at this from another angle: The three stars boosted this time around are all BRAND NEW.

So unless you've paid to cover and then subsequently power leveled any of these characters you are basically screwed... 2 people fighting lvl 100 nodes with lvl 134 boosted characters = incredibly manageable and fun. But, since I have 3 characters leveled I'm facing crazy 200+ nodes where those boosted 2 characters are 70+ lvls short. Add to that it's over scaled Daken/Ares/Jugs etc etc... It's really draining tbh... And my minimal covers on the 3 characters who are boosted makes them unusable...

On top of why are ALL the nodes required SG yet the scaling is through the roof? My one cover SG is gimping the team to the point where the essential nodes are basically impossible...

I'm not sure at what point you guys are measuring, but as a 2* myself, I'm very quickly hitting nodes well over 140. One that just ended had characters at 180+. So things maybe aren't as unbalanced as you think relative to a true 2* transition lineup. It's pretty clear that many players have optimized lineups for PvE. I don't see anything wrong with it. They're basically forgoing PvP progression in favor of this path. No one said the game had to be fair for everyone at every stage. It certainly isn't even close to fair for new players until you have numerous maxed 2*s.

So m i ? i m also a 2* 3* transitior. Well i think it is a overall lv problem and character problem ( well 8 hrs refresh timer also have its effect here )

The dev team always think we want challenge , so they adjust the power curve to reflect the difficulties like lv 94 roster face 150 but 166 roster face 266 + . it is understandable.

However the power curve is NOT linear in ANY aspect.... overbuffed 1* and 2* charcter is much crazy then you think.... 5 green match ares 1 shot for 3K+ damage or 6K + sunder is impossible to win even you have 166 thor

you have average 3K hp and the ai doing 100-200 damage per 3 match and the 166er have 10K hp the ai doing 300-400 damage per match. So linear!

our character is extremely imbalance and 8hrs refresh timer ( dont fail in any mission to keep competitive ) ruin everything

Unknown

Phantron wrote:

I decided to check my bracket's top 10 and out of the 7 or 8 guys that don't have anyone higher than about level 110, only one of them has just 3 pages of heroes (2.5 pages). Everyone else has at least 4 pages of heroes which implies at least 40 slots (14 per page).

So now I'm pretty convinced it's not 2*/transition dominating the top, unless you think it is normal for a transition guy to have enough HP to buy 40 slots while never leveling anyone past level 110. People are definitely gaming the system in some way. We know the scaling was never fair for high rosters, but even if it was perfectly fair, if you're running level 100 and I'm running level 200 against equally difficult opponent, it still takes me twice as long to regen, which matters a lot in the longer refresh format where you've a lot of time to incorporate into the final clear.

lol this is funny to read when Im a transition player and sitting at 42 slots with blade/hulk/patch/falcon at lv95 as my highest characters. I can level patch and balde up to 140 but this would increase the enemies lvs on PvE and because blade is frail (and would tank two colors on PvP) I decided to not level them too much before I get another top tier 3* at that many covers.

I might not be the regular transition player, being an exception, but I can say that while its easier and sometimes even funny to see how much lower my scaling is compared to those 3* rosters it is also more frustrating to not be able to get even T50 on PvP due to the unlikely chance to beat 3*s around score 450~600.

Unknown

ShionSinX wrote:

Phantron wrote:

I decided to check my bracket's top 10 and out of the 7 or 8 guys that don't have anyone higher than about level 110, only one of them has just 3 pages of heroes (2.5 pages). Everyone else has at least 4 pages of heroes which implies at least 40 slots (14 per page).

So now I'm pretty convinced it's not 2*/transition dominating the top, unless you think it is normal for a transition guy to have enough HP to buy 40 slots while never leveling anyone past level 110. People are definitely gaming the system in some way. We know the scaling was never fair for high rosters, but even if it was perfectly fair, if you're running level 100 and I'm running level 200 against equally difficult opponent, it still takes me twice as long to regen, which matters a lot in the longer refresh format where you've a lot of time to incorporate into the final clear.

lol this is funny to read when Im a transition player and sitting at 42 slots with blade/hulk/patch/falcon at lv95 as my highest characters. I can level patch and balde up to 140 but this would increase the enemies lvs on PvE and because blade is frail (and would tank two colors on PvP) I decided to not level them too much before I get another top tier 3* at that many covers.

I might not be the regular transition player, being an exception, but I can say that while its easier and sometimes even funny to see how much lower my scaling is compared to those 3* rosters it is also more frustrating to not be able to get even T50 on PvP due to the unlikely chance to beat 3*s around score 450~600.

Sorry the situation is changing now , Under 8hrs fresher 166 big roster can have more chance to fail any mission without lossing time / points Low lv roster only can hope everything is ok

Arondite

benben77 wrote:

veneretio wrote:

Firebat86 wrote:

benben77 wrote:

I think it is ok in PVE as higher your roster level higher the enemy levels

those 166ers are facing 200+ nodes and we 2* roster face 100 something.

200+ Ares / Daken / Ragnarok is totally different from 100 something

Couldn't agree more.

Now let's look at this from another angle: The three stars boosted this time around are all BRAND NEW.

So unless you've paid to cover and then subsequently power leveled any of these characters you are basically screwed... 2 people fighting lvl 100 nodes with lvl 134 boosted characters = incredibly manageable and fun. But, since I have 3 characters leveled I'm facing crazy 200+ nodes where those boosted 2 characters are 70+ lvls short. Add to that it's over scaled Daken/Ares/Jugs etc etc... It's really draining tbh... And my minimal covers on the 3 characters who are boosted makes them unusable...

On top of why are ALL the nodes required SG yet the scaling is through the roof? My one cover SG is gimping the team to the point where the essential nodes are basically impossible...

I'm not sure at what point you guys are measuring, but as a 2* myself, I'm very quickly hitting nodes well over 140. One that just ended had characters at 180+. So things maybe aren't as unbalanced as you think relative to a true 2* transition lineup. It's pretty clear that many players have optimized lineups for PvE. I don't see anything wrong with it. They're basically forgoing PvP progression in favor of this path. No one said the game had to be fair for everyone at every stage. It certainly isn't even close to fair for new players until you have numerous maxed 2*s.

So m i ? i m also a 2* 3* transitior. Well i think it is a overall lv problem and character problem ( well 8 hrs refresh timer also have its effect here )

The dev team always think we want challenge , so they adjust the power curve to reflect the difficulties like lv 94 roster face 150 but 166 roster face 266 + . it is understandable.

However the power curve is NOT linear in ANY aspect.... overbuffed 1* and 2* charcter is much crazy then you think.... 5 green match ares 1 shot for 3K+ damage or 6K + sunder is impossible to win even you have 166 thor

you have average 3K hp and the ai doing 100-200 damage per 3 match and the 166er have 10K hp the ai doing 300-400 damage per match. So linear!

our character is extremely imbalance and 8hrs refresh timer ( dont fail in any mission to keep competitive ) ruin everything

3,000 / 100 = 30 Matches
3,000 / 200 = 15 Matches

10,000 / 300 = 33.33 Matches
10,000 / 400 = 25 Matches

6,800 / 300 = 23.667 Matches
6,800 / 400 = 17 Matches

It's all actually fairly close. Lol.
166 with 10K HP have it easiest, 166 with 6.8K HP have it a bit harder.

Unknown

Arondite wrote:

3,000 / 100 = 30 Matches
3,000 / 200 = 15 Matches

10,000 / 300 = 33.33 Matches
10,000 / 400 = 25 Matches

6,800 / 300 = 23.667 Matches
6,800 / 400 = 17 Matches

It's all actually fairly close. Lol.
166 with 10K HP have it easiest, 166 with 6.8K HP have it a bit harder.

i dont think any team can stand oppsite to 295 Ares over 15 match not even X force..... but 10 match is fairly enough to kill a 295 Yelena by 3 4 * roster

Unknown

Mau-- wrote:

I have 39 roster slots, and 7 maxed 2*'s, so 94 is my highest level...my Let's dance node in Alaska is all level 152 on the very first clear. My Bullseye 3 in Savage is pushing 160. Ares can pretty much one shot anyone I have for only 5 green.

This game scales on roster strength to slow your progression and that's really the key to "gaming the system".

If I had to do it all over again I would -
- Unlock 7 roster slots total
- Max 1* IM/Juggs/Widow/Storm
- Sell anyone not named Xforce/4Thor/Hood
- Join late and crush beginner brackets for easy 4* covers.

Congrats you just transitioned from 1-4* without building any 2 or 3*s and in probably a fraction of the time the real transition would take. You can now top 25 every PvP and begin the 4*->3* transition.

Sure it's dumb, but so is banging your head against the wall of PvE scaling and failing to crack even top 200 in PvP with 500 points (around what a 2* roster can achieve).

(You could also make an argument for adding a softcapped (around 40-50) Daken/Wolverine for sustain.)

The problem is that once you get that 4* you often get pushed out of 'beginner' bracket. I remember my first go in the game was during the event blade was introduced. I started 2 days in but ended the event ranked 16. That is my highest overall rank to date 90 days in. However that very event I picked up a fury. I was immediately bumped up and there went that. Granted, I didn't know the cause at the time...

Dauthi

I bumped this because of Phantron quitting. I posted this awhile back but I still feel the same. I sit though this PVE and watch a 3* transitional roster take 1st place in my bracket. It is utterly ridiculous that he is going to get 4 4*s that I need before his 3*s are even finished. Prizes are not being distributed correctly and it is slowing down everyone's progress in the end.