When to level 4*s?

GrumpySmurf1002

raisinbman wrote:

i couldnt recommend anyone level xforce starlord susan fury when many 3* are better for less investment

never said they were better, but if u look at character ranking thread its arguable, plus always have to factor in investment

Ummm

raisinbman wrote:

i would not recommend nonCharles/Hulkbuster 4* to players
obviously we are at an impasse if you'd actually think of using elekra starlord

Charles/IMHB are the only 4* where you can set it and forget it, much like one used to with XForce/4Thor. If that's your standard for a 4* character, then yeah, we're at an impasse.

As far as the investment, going from 40->166 for a 3* is roughly the same as 70->198 on a 4*, and all the 4* are usable, at very least in PvE, at 198 (and 198 is low enough that your scaling wouldn't be murdered). The problem is that same cost gets you from 199->237 and 237->268; that's where the ROI for a 4* plummets.

Vhailorx

Lerysh wrote:

Vhailorx wrote:

dr tinykittylove wrote:

4*s don't scale well. It's covers that are most important. I keep mine at the same level as my 3*s and they work fine for me.

Before the nerf and the rotating character buffs/health changes, XF was one of my go-to characters for both pvp and pve. Now he's a bit too squishy to be practical on defense in pvp, but still does a lot of good work in pve and sim.

4*thor I recently got to 525. Pretty awesome when paired with the right support characters.

IMHB also works a treat at level 155, 5/4/3. I have no complaints.

But in the 150a, imhb only has 12I health.

Isnt extra health on of the big benefits of 4*s. Is it worth giving up that advantage?

Ok, but think about it, are you REALLY going to use that 2/2/2 Kingpin, even if he had 8,000 health at level 127? I don't think you are. May as well just wait for a 13 cover 4* before you even contemplate leveling them, they aren't really that useful otherwise.

I don't think you need 13 to justify leveling (assuming that leveling at all is the way to go). It depends on the powers. A 5/3/2 imhb might be pretty useful, but a 3/2/5 imhb less so.

TxMoose

Lerysh wrote:

Ok, but think about it, are you REALLY going to use that 2/2/2 Kingpin, even if he had 8,000 health at level 127? I don't think you are. May as well just wait for a 13 cover 4* before you even contemplate leveling them, they aren't really that useful otherwise.

ok, 2/2/2 maybe not, but what about 3/4/3? at that point does the answer change? (I don't know, so I'm asking - not making an argument for)

I know with so many fewer ****s and with all of them playing so differently, it is likely highly dependent on the character and the covers you have. but as an example, Lthor equals/surpasses **thor at ~3/3/3 in health and damage (even though green generation isn't there). that supports the notion of 9-10 covers before you consider leveling your ***s above your **. however, with the right covers, 7-8 covers can help broaden your roster and still lend help to your ** bunch and still be beneficial. I think its likely short-sighted to say wait for 13, but yes, 6 is insufficient. surely the answer is somewhere between? and maybe there cannot be a rule of thumb like there is for ***s since some abilities are huge and some are ***ish, but I think that is what the OP is asking (and I'm curious as well even though I'm far from that level).

Unknown

GrumpySmurf1002 wrote:

raisinbman wrote:

i couldnt recommend anyone level xforce starlord susan fury when many 3* are better for less investment

never said they were better, but if u look at character ranking thread its arguable, plus always have to factor in investment

Ummm

raisinbman wrote:

i would not recommend nonCharles/Hulkbuster 4* to players
obviously we are at an impasse if you'd actually think of using elekra starlord

Charles/IMHB are the only 4* where you can set it and forget it, much like one used to with XForce/4Thor. If that's your standard for a 4* character, then yeah, we're at an impasse.

As far as the investment, going from 40->166 for a 3* is roughly the same as 70->198 on a 4*, and all the 4* are usable, at very least in PvE, at 198 (and 198 is low enough that your scaling wouldn't be murdered). The problem is that same cost gets you from 199->237 and 237->268; that's where the ROI for a 4* plummets.[/quote]
cool, so u found where i should've used better wording. As I said, the character ranking list shows where the public(and my) opinion lie

agree, 3* are better investment

Vhailorx wrote:

Lerysh wrote:

Vhailorx wrote:

dr tinykittylove wrote:

4*s don't scale well. It's covers that are most important. I keep mine at the same level as my 3*s and they work fine for me.

Before the nerf and the rotating character buffs/health changes, XF was one of my go-to characters for both pvp and pve. Now he's a bit too squishy to be practical on defense in pvp, but still does a lot of good work in pve and sim.

4*thor I recently got to 525. Pretty awesome when paired with the right support characters.

IMHB also works a treat at level 155, 5/4/3. I have no complaints.

But in the 150a, imhb only has 12I health.

Isnt extra health on of the big benefits of 4*s. Is it worth giving up that advantage?

Ok, but think about it, are you REALLY going to use that 2/2/2 Kingpin, even if he had 8,000 health at level 127? I don't think you are. May as well just wait for a 13 cover 4* before you even contemplate leveling them, they aren't really that useful otherwise.

I don't think you need 13 to justify leveling (assuming that leveling at all is the way to go). It depends on the powers. A 5/3/2 imhb might be pretty useful, but a 3/2/5 imhb less so.

why would I use a nonoptimal 4? In PVP sure dumb ppl might say oh no, it's HULKBUSTER and run away, and in PVE, scaling will you.

3* are more useful to the majority of players than 4* unless 100% covered

TxMoose wrote:

Lerysh wrote:

Ok, but think about it, are you REALLY going to use that 2/2/2 Kingpin, even if he had 8,000 health at level 127? I don't think you are. May as well just wait for a 13 cover 4* before you even contemplate leveling them, they aren't really that useful otherwise.

ok, 2/2/2 maybe not, but what about 3/4/3? at that point does the answer change? (I don't know, so I'm asking - not making an argument for)

I know with so many fewer ****s and with all of them playing so differently, it is likely highly dependent on the character and the covers you have. but as an example, Lthor equals/surpasses **thor at ~3/3/3 in health and damage (even though green generation isn't there). that supports the notion of 9-10 covers before you consider leveling your ***s above your **. however, with the right covers, 7-8 covers can help broaden your roster and still lend help to your ** bunch and still be beneficial. I think its likely short-sighted to say wait for 13, but yes, 6 is insufficient. surely the answer is somewhere between? and maybe there cannot be a rule of thumb like there is for ***s since some abilities are huge and some are ***ish, but I think that is what the OP is asking (and I'm curious as well even though I'm far from that level).

Problem is covers matter most for 4* characters so as much as ppl say u can use undercovered 4* you're missing out. Sort of like using Hood before 5 .

Sure, I'll do it if I'm desperate, but I can probably get better results somewhere else.

Ducky

raisinbman wrote:

obviously we are at an impasse if you'd actually think of using elekra starlord

Both of those characters can be very useful under the right circumstances. If you've never used them, you shouldn't be commenting on them.

People really need to stop giving out advice on characters that they have never used at a high level.

Vhailorx

DuckyV wrote:

raisinbman wrote:

obviously we are at an impasse if you'd actually think of using elekra starlord

Both of those characters can be very useful under the right circumstances. If you've never used them, you shouldn't be commenting on them.

People really need to stop giving out advice on characters that they have never used at a high level.

I don't agree with that ducky. Its possible to give advice for characters without using them because it's possible to conduct a though experiment about how a maxed character might play. (its also generally useful to say when you are giving advice about a character you don't have a ton of experience with.) What's bad isn't that raisin is giving advice about characters he/she hasn't played, it's that his advice is overly simplistic.

Elektra and starlord aren't top tier 4*s. But they are quite useful in their specific scenarios. Its just that their uses are limited.

As for why to use an undercovered 4*: I can see a couple of reasons: (1) for fun/variety, and (2) because they have a specific ability that you might use such as elektra's black traps or starlord's ap tricks.

Ducky

raisinbman wrote:

So you disagree with character rankings?

Yea, I do. The number one rated character is almost NEVER seen in top end pvp, even when boosted. Out of the top 10, I only see 3-4 of them with any regularity in top end PvP, even when boosted.

Just because a lot of people agree that a character is good, doesn't make it true. I mean, OBW is ranked 10 spots ahead of 3* Torch and he can one shot her. The character rankings are NOT an indication of how strong a character is. They are an indication of who players enjoy playing the most. Those two are not the same thing.

vhailorx wrote:

I don't agree with that ducky. Its possible to give advice for characters without using them because it's possible to conduct a though experiment about how a maxed character might play.

Tell that to everyone who thought pre-nerf Sentry was going to be terrible before people actually got to play him, then realized he was the new meta. Giving out advice without having any experience with a character is irresponsible because you may have no idea what you're talking about.

dr tinykittylove

raisinbman wrote:

DuckyV wrote:

raisinbman wrote:

And your understanding of why OBW is ranked the way she is considering you say I'm unqualified is shocking.

It's not irresponsible, you sound like those ppl in my old thread who only wanted 'qualified experts' when the vet community was(and still is) dying out.

That was only one of the reasons why I thought she was ranked entirely too high. I would rank almost every 3* higher than her in PvP and in PvE (at least at my scaling level, she can't be useful if she dies to match damage in 5 turns).

And yes, I would take the advice of someone who has used a character extensively over someone who is just theorycrafting. Call me crazy, but I like to base my decisions on a character off of evidence and not speculation.

Then you've fallen prey to what we call "personal bias".

Someone of your stature and "qualification", should know this, yes?

Come back to me when your sample size is adequate, etc etc *insert zoidberg meme*

There is an entire playerbase out there that uses OBW, whom you disagree with. Just like this conversation we're having, the majority is on one side, you are on the other.

Hint: not just in the 2* range either, since you're so knowledgeable I shouldn't have to tell you how to use her, right?

Hint 2: Well, this is a separate hint, but I'm feeling nice so I'll provide you with some perspective, and it's even from a *gasp* someone-who-used-the-character-extensively-person: https://www.d3go.com/forums/viewtopic.p ... 52#p359758

Well, if you're talented/rich enough/lucky enough to be able to "use a character extensively" in a F2P game with locked characters, more power to you. I'll use my resources and spend my time/HP/$$ wisely.

Should I even mention there's loaner nodes in this game where, I, a lowly unqualified theorycrafter, can play pimped-out characters and develop opinions? No, I don't actually have the character so my opinion is instantly invalid.

But I'm not heartless - My heart goes out to anyone who seeks "verification" over ever little facet of MPQ rather than trusting people.

I love OBW. She's one of the top 2*s without question, everyone can agree on that. And on a lucky board, she can really ruin your day.

But the rankings are based on a different system from the old one. They are given a rating of 1-10 rather than pitting her against other characters. Of course she'll get high points, she's indisputably good and everyone can agree on that. But in practice, once you have your 3*s up and running, you aren't going to take her into a match with other 3-4*s. If she tanks her colours, she dies. If she doesn't tank her colours, she loses one of her powers. How useful is she then?

That's the real problem with the new ranking system. You're not really comparing the characters with each other. OBW is an amazing apple. Lazy Thor is a pretty good orange. Kingpin is a rangpur lime. And hardly anyone knows what that stupid fruit even smells like, how do you compare him with OBW and Lazy Thor?

Unknown

It's always interesting to see a thread derailed. I have an acronym that would be helpful, but if I were to explain it I'd get in trouble. It is: DNEtA.

Unknown

TxMoose wrote:

Lerysh wrote:

Ok, but think about it, are you REALLY going to use that 2/2/2 Kingpin, even if he had 8,000 health at level 127? I don't think you are. May as well just wait for a 13 cover 4* before you even contemplate leveling them, they aren't really that useful otherwise.

ok, 2/2/2 maybe not, but what about 3/4/3? at that point does the answer change? (I don't know, so I'm asking - not making an argument for)

I know with so many fewer ****s and with all of them playing so differently, it is likely highly dependent on the character and the covers you have. but as an example, Lthor equals/surpasses **thor at ~3/3/3 in health and damage (even though green generation isn't there). that supports the notion of 9-10 covers before you consider leveling your ***s above your **. however, with the right covers, 7-8 covers can help broaden your roster and still lend help to your ** bunch and still be beneficial. I think its likely short-sighted to say wait for 13, but yes, 6 is insufficient. surely the answer is somewhere between? and maybe there cannot be a rule of thumb like there is for ***s since some abilities are huge and some are ***ish, but I think that is what the OP is asking (and I'm curious as well even though I'm far from that level).

This is a tough call, and ultimately the answer is "Whenever you have the ISO to level them". Personally I have other projects going on so I'm waiting for 13 cover 4*s before I even invest a small amount in them.

The situational usefulness of, say, Elektra, can be utilized at level 70. She may be in danger of AoE death perhaps but at that level the fact she's tanking probably 0-1 colors is actually a boon. So don't go investing ISO based solely on gimmicks.

ThatOneGuyjp189512

OBW is only useful till you get 2 or 3 maxed/usable 3* depending on who you get first, once you start getting more and more 3* maxed she starts to drop in value a ton. Her health alone is a liability even if she's powered up, sure her purple is probably the best support power in the game(hood's blue notwithstanding) but once you get an established roster and start getting into 300+ land in pve she's basically useless cause any power will down her.

Unknown

ThatOneGuyjp189512 wrote:

OBW is only useful till you get 2 or 3 maxed/usable 3* depending on who you get first, once you start getting more and more 3* maxed she starts to drop in value a ton. Her health alone is a liability even if she's powered up, sure her purple is probably the best support power in the game(hood's blue notwithstanding) but once you get an established roster and start getting into 300+ land in pve she's basically useless cause any power will down her.

Not true because DDQ (and to a lesser extend required 2* PvE, and to a lesser lesser extent she is really good at PvE even in the 3* range). I use OBW every day on 2 DDQ nodes. She is clearly one of, if not the best 2* in the whole game.

True in a PvP environment, but that is not the only environment that exists in the game.

Ebolamonkey84

To the OP's question:
I personally would wait to level a 4* until it has a good amount of covers and you have a well rounded cast of 3* characters. With the weekly buffed rotation, it is better to have a bunch of higher level 3* characters than one high 4*. It's never good to put all of your eggs in one basket, especially when the most desirable 4* covers are also the most likely to get nerfed. Ask anyone who tried to skip the 3* level by putting everything into GThor and XForce how they felt after the nerf.

To the side conversation:
I organized the latest round of character rankings, and I have to agree with Ducky on this one. The new format benefits the best characters in each rarity tier, and it also benefits characters that are well rounded and aren't just useful in certain situations.

While almost no one would call LThor the best character in the game currently, when rating him on a scale of 1-10 it is hard to put him below an 8, as he has high HP, two strong abilities, one of which feeds the other, and a third ability that is decent, but just pales in comparison to the other two. He is also familiar to people in the transition stage, as he is just 2* Thor with a hell of a lot more power, and 2* Thor is one of the best at that level, so how can 3* Thor not also be great?

Similarly, very few people will disagree that OBW is the best 2* character in the game, hence her relatively high position in the character rankings. However, there are many characters below her that I use more often. Let's break her down

PVP: I believe the majority of 3* characters in the game are usable in PVP when boosted for the week. I would have a hard time using OBW in PVP, even when boosted.
PVE: OBW is good for three things: AP steal, CD extension, and double dipping on strikes. The healing is ok, but it is only temporary and isn't that much if you are facing the kind of scaling a 3*/4* roster gets you. AP steal is great, but Hood and Loki can also do it and are a bit more durable. CD extension is also good, but you need someone with some power to kill the goons before those extra turns get used up. There are also other options in 3* land like Falcon and LCap. The double dip from espionage requires her to own those tiles, which makes it a liability in combination nodes where goon match damage does over 500 per match. If you purposely **** your roster so that all your max cover 3* are underleveled, I'm sure she is still the queen.
DDQ: She's great for the 2* nodes, but so are a bunch of other characters. I prefer to use Ares/MNMags/CStorm for those. I'm sure she is useful for the 4 wave node as well, but my team of LCap/KK/Hood trivializes that node.

I think the most important numbers in the character rankings are the average scores of each character, not the actual rank. It is a good reference as to who is worth leveling when your resources are limited starting out. Almost all of the 3*/4* characters are usable in the right circumstances, even if others might be able to do the job better.

Raisin, your opinions are not dismissed solely based on your roster. They are dismissed because of the way you present them as fact and the way you dismiss anyone's opinion that doesn't match your own, even as you cry foul when others do the same to you. Vets have a lot more experience in the game, and while that doesn't mean their opinion matters and yours does not, it does mean that they usually have used particular characters in game instead of just theorizing based on power descriptions. If you expressed your opinions in a less antagonistic way and actually considered other people's input, you might find the forum a little less hostile. Eventually, everyone will be on your ignore list and it will just be you talking to yourself.

Unknown

Vhailorx wrote:

HiPhoneGamer wrote:

My experience is that leveling 4* even with 13 covers is a waste of iso unless you can get them to at least 200-205. They actually become stronger than 166 level 3* at 222-225 I believe.

In the "n-word" era

nerf

I seriously doubt I will ever take a 4* past 250 unless/until the rest of my 3* roster is maxed, and for that matter my 2* & 1* are all at their respective level caps.

I took three 4* characters to level 185, and they were weaker than my 166 3* characters.

Having 20/20 hindsight. If you can be patient I would suggest not leveling 4* until you can go from level 70 to level 200-205 at one time.

Just my opinion; and I don't pretend to be an expert.

Out of curiosity, which 4*s did you level? I Had a 5/5/3 xforce at 166 pre-nerf and he was clearly better than most of my 3*s. His abilities (once they had 5 covers) were just that good. Post nerf I barely use him, and i wonder if taking him up to 200-220 will make him useable again, if not as awesome as he used to be.

I also have a 4/4/2 imhb (who will probably 5/4/2 next weekend after the season reward cover), and imhb seems like a great all around PvP character these days

I leveled XF, Fury and Thoress to 185 initially -- and put XF over 220 as fast as I could. I still have Fury and Thoress at 185 and I never use them. I occasionally still use XF but it is rare -- I think SS is still good but until I can re-spec to 355 I will likely leave XF on the sidelines. I did not think XF under 200 was better than my 166 3* characters but I only play PvP -- not sure if playing PvE would impact my view. In my experience, pre-N using a 166 XF was asking to get hit in PvP.

IMHB may be the best in the game right now, but it will probably change in 2 weeks with the next 4* release. I'm hesitant to take any 4* too high because of the ISO needed to level them compared to 3* characters like Cage, KK, IF, Cyc, even SW, etc. Some -- not all -- of the newer 3 * characters released have been pretty good I think but I'm new to this game so don't pretend to be any sort of Roster guru. There are a ton of people on this forum who know a lot more about rosters and building characters than I will likely even know.

I saw this thread as an opportunity to tell someone about a mistake I made so they could possibly avoid it.

Vhailorx

You are right hiphonegamer, that a pre-nerf xforce was inviting attacks. My point is that his green/black abilities were so good that it didn't matter. He was still plenty fast enough to shield hop. And nothing else in game could match surgical strike for damage, ap generation, and ap suppression, and board control.

I don't know that any of the current top 4*s replicate that level of usefulness.

And thanks for the advice! I did suspect that leveling up only 1 or 2 4*s could backfire.

Unknown

Thanks for the reply and up vote!

With weekly 3* buffs across PvP/PvE I think you are dead on if you plan on trying to level a solid group of 3* and take your time leveling 4* characters.

Having said that, in my opinion the only exception to waiting to level 4* would be IMHB -- just keep in mind, now that IMHB is getting to be at the level he is almost required to be used in high level PVP, I really fear he is moving to the front of the line that Thoress and XF just left... which would be sad because I think he is well designed as is and not OP at all.

Oh, and sorry your thread got hijacked. Some people in the forum really like to see (as opposed to hear) themselves talk.

Good luck with your roster.

babinro

I find this question surprisingly difficult to answer despite having gone through the transition phase already myself. This game has just changed soo much that my experiences/expertise are probably no longer relevant.

That aside, here's my two cents:

Do you want to whale your way to top tier play in all modes of play?
Hulkbuster + Iron Fist.

This is as close as we get to the current games version of Patchneto, Sentry Bombing, XF/Thor prenerf. It's clearly not on the same level as those builds but it is a universal duo that's sufficient to play in top tier pvp regardless of whose featured and buffed.

That duo aside I can't really recommend a reason to go out of your way and rush ISO into a 4* over a buffed 3*. Characters like 4Thor are great but they essentially translate to your typical 3* with a couple of utility benefits/kickers added to their skill set. So while Cage/4Thor is a strong duo it's not really all that much better than say Cage/Cyclops or Cage/Magneto. It's main advantage is that a 4*'s health is better and leads to more play and possibly more intimidation when it comes to people choosing who to attack.

So rather than spend 3x more ISO on a 4* whose abilities scale POORLY when buffed I'd sooner recommend you spend that ISO on maxing out several 3*'s who become strong when buffed.

Once you have a solid foundation of say 7-10 established 3*'s such as Lcap, Blade, Cyclops, Iron Fist, Loki, Cage, Mags, Groot, Hood, Lthor and Patch then you can really focus on those 4*'s.

Level Fury and pair him with Hood.
Level Thor and pair with Cage.
Level XF and pair with Mags.
Level Xavier and pair with GSBW.
Level Hulkbuster and pair with Iron Fist.
Level Invisible Woman and kick yourself.

GothicKratos

Sorry about locking this for so long. I only intended to have it locked for an hour or so. I was at work at the time, so I did it from my phone. Totally forgot I had a family engagement afterwards, so I didn't have access to a computer to address the issue.

===

@raisinbman: I'm going to keep this short and sweet; do unto others as you wish others to do onto you. If you don't want people to qualify your ability to have opinions, then don't do it to others. No, "they did it first" is not an okay excuse. That's just childish. Start acting like you expect others to act, or you're going to find yourself lumped in with those people really quickly. You know what's acceptable. You know what isn't. If you feel like someone broke a rule, then report the post.

Furthermore, I ask that you evaluate the contribution that your posts bring to the table. Think about it before you hit that "Post" button. If it's just a rebuttal in an argument, then try and leave it at the door. You don't need the last word in an internet argument. If it's not something to do with a discussion at hand, please leave it at the door. If it's just some snark, absolutely leave it at the door. If it's simply antagonistic in nature, try and reconstruct it to be explanatory and descriptive, rather than snarl and snoot.

Consider what behaviour you would like to see on the forums, and please attempt to mimic that behaviour. Don't let the misbehavior of others lull you into something you don't intend to be. This is your "public warning", so to speak. As I have said previously; you do not have to hold respect for someone to treat them as a human being. If there are particular individuals you feel you cannot hold your tongue with, please place those individuals on "Ignore" as to avoid any altercations. Thank you for understanding.

===

After pruning the argumentative posts out of the thread, I'm going to go ahead and unlock it.

morph3us

I'd agree with the feeling that you need to have them well covered enough such that they're useful. In my book, that's generally 5/5/x (in any given order). I'd also say that given that a boosted maxed 3* (in PvP) is pretty much as useful (and probably better) than a non-boosted 4*, and is reasonably competitive with a boosted 4*, that a you're better off spreading your Iso out amongst your 3*s until you have a reasonably strong stable of 3*s.

Some of the time, you'll have a 3* who's fairly comparable to a 4*, such as Cyclops and X-Force (in role, if not entirely in colour), and I think that in that instance, your rate of return on levelling X-Force is diminished by the presence of Cyclops in your roster. (Enough so that I actually sold my X-Force for a full HP refund in the post-nerf period; it just seemed that the HP I spent in buying out his covers was better used on 4*s who would better fill holes in my roster. Maybe I'm mad, I dunno.) It's a question of the role that particular 4* is going to play in your roster as a whole.

The conclusion that I've reached is that 4*s probably aren't really worth focusing on until you can level them to 270, such that you'll always have a strong team, particularly if your 3*s have missed the boost list for the week in PvP. As a consequence of that, given that I don't want to level a single 4* alone to 270, for fear of messing up my PvE scaling, I'm planning on keeping my 4*s to 200-220 at present. I'm planning on levelling them together to 270 when I have two or three usable 4*s.

Unknown

I'm not going to argue circles with you in someone else's thread, I'll send you a message to continue the conversation, if you'd like me to source you how you did not do the things you're saying.

morph3us wrote:

I'd agree with the feeling that you need to have them well covered enough such that they're useful. In my book, that's generally 5/5/x (in any given order). I'd also say that given that a boosted maxed 3* (in PvP) is pretty much as useful (and probably better) than a non-boosted 4*, and is reasonably competitive with a boosted 4*, that a you're better off spreading your Iso out amongst your 3*s until you have a reasonably strong stable of 3*s.

Some of the time, you'll have a 3* who's fairly comparable to a 4*, such as Cyclops and X-Force (in role, if not entirely in colour), and I think that in that instance, your rate of return on levelling X-Force is diminished by the presence of Cyclops in your roster. (Enough so that I actually sold my X-Force for a full HP refund in the post-nerf period; it just seemed that the HP I spent in buying out his covers was better used on 4*s who would better fill holes in my roster. Maybe I'm mad, I dunno.) It's a question of the role that particular 4* is going to play in your roster as a whole.

The conclusion that I've reached is that 4*s probably aren't really worth focusing on until you can level them to 270, such that you'll always have a strong team, particularly if your 3*s have missed the boost list for the week in PvP. As a consequence of that, given that I don't want to level a single 4* alone to 270, for fear of messing up my PvE scaling, I'm planning on keeping my 4*s to 200-220 at present. I'm planning on levelling them together to 270 when I have two or three usable 4*s.

exactly what I was saying this whole time