Fix scaling for rosters with 5 star characters

smkspy

Players that aren't long term vets or whales shouldn't be penalized with they luck upon these dream prize 5 star characters. Either do some to fix the upscaleing issues where we can't decently compete in pvp anymore or create an option for us to bench our 5 stars and retain them, so they don't affect our scaling while we play. Benching them would make unplayabke until we're ready for them yet not force us to sell these rare diamonds. It could.got even be like a savings account where we pay so many iso to keep them benched every week.

Cause really the way things are now only hurts new players that don't understand scaling and such. All they see is that they've won a great character and are then baffled and probably put off by the fact that are facing enemy team way kore.poweful.thanthey can handle.

ZekeBarrett

Devs said 5* wasn't going to affect scaling but apparently it has. It's about time something is done about this. It has gone on far too long.

Ouroboros9999

I totally agree. This has made PvP insanely difficult and slowed my progress significantly.

frostCoH

Yes I've clearly been punished ever since I got my blue surfer (yay **** of his powers unless you have the other two).

simonsez

I'm still waiting for them to fix scaling, period

firethorne

simonsez wrote:

I'm still waiting for them to fix scaling, period

Same here. It is the dirty trick the game plays. If you fail missions, it tells you buy new characters, buy ISO (so we can start throwing 350 Gorgons with feeder nodes at you, putting you in an even worse situation). 5*s just make that even more obvious because there is no gradual transition when a 2-3* roster draws one.

fun_and_gun

getting and rostering the much coveted 5* cover should not be seen as a punishment, but yet, many are not excited to have pulled one (including me). there is something seriously wrong with this model.

My suggestion for a "fix" would be this:

Instead of basing your scaling/mmr on your roster's top 3 leveled heroes, base it off of your roster's top 3 (or 5, 7, 10...whatever sample size) characters that have at least 10 covers. This would basically account for your usable characters. of course for 5* characters, the number of covers deemed usable could be set lower than 10 since they're pretty much usable with relatively low covers. for beginners, since they will not have the necessary characters/covers, their rating could be set at a standard noob level.

this suggestion is just a starting point for the devs to expand upon.

firethorne

fun and gun wrote:

My suggestion for a "fix" would be this:

Instead of basing your scaling/mmr on your roster's top 3 leveled heroes, base it off of your roster's top 3 (or 5, 7, 10...whatever sample size) characters that have at least 10 covers.

I love it. Simple mathematical way of doing it. And you can't easily abuse it by undercovering characters, as doing that makes them of little or no use.

TxMoose

scaling on them wouldn't matter as much if they were actually usable from the get-go like they claimed they would be. however, even after very lucky pulls, I have a -/2/2 SS that is good for seeds and trivial nodes. if I used match damage boosts, maybe I could use him on an essential node where he tanks for someone, but even at 2 covers, his abilities are pretty weak. so my top end pve nodes are scaling on characters that don't actually benefit me there or anywhere else that matters. to me, unless you've whaled out 7 or 8 covers of them, they should not be influencing scaling. of course I've put no iso into them, so maybe they get much stronger if I did, but that would screw my scaling up even more, so no thanks.

BlackSheep101

Conversely, my 0/1/1 OML has been useful in PVE nodes tanking for characters with the same colors and saving me health packs. It's not like I'll win any events with him, but he's not dead weight on my roster like almost all my 4*s.

Crowl

fun and gun wrote:

getting and rostering the much coveted 5* cover should not be seen as a punishment, but yet, many are not excited to have pulled one (including me). there is something seriously wrong with this model.

My suggestion for a "fix" would be this:

Instead of basing your scaling/mmr on your roster's top 3 leveled heroes, base it off of your roster's top 3 (or 5, 7, 10...whatever sample size) characters that have at least 10 covers. This would basically account for your usable characters. of course for 5* characters, the number of covers deemed usable could be set lower than 10 since they're pretty much usable with relatively low covers. for beginners, since they will not have the necessary characters/covers, their rating could be set at a standard noob level.

this suggestion is just a starting point for the devs to expand upon.

I don't think they actually need to do anything as complex as you suggest, besides 5* characters, the only way you could get something to a sufficiently high enough level would be by having it highly covered and thus useful to you, although obviously they need to explain to newer characters that over levelling one or two characters in isolation is not an ideal approach.

Personally, I would suggest they just do the following with scaling:

Ignore 5* from scaling calculations until people have characters beyond at least 166.
Use the base level for all boosted characters, people should be getting an actual boost from those character and not feel like they are almost forced to use them since the game will penalise you for having them anyway.

TxMoose

BlackSheep101 wrote:

Conversely, my 0/1/1 OML has been useful in PVE nodes tanking for characters with the same colors and saving me health packs. It's not like I'll win any events with him, but he's not dead weight on my roster like almost all my 4*s.

yes, that all changes if you luck into either of their healing abilities. looking forward to that. until then, they have enough health to run a full set of seeds in LR. I'm afraid to use them on trivial nodes due to additional personal scaling. I still use jugs and low-level guys for those.

SkyElf

firethorne wrote:

fun and gun wrote:

My suggestion for a "fix" would be this:

Instead of basing your scaling/mmr on your roster's top 3 leveled heroes, base it off of your roster's top 3 (or 5, 7, 10...whatever sample size) characters that have at least 10 covers.

I love it. Simple mathematical way of doing it. And you can't easily abuse it by undercovering characters, as doing that makes them of little or no use.

A character with 9 covers is hardly useless. A fairer, but more complex way of dealing with the problem is to give each character an "effective level" equal to 35% + 5% per cover of their actual level.

However, I think the real problem is that the starting level for 5* characters is too high compared to the rest of a player's roster, unless they already have maxed out 4* characters. I have come up with a few ideas on how to fix this. In all cases, iso-8 costs to level characters should be redistributed so that the total cost to level a character to maximum remains the same. Iso-8 spent on a character would be retained, but the level might be adjusted for some characters.

1) Start all characters at level 1, but keep the level caps by cover the same as they are now. This might help some players who get 4* characters before they are ready for them. However, some new players who don't know any better automatically level characters up to their level cap, so this won't help them.

2) Start 5* characters at level 105, which fits the progression of starting level for other characters much better. Keep the level caps by cover the same as they are now.

3) Start 5* characters at level 125 and change the additional levels per cover to 25. This would limit the amount of damage a new player could do to their roster by leveling up a 5* character, but may annoy players who have enough covers for their 5* characters to be playable, but haven't gotten 13 yet.

It would be nice if there was a way to delevel characters other than selling them and rebuilding them from scratch, but I doubt the company would go for that.

Crowl

Sky Elf wrote:

1) Start all characters at level 1, but keep the level caps by cover the same as they are now. This might help some players who get 4* characters before they are ready for them. However, some new players who don't know any better automatically level characters up to their level cap, so this won't help them.

2) Start 5* characters at level 105, which fits the progression of starting level for other characters much better. Keep the level caps by cover the same as they are now.

3) Start 5* characters at level 125 and change the additional levels per cover to 25. This would limit the amount of damage a new player could do to their roster by leveling up a 5* character, but may annoy players who have enough covers for their 5* characters to be playable, but haven't gotten 13 yet.

A simpler option to avoid annoying either group of players would be to start 5* characters at level 105 or so as you suggest except with a max of 270 and simply make the first 150 levels only one cost 1 iso each, include a popup when people start to level it up that it could negatively impact the scaling in their game to increase the level and then all levels of play could enjoy their lucky token.