Funbalancing Queue Update?

Unknown

Alright, so I just want to throw this out there again...

How many people think it possible to take down 3 level 400 toons of the likes of Venom, Ares, Rag and/or Bullseye without "Stun lock"?

Sure, there are very few combinations available to take down that group. But, by my count, you need to be at level 141 - buffed to 212 x 3 in order to do so. And pray that a single cascade does not kill you.

daveomite wrote:

reckless442 wrote:

Make it stop

Okay, the scaling is absurd.

Unknown

Tonzil wrote:

Alright, so I just want to throw this out there again...
How many people think it possible to take down 3 level 400 toons of the likes of Venom, Ares, Rag and/or Bullseye without "Stun lock"?

Look on the bright side, once done you get 314 !!!! shield points for the win. With a mere thousand runs you could reach the HT progression cover for good.

Unknown

pasa_ wrote:

Tonzil wrote:

Alright, so I just want to throw this out there again...
How many people think it possible to take down 3 level 400 toons of the likes of Venom, Ares, Rag and/or Bullseye without "Stun lock"?

Look on the bright side, once done you get 314 !!!! shield points for the win. With a mere thousand runs you could reach the HT progression cover for good.

Don't forget the 20 ISO as well. With that 1000 runs you mentioned, you could buy like 6 or 7 levels for your 120 level character. And people complain about the 20 ISO reward.

Spoit

The theory is that they won't scale that high without stunlock/cmags.

I'm not convinced, sure you didn't have them for heroics, but then, you don't have any of the other leveled heroes either!

Unknown

Spoit wrote:

The theory is that they won't scale that high without stunlock/cmags.

I'm not convinced, sure you didn't have them for heroics, but then, you don't have any of the other leveled heroes either!

Not convinced either. Heroics prove that. They'll continue scaling ridiculously high because of low-level players beating those nodes and driving up community scaling, Spidey/CMags or no.

Unknown

walkyourpath wrote:

Spoit wrote:

The theory is that they won't scale that high without stunlock/cmags.

I'm not convinced, sure you didn't have them for heroics, but then, you don't have any of the other leveled heroes either!

Not convinced either. Heroics prove that. They'll continue scaling ridiculously high because of low-level players beating those nodes and driving up community scaling, Spidey/CMags or no.

Exactly! Community scaling needs to be scaled (heh) way back on these events. Although I seem to remember the juggernaut heroic not being as bad as the venom..maybe community scaling was ramped up for that one.

Unknown

I think scaling should be manageable by any player's roster with some amount of boosters at most. I don't if it's easy to make it happen though. More importantly why is this here? Isn't this a plea to get some updates on balancing queue?

So, when will we see some more balancing?

Unknown

sms4002 wrote:

Exactly! Community scaling needs to be scaled (heh) way back on these events. Although I seem to remember the juggernaut heroic not being as bad as the venom..maybe community scaling was ramped up for that one.

Wasn't Juggernaut the one that had Daredevil as the only buffed char? I think I see why scaling didn't go postal on that one...

Unknown

Moghwyn wrote:

sms4002 wrote:

Exactly! Community scaling needs to be scaled (heh) way back on these events. Although I seem to remember the juggernaut heroic not being as bad as the venom..maybe community scaling was ramped up for that one.

Wasn't Juggernaut the one that had Daredevil as the only buffed char? I think I see why scaling didn't go postal on that one...

That was Heroic Oscorp. You also had a limited roster too. Although Spiderman was usable, you have almost no damaging options and every fight took 20 minutes to win if you're lucky against the level 200 guys.

MarvelMan

reckless442 wrote:

Make it stop

You, sir, are too good at MPQ. They are offering you your life back.

reckless442

Tonzil wrote:

Alright, so I just want to throw this out there again...

How many people think it possible to take down 3 level 400 toons of the likes of Venom, Ares, Rag and/or Bullseye without "Stun lock"?

Sure, there are very few combinations available to take down that group. But, by my count, you need to be at level 141 - buffed to 212 x 3 in order to do so. And pray that a single cascade does not kill you.

daveomite wrote:

reckless442 wrote:

Make it stop

Okay, the scaling is absurd.

As I posted in the other thread, I actually defeated that node without stunlock.

Instead, I relied heavily on Classic Mags' blue to control the board, went in with full boosts so I could use that power before my first match, and got a favorable board. It was not fun thought. It took 17 minutes and I managed to take out each opponent on the turn before he would have insta-killed one of my guys.

Because I did that, I got out relatively unscathed by MPQ standards. Lazy Thor took about 5000 damage (half his total) and either Mags or Human Torch took 1500. My scaling on TOTW jumped by about 15 points immediately after. It's now at 297 across the board.

wirius

reckless442 wrote:

Tonzil wrote:

Alright, so I just want to throw this out there again...

How many people think it possible to take down 3 level 400 toons of the likes of Venom, Ares, Rag and/or Bullseye without "Stun lock"?

Sure, there are very few combinations available to take down that group. But, by my count, you need to be at level 141 - buffed to 212 x 3 in order to do so. And pray that a single cascade does not kill you.

daveomite wrote:

reckless442 wrote:

Make it stop

Okay, the scaling is absurd.

As I posted in the other thread, I actually defeated that node without stunlock.

Instead, I relied heavily on Classic Mags' blue to control the board, went in with full boosts so I could use that power before my first match, and got a favorable board. It was not fun thought. It took 17 minutes and I managed to take out each opponent on the turn before he would have insta-killed one of my guys.

Because I did that, I got out relatively unscathed by MPQ standards. Lazy Thor took about 5000 damage (half his total) and either Mags or Human Torch took 1500. My scaling on TOTW jumped by about 15 points immediately after. It's now at 297 across the board.

It simply means that you've been winning for a long, looooong time. The game is telling you its someone elses turn. Start losing, give other people a chance to take your place, and the levels will fall too. Sounds like its working as intended. =/

Deimos12

If by working as intended you mean encouraging the most devoted players to vacate the game then sure scaling is working as intended. Not a very stable system for long term growth though. Kind of puts an expiry date on player growth

Unknown

At the individual level you can certainly afford to take it easy if it turns out you've a significant lead on top 2. The only problem with this event is that nobody has any idea of where their relative standing is in the main bracket due to the staggered sub bracket finish time so I guess everyone is assuming for the worst. For all we know reckless could end up winning #1 by a margin of 2000 points, but there's no way she could possibly know at this point due to the way the sub brackets are staggered.

Now when you bring alliance into the picture it gets a bit murkier since you may indeed have to keep on pushing for a good alliance score but that's part of the competition.

Unknown

Phantron wrote:

At the individual level you can certainly afford to take it easy if it turns out you've a significant lead on top 2. The only problem with this event is that nobody has any idea of where their relative standing is in the main bracket due to the staggered sub bracket finish time so I guess everyone is assuming for the worst. For all we know reckless could end up winning #1 by a margin of 2000 points, but there's no way she could possibly know at this point due to the way the sub brackets are staggered.

Now when you bring alliance into the picture it gets a bit murkier since you may indeed have to keep on pushing for a good alliance score but that's part of the competition.

Well..u can see top ranked order's player's scores in a sub at any time by looking at alliance tank and clicking the score though. So in this situation..I could tell where she was at.

That said, the point is still valid as that only accounts for 100 players from 10 orders...more depending on your alliance rank. Still hardly accounts for everyone likely in the top of a given bracket

Bowgentle

Phantron wrote:

At the individual level you can certainly afford to take it easy if it turns out you've a significant lead on top 2. The only problem with this event is that nobody has any idea of where their relative standing is in the main bracket due to the staggered sub bracket finish time so I guess everyone is assuming for the worst. For all we know reckless could end up winning #1 by a margin of 2000 points, but there's no way she could possibly know at this point due to the way the sub brackets are staggered.

Do any of the top players (apart from you, because you're kerrrazzzyyyy, Phantron) actually care about _winning_ this godawful event, though?
The 4*s are way more easily acquired through PVP (if you want them at all), the ISO difference can be made up in one LR and the HP... not much difference there either.

Myself, I just don't care anymore and will just go for top 100 or so in each sub, with doing just enough missions to scrape by.
Yesterday it was helped by the server crash, but still - I started with 90 mins left in Savage, wiped my whole team twice on the stupid Ares mission (level 280 DAs), then tried to do some other missions with my B-Team, when that wiped teams C, D and E, and still managed to get within 2K points of my main bracket leader. I think I did less than 10 missions overall in that bracket.
Even if you're in an insane bracket where people grind like mad, scaling be damned, 10 missions should easily be enough for top 20 and two Falcon covers.

Of course it still sucks to not be able to play when you want, how much you want, and it really seems to be the plan to not level the playing field between veterans with multiple 141s and new players with 1*, but to take the veterans out of the picture completely.

Unknown

Bowgentle wrote:

Do any of the top players (apart from you, because you're kerrrazzzyyyy, Phantron) actually care about _winning_ this godawful event, though?
The 4*s are way more easily acquired through PVP (if you want them at all), the ISO difference can be made up in one LR and the HP... not much difference there either.

Hey, I've got Jozier in my main bracket, it's a matter of pride now not to give up.

reckless442

soenottelling wrote:

Phantron wrote:

At the individual level you can certainly afford to take it easy if it turns out you've a significant lead on top 2. The only problem with this event is that nobody has any idea of where their relative standing is in the main bracket due to the staggered sub bracket finish time so I guess everyone is assuming for the worst. For all we know reckless could end up winning #1 by a margin of 2000 points, but there's no way she could possibly know at this point due to the way the sub brackets are staggered.

Now when you bring alliance into the picture it gets a bit murkier since you may indeed have to keep on pushing for a good alliance score but that's part of the competition.

Well..u can see top ranked order's player's scores in a sub at any time by looking at alliance tank and clicking the score though. So in this situation..I could tell where she was at.

That said, the point is still valid as that only accounts for 100 players from 10 orders...more depending on your alliance rank. Still hardly accounts for everyone likely in the top of a given bracket

You can tell where I am now, but even if I'm 2000 up, there is no way of knowing if the guy in second place in my main bracket is in a sub-bracket where someone has ground so much that Mr. Second Place has untouched nodes that will give him 5000 in his next clear. Not all sub-brackets are equal. Davecazz just took first in his Alaska sub-bracket with over 7000 points. The leader of my sub-bracket i sat 6349, and nobody else has crossed 6000. Or Mr. Second Place may not have even done his first clear of Alaska while I have. He could have massive points stockpiled and there is no way to know.

Unknown

reckless442 wrote:

soenottelling wrote:

Phantron wrote:

At the individual level you can certainly afford to take it easy if it turns out you've a significant lead on top 2. The only problem with this event is that nobody has any idea of where their relative standing is in the main bracket due to the staggered sub bracket finish time so I guess everyone is assuming for the worst. For all we know reckless could end up winning #1 by a margin of 2000 points, but there's no way she could possibly know at this point due to the way the sub brackets are staggered.

Now when you bring alliance into the picture it gets a bit murkier since you may indeed have to keep on pushing for a good alliance score but that's part of the competition.

Well..u can see top ranked order's player's scores in a sub at any time by looking at alliance tank and clicking the score though. So in this situation..I could tell where she was at.

That said, the point is still valid as that only accounts for 100 players from 10 orders...more depending on your alliance rank. Still hardly accounts for everyone likely in the top of a given bracket

You can tell where I am now, but even if I'm 2000 up, there is no way of knowing if the guy in second place in my main bracket is in a sub-bracket where someone has ground so much that Mr. Second Place has untouched nodes that will give him 5000 in his next clear. Not all sub-brackets are equal. Davecazz just took first in his Alaska sub-bracket with over 7000 points. The leader of my sub-bracket i sat 6349, and nobody else has crossed 6000. Or Mr. Second Place may not have even done his first clear of Alaska while I have. He could have massive points stockpiled and there is no way to know.

The last few events (months?) Have had universal sub bracket rubberbanding...meaning everyone is being rubberbanded to whomever is the overall leader in points as far as I l've seen. The scores in these are close enough that I don't have any evidence proving the opposite as simply playing late can account for a few hundred point swing. It's the reason ppl just starting a sub at the 4 hr mark can still score as high, in that sub, as someone who has been grinding each node constantly at efficient times. So, rough estimate of looking through the top 10 orders and taking the top score tells you around where the current rubberbanding modifier is. Give yourself a 2k cushion is more than.enough to account for the differences as long as you can see the opponent's current sub score.

reckless442

soenottelling wrote:

reckless442 wrote:

soenottelling wrote:

Phantron wrote:

At the individual level you can certainly afford to take it easy if it turns out you've a significant lead on top 2. The only problem with this event is that nobody has any idea of where their relative standing is in the main bracket due to the staggered sub bracket finish time so I guess everyone is assuming for the worst. For all we know reckless could end up winning #1 by a margin of 2000 points, but there's no way she could possibly know at this point due to the way the sub brackets are staggered.

Now when you bring alliance into the picture it gets a bit murkier since you may indeed have to keep on pushing for a good alliance score but that's part of the competition.

Well..u can see top ranked order's player's scores in a sub at any time by looking at alliance tank and clicking the score though. So in this situation..I could tell where she was at.

That said, the point is still valid as that only accounts for 100 players from 10 orders...more depending on your alliance rank. Still hardly accounts for everyone likely in the top of a given bracket

You can tell where I am now, but even if I'm 2000 up, there is no way of knowing if the guy in second place in my main bracket is in a sub-bracket where someone has ground so much that Mr. Second Place has untouched nodes that will give him 5000 in his next clear. Not all sub-brackets are equal. Davecazz just took first in his Alaska sub-bracket with over 7000 points. The leader of my sub-bracket i sat 6349, and nobody else has crossed 6000. Or Mr. Second Place may not have even done his first clear of Alaska while I have. He could have massive points stockpiled and there is no way to know.

The last few events (months?) Have had universal sub bracket rubberbanding...meaning everyone is being rubberbanded to whomever is the overall leader in points as far as I l've seen. The scores in these are close enough that I don't have any evidence proving the opposite as simply playing late can account for a few hundred point swing. It's the reason ppl just starting a sub at the 4 hr mark can still score as high, in that sub, as someone who has been grinding each node constantly at efficient times. So, rough estimate of looking through the top 10 orders and taking the top score tells you around where the current rubberbanding modifier is. Give yourself a 2k cushion is more than.enough to account for the differences as long as you can see the opponent's current sub score.

And pray tell how am I supposed to see my opponent's sub score when it is a near-certainty that we will not be in the same subs?