Scaling for 5 char teams is broken, please fix it Devs!

Polares

I have been suspecting for a while, reading others experience and with my own, that scaling in PvE when you are in 5 land makes competition harder than in the rest of layers. Last Boss Rush was a clear demonstration, people in 3 and 4 land managing to beat the bosses in rounds 6 and 7 sometimes, when I was being wiped ALL THE TIME (with my difficulty level I could not use the teams most people was suggesting, I tried and failed repeatedly). Even people with the best rosters, most 5s champed, was being wiped all the time. So, if the people with the best rosters in the game are being wiped most of the time, something is clearly wrong. But is this just me or there is really something going on?

Now, new Heroic tournament, with all my champed 5s locked out, I can check and compare difficulty levels when you just have champed 4s and 3s. Let's see:

Heroic: (Subs 1 and 2)
Max chars Xforce 391, Xpool 385, Peggy 383
Avg 386

Hardest node max difficulty: 324
Hardest essential node max difficulty: 309

Minimum Difference 62 levels (Avg - hardest)


Normal PvE:
Max chars OML 454, PH 452, SS 451
Avg 452

Hardest node max difficulty: 430
Hardest essential node max difficulty: 405-410

Minimum Difference 22 levels (Avg - hardest)


Whaaaaaat????, there is more level difference between my team and my enemies when using champed 4s ?!?!?!?! This doesn't look right AT ALL. It is obvious the curve they are using for setting the difficulty levels is wrong in the upper level. In fact, it should not be a curve! It doesn't make sense that it gets closer to the user level roster in the higher end!


Observations:

- I can use basically just 4-5 characters in any given PvE, the 3 champed 5s I have, and some 4s like Peggy, Punisher, Iceman, MoonK when buffed. SS has improved but he really doesn't add anything to the OML+PH duo, so Peggy is usually my third char when no other 4 is buffed (this will change whenever I champ GG, IM or Spidey).

- when I had just OML and PH levelled my hardest node difficulty was around 405, so it looks like when you have just 2 champed 5s things are not that bad, specially in essential nodes. Those extra 20-25 levels are a big deal because of how scaling works, a 430 Iceman is much stronger than a 405 level Iceman, and a team composed of PH, OML, SS is as strong as PH, OML + buffed Peggy/Iceman/MoonK/etc so depending who is your third 5, he might be adding just some extra difficulty levels for no real gain.

- 4 scale A LOT when over 400, so when the node is composed of 4s and they are 430 level they are quite hard to beat. Simulator and nodes in Boss fights ARE REALLY HARD. As an example Moon Knight green or Cyclops red can one-shot kill any of my chars (a level 320 Moon green does around 20-23k which will never one-shot kill any 370-390 level 4)

- Essential nodes, specially in boss nodes, are super unfair, and difficulty is no set correctly. We have to fight 430+ level enemies with a 200 level 2? or with a 270 level 3? How is this fair? This battles are basically 2 vs 3. Essential node difficulty should be calculated with just the best 2 chars of your roster and then add the char you are forced to use. I don't understand why this nodes are not calculated like this. Reducing just 20 levels it is obviously not enough when your enemies are 430+ level.

- Matches are last much longer for us, all my enemies are 45k+ hitpoints, some like Moonstone are even 55k hitpoints. Whenever I manage to champ GG and IM I think things will improve a little, but SS, PH and OML are not that fast, compared to the top tier 4s like Iceman, Cyclops, Rhulk. It is also much easier to use accelerators like Im and switch in 4 land (3s die super fast when matched against 430+ level enemies), and there are no good accelerators in 5 land yet.

- Champing 5s require A LOT of time or A LOT of money. When we got to 3 land or 4 land there was also a time, were we 'endured' similar penances, when we had just 3 champed 3s or 4s, but it was much much easier to level the 4th-7th champions at that time. Most people will need probably a year or more at the current rate to get their 6th 5 champion (I hope this will be improved with SCL9 and SCL10, but we will see).

- 5s are never buffed in PvE (I don't know if this is good or bad, probably good but who knows...)


So, how is this possible, why the difference in levels is so much bigger in 5 land? This doesn't look right or even fair. Not only we have less chars we can use, and a much smaller combo combinations, difficulty is much higher! And 4 characters at those levels are stronger than normal 5s (it was the same thing with 3s, but they were 'fixed'). I said it already, but a 450+ level Iceman or Peggy are stronger than 450 level 5s (IMHB at 470 level does 3k for each red AP and has 90k hitpoints!!!) The only big advantage of 5s is match damage which helps a bit to reduce the difference, but just a bit (cascades are big though, this is why PH is so strong).

[Plea Time]
We are the more loyal players of this game, the ones we have played the most or the ones that have spent the most (or even both, probably both ) so, Devs, please, fix this difficulty disparity. I get that PvE should be equally as hard for everybody, I am not saying it should be easier than in the rest of layers, it should be more or less the same difficulty level. And right now it is not, for anybody with 3+ champed 5s IT IS HARDER.

PS: This are of course just my observations, other 5 land players (3+) might prove me wrong
PS: I don't want 4 power levels to be reduced, I just want scaling to be reduced. I like that 4s can be as strong or more than 5s.

Edit:

And of course, Strange event has the same problems than Boss Rush. Kaecillius is level 513, but we need to use 3s to beat him????

And Ultron minions at level 410 have 100k+ hitpoints and match damage as 5s. And some add two criticals every turn!!!! (doing 8k damage each).

Seriously Devs ????? Seriously ???????

jobob

Scaling was BEYOND broken for 5* rosters in the Boss rush.

For normal PVE, it's do-able... but, really, who likes fighting level 450+ 2* who scale up to ridiculous numbers?

Polares

jobob wrote:

Scaling was BEYOND broken for 5* rosters in the Boss rush.

For normal PVE, it's do-able... but, really, who likes fighting level 450+ 2* who scale up to ridiculous numbers?

I think most PvEs are doable, when the enemies are goons (except Muscles), and when they are 2s and 3s, but when the enemies are 4s, then no, it is not doable, enemies one-shot killing my chars I think is too much.

And even though it is doable, it takes much longer, so when new chars are released that hurts our chances of winning them.

elvy75

I agree that scaling for 5* rosters is broken. All boss events i managed to get over top progression (personal one) but in boss rush, i got to round 8, and then just kept on wiping. That wasnt fun, especially as i was hearing how people with 3 and 4* rosters were clearing round 8. Why in the world did i leveled up my characters? I wasnt too complaining for the pve scaling, but this heroic showed me how much easier id have it if i had underleveled roster.

Please devs fix this!!!

amusingfoo1

I don't know that the difficulty gets all that much worse, but it's a certainty that things slow down in 5* land. My grinds in this heroic are taking half an hour less than in normal PvEs. And 20-30 minutes less on initial clear.

Boss Rush, though... That was bad. An alliance-mate who finished it; his enemies in round 8 (and he even has one champion 5*) were 40 levels below my round 6 enemies. Even round seven wasn't happening for me (actually, round six was already iffy).

fmftint

Normal event T3 average is 415 (420, 420, 405) with max enemies of 398
6% differential

Thus heroic T3 average is 350 (386, 371, 295) with max enemies of 312
10% differential

Fightmastermpq

I've commented on this in the past as well and I completely agree. First of all - I don't think that having a 5* roster entitles players to an easier time in PvE, and I don't think a system where the rich get richer is good for the game. But I DO think that the scales are tipped in favor of lower leveled rosters. A few additional comments.....

I just champed Peggy during Unstable ISO-8 and so my strongest team was IM40/Iceman/Peggy, with all of them being boosted. I forget the exact levels, but my Iceman is pretty high so something like 300/400/386 maybe. My scaling is based off of my 456/453/453 5*s and tops out around 420 I think? So players with 4* rosters were using the same offensive team as me, but facing far easier opponents. Seems unfair.

Now, you could say "but how is that any different from someone with a champed M4xPun/Carnage as their only 4* characters and the rest 3*s?" It's a good point. It's hard to complain about PvE when you clearly have a roster built for PvE. The problem with this argument is two-fold... First, there is no such thing as a 5* PvE roster, and moreover it's functionally impossible at this point to selectively build a 5* roster like you would a 3* and 4* one - you take what 5* covers you get, and you will never see a thread asking "I'm short on roster slots, should I sell my Banner to make room for Black Bolt?" Secondly, 5* scaling is through the roof. The difference between a level 250 and 270 enemy is nothing compared to the difference between a level 400 and 420 enemy.

Seems like 4* characters see greater benefit to their ability strength when they are boosted compared to 5* characters. My 456 PHX does about 1k damage/red AP and puts out some strikes, but a boosted Peggy or IMHB or XFDP or Iceman does.....a lot more than that. For 12 green AP my 400 (56 levels lower than PHX) Iceman was doing close to 18k AoE. So IMO 5*s are inherently lacking in speed to make up for the massive scaling wall that they have to overcome to be really competitive in PvE.

Polares

Fightmastermpq wrote:

Now, you could say "but how is that any different from someone with a champed M4xPun/Carnage as their only 4* characters and the rest 3*s?" It's a good point.

I think this is not really a fair comparison, I already said in the main post, but there is a big difference regarding the time you need to champ a 3, a 4 and a 5. You can champ a 3 in a couple of months, a 4 in 4-5 months, for a 5 you need a year, if you are lucky!!! (or spending thousands of dollars). So yes, when you start your 4 transition there are couple of months that are hard, but soon after things improve a lot. Things are not like this in 5 land.

There are also other reasons that I think invalidate this reasoning. First, when you get to 4 land, you can still use your 3s. They are not as strong, but some like IF, IM, switch, Cap, etc. are perfectly usable while you still have 3-4 champed 4s. The level difference is not that big (buffed 4 370 - buffed 3 270 -> 100 levels). When you have 3 5s, using 4s is most of the time not an option, the strongest ones might be usable, but your options a much more limited (the level difference raises to 180 levels). Second, right now there are 40 - 4s and 40 - 3s, there is a char for almost any situation. It is not the same with 5s. This will improve, of course, but right now the number of options, even for the super whales, is quite limited, and we can't use 3s or 4s (see previous point).

Sm0keyJ0e

In my mind, there are two rather obvious differences for those in 5* land that make it feel like progression is a bad thing (and not the cool, fuzzy feeling of advancing your roster like in a normal progression game):

1. There is limited roster composition. Lucky enough to champ Phx? Enjoy her, because now you HAVE to use her for every match. Dr. Doom is required? Sucks trying to fire her red now without generating enemy black attack tiles. Anything less than 5* land you have a lot of freedom in building a roster to counter who you are facing. In 5* land you have to use them because of scaling. Most boosted 4's don't even help.

2. Everything takes longer. As pointed out by someone above, clears in heroics are surprisingly fast compared to normal PVE's, likely because of the health pools you are facing and again because you are stuck using whatever 5*'s you happen to have champedin regular PVE. OML is ridiculously slow to get going and with his healing banner every single turn, chewing through three enemies with 60k+ health is a time suck. The only usable stuns are in 4* land and below at this point (5* stuns suck at this point).

I'm sure #2 will correct itself over time as more 5*'s are released and people gradually max them, but man it's a slog right now.

Bowgentle

Sm0keyJ0e wrote:

2. Everything takes longer. As pointed out by someone above, clears in heroics are surprisingly fast compared to normal PVE's, likely because of the health pools you are facing and again because you are stuck using whatever 5*'s you happen to have champedin regular PVE. OML is ridiculously slow to get going and with his healing banner every single turn, chewing through three enemies with 60k+ health is a time suck. The only usable stuns are in 4* land and below at this point (5* stuns suck at this point).

I'm sure #2 will correct itself over time as more 5*'s are released and people gradually max them, but man it's a slog right now.

I'm wondering if it will, because after seeing CL8 I'm starting to wonder why I should keep playing, constantly hoping for improvements that are clearly not coming, eg a clearer progression into 5* land.

If the only way to improve my roster is to hoard Latest and CP for 9 months in the hope of maxing one of the new 5* characters, that's a sure sign that retention is going to fall off a cliff at some point.
Not many vets who got unlucky in the 5* lottery so far will stick it out, hoping beyond hope that a) CL 9 and 10 will address this problem and b) that they will come soon enough to help.

Fightmastermpq

Polares wrote:

Fightmastermpq wrote:

Now, you could say "but how is that any different from someone with a champed M4xPun/Carnage as their only 4* characters and the rest 3*s?" It's a good point.

I think this is not really a fair comparison, I already said in the main post, but there is a big difference regarding the time you need to champ a 3, a 4 and a 5. You can champ a 3 in a couple of months, a 4 in 4-5 months, for a 5 you need a year, if you are lucky!!! (or spending thousands of dollars). So yes, when you start your 4 transition there are couple of months that are hard, but soon after things improve a lot. Things are not like this in 5 land.

There are also other reasons that I think invalidate this reasoning. First, when you get to 4 land, you can still use your 3s. They are not as strong, but some like IF, IM, switch, Cap, etc. are perfectly usable while you still have 3-4 champed 4s. The level difference is not that big (buffed 4 370 - buffed 3 270 -> 100 levels). When you have 3 5s, using 4s is most of the time not an option, the strongest ones might be usable, but your options a much more limited (the level difference raises to 180 levels). Second, right now there are 40 - 4s and 40 - 3s, there is a char for almost any situation. It is not the same with 5s. This will improve, of course, but right now the number of options, even for the super whales, is quite limited, and we can't use 3s or 4s (see previous point).

Right, that's the point I was trying to make in the next few sentences. Basically, in the 3* and 4* tier you can make a conscience decision on whether or not you want a PvE or PvP focused roster..."who should I champ next, LCap or CMags? JG or IMHB?" Typically the first response will be "are you focusing on PvE or PvP?" You don't see threads saying "I've got 2 Black Bolt covers, and 2 OML covers in my queue, but only enough ISO to champ one - who should I champ, who should I sell?" It doesn't happen, there is no ability to decide whether or not you will pursue PvP or PvE in the 5* tier - you have to try to do both with the covers you luck into.

Markot

Heroic: (Sub 3)
Max chars Colosuss 291, Xpool 287, XWolf 287
Avg 288

Hardest node max difficulty: 290
Hardest essential node max difficulty: 267

Minimum Difference -2 levels (Avg - hardest)

So at my level of roster, hardest node is above average of my (according to their level) best characters.

My roster: 3 champed 4* (all not usable in this heroic), many 4* cover maxed waiting for ISO at lvl 165-200, all champed 3* (levels 187-204), 5* all at basic level 255 with 1-8 covers

Polares

Markot wrote:

Heroic: (Sub 3)
Max chars Colosuss 291, Xpool 287, XWolf 287
Avg 288

Hardest node max difficulty: 290
Hardest essential node max difficulty: 267

Minimum Difference -2 levels (Avg - hardest)

So at my level of roster, hardest node is above average of my (according to their level) best characters.

My roster: 3 champed 4* (all not usable in this heroic), many 4* cover maxed waiting for ISO at lvl 165-200, all champed 3* (levels 187-204), 5* all at basic level 255 with 1-8 covers

But this is more or less normal. In 1 and 2 land enemies might even have bigger levels than your average in the hardest node. Scaling of enemies and chars is supposed to work like this. The problem is that scaling in the higher end is super crazy high and it is what makes the difference in levels so much worse, than in 3 land.

In 5 land the difference between levels should be at least as much as in 4 land, the problem is that it gets reduced like in 3 land (but with a much higher scaling, which makes this so much harder).

Scaling:
4s from 270 -> 370 they double the dmg values
4s from 370 -> 450 they more than quadruplicate the original dmg values

So someone like Moon Knight does 55k dmg for 12 AP or Cyclops red does 45k+ dmg for 10AP.

9k + strike tiles for 9AP or 22k for 8AP is not that great compared to this (even though GG black is probably the single strongest attack in 5 land).

mpqr7

My best 5* is an OML at lv 420, and my rest are at 255, waiting to have 13 covers (bss at 280, because why not).

I am completely terrified though because at some point (1 year, 2 years?) I will hopefully have two+ champed 5*s (one can dream!), so I will be suffering the same as these posters.

I would think that having champed 5*s should be a #SquadGoals, not something to dread. And I'm certainly not asking for pve to be markedly easier at that point, but it should not be way harder either.

Polares

mpqr7 wrote:

My best 5* is an OML at lv 420, and my rest are at 255, waiting to have 13 covers (bss at 280, because why not).

I am completely terrified though because at some point (1 year, 2 years?) I will hopefully have two+ champed 5*s (one can dream!), so I will be suffering the same as these posters.

I would think that having champed 5*s should be a #SquadGoals, not something to dread. And I'm certainly not asking for pve to be markedly easier at that point, but it should not be way harder either.

Things are easier in PvP, well it used to be easier, now there is a lot of people with 5s, so I am not 100% sure it is still easier than for people in 4 land with 20+ champed 4s and 350 level 5s. It is probably easier, but I am not 100% sure anymore.

But in PvE is definitely much worse, as I said, it is always slower and is specially hard in Simulator and Boss events. Nodes with 430+ level 4s is a nightmare, and if we have to use 200 - 300 level chars as essential chars is even worse.

Again, looks like soft capping at 350 is the way to go

Polares

I want to add that scaling difficulty and how scaling works after 270 level also forbids you from using 8-11 5s with your champed 5s.

We were promised that we would be able to use 5s very early, but in the end this has been proven wrong. The reason is again how scaling works. Scaling over 270 is not linear, is quadratic. Example:

PH red damage (5 covers):
255 -> 2.3k dmg
360 -> 4.5k dmg
450 -> 9k dmg

550 -> 18k dmg

So every 100 levels it duplicates the previous value. This of course makes the 360 to 450 so much important than the 255 to 360, and basically makes all 5s almost useless until they reach 405+ level.

If the damage was linear we would have something like this (using 450 level as max)
255 -> 2.3k dmg
360 -> 5.6k dmg
450 -> 9k dmg
550 -> 12k dmg

This would make 5s so much useful at the medium range.

We could use 550 level as max so all 5s do more dmg, but what it needs to be adjuested is this formula for everybody (everybody over 270). This would make 4s less powerful when buffed, like it happened to 3s. But quadratic scaling has A LOT of problems in the higher end.

jobob

Sm0keyJ0e wrote:

2. Everything takes longer.

...

I'm sure #2 will correct itself over time as more 5*'s are released and people gradually max them, but man it's a slog right now.

Just so you know... it won't correct itself. With all 10 champed 5* ranging from lvl 463 - 491... it still takes a loooong time to clear the hard nodes.

Part of the issue is that all the best AP generators are still in the 3* tier, so the fastest clear still requires you to use 3* against level 500 enemies.

Phx/GG/SWitch
Phx/BSS/IM40
BSS/Natty/IM40
Natty/SL/IF

jobob

Also, let me say that a good way to help with this would be to make 4* covers much, much more common.

4* don't compete with 5*... or so I thought. Once I started getting some of the better ones into the 350 - 370 range, though... I found that, when boosted, they are often better than champed 5*. The problem is, however, most people won't agree with me because most people don't have multiple 4* over 350. As 5* tier becomes the meta, D3/Demi really needs to focus on helping players add champ levels to 4*, to continue to make them relevant to the game.

westnyy2

First of all, I agree Boss Rush was completely broken for 5 star rosters. There were no gimmicks or winfinite options, just loss after loss.

PVE is something different. Heroics aside I believe it to be fair. Before the new scaling, I would own PVE due to my match damage. Matches went quick and transitioners had no chance to match our speed. Under the new scaling, I do find it much closer. I don't love the slog of level 480 opponents either but speed wise it is much closer to the rest of the population.

In the most recent PVE contest with the new Blade as a prize, 4 of the top 5 had at least 2 champed 5's. The only 4 star roster finished 4th. Not only did we own the top 5, but I routinely finished 1st in all but one sub. I don't go for placement often in PVE but when I do I can routinely get what I want.

Orion

jobob wrote:

Also, let me say that a good way to help with this would be to make 4* covers much, much more common.

4* don't compete with 5*... or so I thought. Once I started getting some of the better ones into the 350 - 370 range, though... I found that, when boosted, they are often better than champed 5*. The problem is, however, most people won't agree with me because most people don't have multiple 4* over 350. As 5* tier becomes the meta, D3/Demi really needs to focus on helping players add champ levels to 4*, to continue to make them relevant to the game.

Exactly. A 4* at level 450 is WAY more powerful than a 5* at the same level. I'm starting to see this in PvP where the superwhales are using a boosted 4* in the level 450 range over their level 475-500 5*s.

I see this all the time in the Team-Ups that I receive. I ask for TUs of the 4*s that are boosted for that week. So when I get them at level 370, the boosted level is 479 and they are crazy! Like 4Pool red doing 36k crazy. Or Rulk green doing 18k unboosted / 36k AoE boosted crazy. Surgical Strike does 3705 per tile and so on...

So champion levels were designed to let 4*s compete with 5*s eventually. But for mere mortals, the amount of time it takes to get a 4* to that level could be years. They have to loosen the spigot a bit.

Vhailorx

I have a miderately deep 4* roster. So i am sort of in between camps on this argument.

But by and large i have a hard time believing that 5* players actually have a harder time in pve. Non-scientific examination of leader boards show a very healthy proportion of both 4* and 5* players putting up top scores. 5* rosters seems about as common as soft-cappers. Considering both 5* players and soft-cappers are small fractions of the overall playerbase, i would guess that such rosters are over-represented at the top.

This effect is even more noticeable in pre-boss rush boss events, when 5*s players are the only rosters that can go toe to toe with the round 8 bosses. Those alliances that finished 16 rounds in civil war are chock full of 5* players.

All of that said, i buy that 5* players have a worse experience than lower level rosters. They are forced to use just a few characters in every match because he gulf between 4* and 5* character is so big. Plus the massive 5* tier health pools might make everything last a lot longer, and even 30 seconds extra per match adds a significant amount of time to each grind.

So all in all, i think quality of life improvements for 5* players would be good. But we should also keep the 'plight' of 5* players in perspective.

Edited for terrible typing