Skyedyne wrote: Lyrian wrote: That being said, I am **DEATHLY** afraid to level up any of my covers in complete fear that I will be considered a "high-level" character and face the wall of triple 141s in PvP and the 230 in PvE. At the moment, I refuse to level any of my 3*s over 85, afraid that the system will recognize me as 3* player. I know, this is likely all in my head (to some degree), but the fear is very real and drives my in-game motivations. I will bend over backwards to find ways to lower my MMR to avoid this scenario, such as the mass genocides in TaT to lower PvE encounters down to playable levels. This will do you no good. My highest is 66 for this event, and I'm still facing 230's. It was never based off your character level. It seems more skill based, but what seems to be off is the reduction in levels when you get a legitimate loss, and has a horrible scaling on wins. I can consistently beat the level 230 goon squads with my team, but if I happen to lose, I imagine I would only see a small decrease in enemy level. So it's fine to level your characters. I'd say that their is probably some other factor. Perhaps a total amount of account ISO invested? That might help to explain initial level. But tbh, I haven't a clue. The best bet is to play how you want and hope for the best.
Lyrian wrote: That being said, I am **DEATHLY** afraid to level up any of my covers in complete fear that I will be considered a "high-level" character and face the wall of triple 141s in PvP and the 230 in PvE. At the moment, I refuse to level any of my 3*s over 85, afraid that the system will recognize me as 3* player. I know, this is likely all in my head (to some degree), but the fear is very real and drives my in-game motivations. I will bend over backwards to find ways to lower my MMR to avoid this scenario, such as the mass genocides in TaT to lower PvE encounters down to playable levels.
Skyedyne wrote: This will do you no good. My highest is 66 for this event, and I'm still facing 230's. It was never based off your character level. It seems more skill based, but what seems to be off is the reduction in levels when you get a legitimate loss, and has a horrible scaling on wins. I can consistently beat the level 230 goon squads with my team, but if I happen to lose, I imagine I would only see a small decrease in enemy level. So it's fine to level your characters. I'd say that their is probably some other factor. Perhaps a total amount of account ISO invested? That might help to explain initial level. But tbh, I haven't a clue. The best bet is to play how you want and hope for the best.
Lyrian wrote: Skyedyne wrote: Lyrian wrote: That being said, I am **DEATHLY** afraid to level up any of my covers in complete fear that I will be considered a "high-level" character and face the wall of triple 141s in PvP and the 230 in PvE. At the moment, I refuse to level any of my 3*s over 85, afraid that the system will recognize me as 3* player. I know, this is likely all in my head (to some degree), but the fear is very real and drives my in-game motivations. I will bend over backwards to find ways to lower my MMR to avoid this scenario, such as the mass genocides in TaT to lower PvE encounters down to playable levels. This will do you no good. My highest is 66 for this event, and I'm still facing 230's. It was never based off your character level. It seems more skill based, but what seems to be off is the reduction in levels when you get a legitimate loss, and has a horrible scaling on wins. I can consistently beat the level 230 goon squads with my team, but if I happen to lose, I imagine I would only see a small decrease in enemy level. So it's fine to level your characters. I'd say that their is probably some other factor. Perhaps a total amount of account ISO invested? That might help to explain initial level. But tbh, I haven't a clue. The best bet is to play how you want and hope for the best. There's the difference... you are beating 230s, so the game is going to assume that is your baseline level of skill and present the appropriate level of opponents, which would be... more 230s. On my end, I won't try anything north of 120, as I don't have a max-blued Spidey to keep anything that high level stunlocked. That might be a key reason why my levels on opponents are still considered to be mid-range for me. On your end, if stun-locking is allowing players to beat the 230 encounters consistently, then the game will surely assume that 230s are trivial encounters and is setting them as the baseline encounter level. Now, if 230 was not the max cap on enemy levels, I'd bet that you would be seeing mob levels in the 300s and 400s, which would continue to everlastingly increase as long as you could ensure a win through stun-locks.
turul wrote: Just bumping this topic to get seen by devs. Scaling is better (for me) than two PVEs ago, however it still looks a bit unfair...