Official algorithm for scaling

monsieurmojo

Uninspired wrote:

I always assumed the essential nodes put special weight on the essential character for scaling. Possibly something like the average of essential level + top two instead of average of your top 3. Does that possibly impact the stats that should be collected, especially where the essential isn't a top character on someone's roster?

I always wonder about this, too, only there doesn't seem to be any difference in scaling between having a fully covered and championed 4* and having a 1-cover level 70 new release on these nodes. The only thing consistent about them that I see is that they average about 15 levels less than the main CP node, and are worth more points.

Tromb2ch2

aesthetocyst wrote:

Tromb2ch2 wrote:

aesthetocyst wrote:

Describe the players' approach to / consistency in PVE and their typical placement?

Also, are their highest characters fully covered / champed?

Clearly something different about player A. Is he a wizard?

I usually try to place t10 (except 7 day events) I play in cl 8 and the top 3 are champed flaptain, venom, devil dinosaur. And if I am a wizard I clearly am using my powers wrong lol.

And in tegards to the other 3 players, same questions?

They usually try to place high as well (we are in a pve alliance). They all have champed 4* as there highest unboosted characters (but at least one of them had 3* characters in their top 3 boosted).

Tromb2ch2

aesthetocyst wrote:

But do they perform at your level and as consistently?

Past/recent placements are a significant factor in scaling.

In prodigal sun I know 2 of them are currently in t10 I don't know if the other is awake right now to ask him. But yeah we usually shoot for t10.

Polares

DuckyV wrote:

BassMuffinFIve wrote:

Jamie Madrox wrote:

Nobody except Demiurge knows how scaling is calculated, but it's safe to say that there are a number of factors that determine what levels you face in an event and it likely changes based on the event, etc. Same with MMR. Nobody has a sweet clue how it works and anyone that says otherwise is just speculating.

Maybe it's time they released that information then? I think 3 years of suffering trying to guess their formula is enough, don't you?? This should be public knowledge. There is not a single legitimate reason why they haven't shared it with the playerbase yet. Not one. Time to get off your high horse DEMI!

They'll never release how scaling or MMR works because then ppl could game the system even more, which is something that they don't want happening.

They should show how scaling works, game mechanics that affect players so much should be known by players.

And about taking advantage by knowing the system, first, people has been taking advantage of the system for a long while. Anybody that doesn't level its 5s over 350 (which is A LOT of people) is already 'exploiting' the scaling system. We have always had softcappers (3s levelled to 94 anyone?). So I don't see why knowing exactly how it works would make things worse.

And second and more important, the system is broken! No one should have advantage in any game by not levelling its characters! Scaling has always been a mess, MMR has always been a mess! SCL should be the solution, as long as rewards are worth it so you always want to be in the highest SCL possible (every SCL should have a max scaling level, and in PvP you should fight against people in your own SCL level). Devs need to release SCL9 and 10 and make those changes ASAP!

carrion_pigeons

Polares wrote:

No one should have advantage in any game by not leveling its characters!

I mean, yeah, I understand that this is unintuitive and frustrating when you first encounter it, but I don't necessarily agree that it's a True Fact About Games. In the particular situation of MPQ, there are lots of potential different ways you can level up your characters, so the devs are faced with a spectrum of choices: either tune fights based on the most optimal way to level characters on one end, or tune fights based on the least optimal way to level your characters on the other.

What you're advocating amounts to taking that knob all the way over to the second end, there, and I can easily imagine a ton of exploits that would trivialize the game in that situation.

Scaling rises too quickly for players in the 5* tier, granted. I'm not saying scaling isn't an issue that needs addressing. I'm just saying absolutist opinions don't get you very far in the world of design (of anything).

broll

Polares wrote:

No one should have advantage in any game by not leveling its characters!

Conversely no one should be disadvantaged for rostering rare character at an early part of the game (when that's totally doable and seemingly encouraged).

KGB

Suddenreal wrote:

Scaling isn't dependant solely on the boosted characters, but takes in account the boosted level instead of the actual level. Also, I believe the scaling ignores your highest three characters (so low level players still have a fighting chance in the event if they have a 5 or if they have a boosted yet unusable character).

This seems very likely to me. At the very least it seems to be ignoring at least your highest character.

I say this because I have a large soft capped roster (7 2* at 120 and 30 3* at 115 plus a bunch more 2*, 3* and 4* below that). My boosted characters are normally L180-210 range. I recently hit the day 730 re-supply which is Silver Surfer. I rostered him at 255. I expected this to increase my scaling since my top 3 characters would now be 255/210/190 vs before which was 210/190/180. Yet I have seen ZERO difference in the current PvE (I rostered him before the PvE started) in any node as they all start at exactly the same level as they did before I had Surfer (I was writing them down for comparison) and end up at the exact same place. So it appears the algorithm is ignoring my top character.

KGB

smkspy

Champing is a deterrent to soft capping (and champing also ends up being a deterrent to using CP and LTs ironically), but not much of one. From my very first 4champ, I noticed max level hard nodes jumped from 300-310...now about 330 after 5 champed 4s.

But once you get locked into a tier, there is no where else to go but further down the rabbit hole.

Which is why I have no intention of leveling my fives, at all. I mean, not that I really have any besides maybe my 8 cover phoenix that are truly useable anyways, but it would be crazy to lock myself into the 5 star tier and only have that selection of characters to use. And really, that's one of the biggest complaints I see about being a 5 star player. And I can see it starting already in the 4 star transition. Only a handful of 3s are useful and 2s are nothing but roster farming now.

Evilgenius_9

Top 4 are 314, 287, 277, 276. 4* essential node is avg 304 and cp node is 320. Characters are boosted non-champed 4* and then all 3* boosted champs.
I place maybe t300 in pve events, playing scl8, but get max progression for all events (until now - prod son will be the first one I missed in forever). I think it is likely they use progression rather than placement when they consider past performance.

Polares

carrion pigeons wrote:

Polares wrote:

No one should have advantage in any game by not leveling its characters!

I mean, yeah, I understand that this is unintuitive and frustrating when you first encounter it, but I don't necessarily agree that it's a True Fact About Games. In the particular situation of MPQ, there are lots of potential different ways you can level up your characters, so the devs are faced with a spectrum of choices: either tune fights based on the most optimal way to level characters on one end, or tune fights based on the least optimal way to level your characters on the other.

What you're advocating amounts to taking that knob all the way over to the second end, there, and I can easily imagine a ton of exploits that would trivialize the game in that situation.

Scaling rises too quickly for players in the 5* tier, granted. I'm not saying scaling isn't an issue that needs addressing. I'm just saying absolutist opinions don't get you very far in the world of design (of anything).

I don't agree with this statement

I said advantage by not levelling, not getting an advantage by levelling, which are two completely different things, one doesn't imply the other one. It is true that in PvE they want a fair game for everybody, and that implies that levelling your chars doesn't make things easier (having a big roster does) BUT it can't be the opposite, this is what it should not be. And in this game it has always been better in PvE to softcap than levelling your chars. This MUST end.

What I was proposing is fixed scaling depending on your SCL with much better rewards in higher SCL levels (not like SCL7 -> SCL8 :S). You would still be able to chose which SCL you want to play, so if in a particular PvE you want an easier time, or instead of playing with your 5s you want to play with a new 4 (or 3) you would be able to do it, BUT you would be getting lower rewards, so most of the time you would want to play in the higher SCL possible.

This is in my opinion the best solution to scaling. You want the best rewards, you need to fight at your max scaling level (with people facing the exact same scaling level than you do, theorically with very similar rosters), if you prefer and easier time but worse rewards, on the other hand, you can do it too, but most of the time people will just prefer to get the better rewards.

PS: If someone sees problems please comment, if we find a method that is bullet proof I might create a thread... (I hope this is the final goal for SCLs and Devs are doind this to reach that goal).

Bowgentle

Polares wrote:

What I was proposing is fixed scaling depending on your SCL with much better rewards in higher SCL levels (not like SCL7 -> SCL8 :S). You would still be able to chose which SCL you want to play, so if in a particular PvE you want an easier time, or instead of playing with your 5s you want to play with a new 4 (or 3) you would be able to do it, BUT you would be getting lower rewards, so most of the time you would want to play in the higher SCL possible.

This is in my opinion the best solution to scaling. You want the best rewards, you need to fight at your max scaling level (with people facing the exact same scaling level than you do, theorically with very similar rosters), if you prefer and easier time but worse rewards, on the other hand, you can do it too, but most of the time people will just prefer to get the better rewards.

PS: If someone sees problems please comment, if we find a method that is bullet proof I might create a thread... (I hope this is the final goal for SCLs and Devs are doind this to reach that goal).

Not going to happen after SCL are set up the way they are set up.
SCL 8 has people running barely champed 3s and people running 550 5s all in the same level.
Who do you scale your fixed levels for?

Fixed levels may have worked if the jumps between shield levels would be what they should be - eg every level clearly designed for a very narrow group of players, with huge gaps between the tiers.

The way it is now, and the way it will be forever since they started with miniscule differences, it will not work to have fixed enemy levels.

Polares

Bowgentle wrote:

Polares wrote:

What I was proposing is fixed scaling depending on your SCL with much better rewards in higher SCL levels (not like SCL7 -> SCL8 :S). You would still be able to chose which SCL you want to play, so if in a particular PvE you want an easier time, or instead of playing with your 5s you want to play with a new 4 (or 3) you would be able to do it, BUT you would be getting lower rewards, so most of the time you would want to play in the higher SCL possible.

This is in my opinion the best solution to scaling. You want the best rewards, you need to fight at your max scaling level (with people facing the exact same scaling level than you do, theorically with very similar rosters), if you prefer and easier time but worse rewards, on the other hand, you can do it too, but most of the time people will just prefer to get the better rewards.

PS: If someone sees problems please comment, if we find a method that is bullet proof I might create a thread... (I hope this is the final goal for SCLs and Devs are doind this to reach that goal).

Not going to happen after SCL are set up the way they are set up.
SCL 8 has people running barely champed 3s and people running 550 5s all in the same level.
Who do you scale your fixed levels for?

Fixed levels may have worked if the jumps between shield levels would be what they should be - eg every level clearly designed for a very narrow group of players, with huge gaps between the tiers.

The way it is now, and the way it will be forever since they started with miniscule differences, it will not work to have fixed enemy levels.

I agree, you are totally right BUT they can change how SCLs work and how are they distributed.

But it is true it might be too late, and Devs might have lost the perfect opportunity to fix scaling and MMR

carrion_pigeons

Polares wrote:

carrion pigeons wrote:

Polares wrote:

No one should have advantage in any game by not leveling its characters!

I mean, yeah, I understand that this is unintuitive and frustrating when you first encounter it, but I don't necessarily agree that it's a True Fact About Games. In the particular situation of MPQ, there are lots of potential different ways you can level up your characters, so the devs are faced with a spectrum of choices: either tune fights based on the most optimal way to level characters on one end, or tune fights based on the least optimal way to level your characters on the other.

What you're advocating amounts to taking that knob all the way over to the second end, there, and I can easily imagine a ton of exploits that would trivialize the game in that situation.

Scaling rises too quickly for players in the 5* tier, granted. I'm not saying scaling isn't an issue that needs addressing. I'm just saying absolutist opinions don't get you very far in the world of design (of anything).

I don't agree with this statement

I said advantage by not levelling, not getting an advantage by levelling, which are two completely different things, one doesn't imply the other one. It is true that in PvE they want a fair game for everybody, and that implies that levelling your chars doesn't make things easier (having a big roster does) BUT it can't be the opposite, this is what it should not be. And in this game it has always been better in PvE to softcap than levelling your chars. This MUST end.

What I was proposing is fixed scaling depending on your SCL with much better rewards in higher SCL levels (not like SCL7 -> SCL8 :S). You would still be able to chose which SCL you want to play, so if in a particular PvE you want an easier time, or instead of playing with your 5s you want to play with a new 4 (or 3) you would be able to do it, BUT you would be getting lower rewards, so most of the time you would want to play in the higher SCL possible.

This is in my opinion the best solution to scaling. You want the best rewards, you need to fight at your max scaling level (with people facing the exact same scaling level than you do, theorically with very similar rosters), if you prefer and easier time but worse rewards, on the other hand, you can do it too, but most of the time people will just prefer to get the better rewards.

PS: If someone sees problems please comment, if we find a method that is bullet proof I might create a thread... (I hope this is the final goal for SCLs and Devs are doind this to reach that goal).

Here's the inherent problem: exponential scaling with exponential rewards like you're proposing works marvelously for PvE, while the only scaling that really makes any sense in PvP is linear. This is true across lots of games: look at WoW for a great example of the gearing conflict between competitive and cooperative play.

The devs have tried to hit a sweet spot in between by using a polynomial scaling curve and a linear rewards curve, and periodically adjusting both as the shape of the curve of player power changes. This works in theory if they have good data and keep updating things regularly enough, but they really don't, and haven't.

The alternative is to separate PvE and PvP completely. Make it so you can scale everything exponentially in PvE but flatten everyone out in PvP. Most RPGs with competitive elements actually do this, historically, from Pokemon to Starcraft. The problem with doing it in a FTP game is that it discourages whales, so (once again) sacrificing good game design on the altar of a terrible business model is the choice that gets made.

acescracked

broll wrote:

Polares wrote:

No one should have advantage in any game by not leveling its characters!

Conversely no one should be disadvantaged for rostering rare character at an early part of the game (when that's totally doable and seemingly encouraged).

They also shouldn't get an unreal advatage either. The single cover 5* can't be ignored when that player has an all 1*, 2* or even developing 3* roster. If scaling didn't change for them they could clear nodes way faster than same roster without a single 5* cover.

Now they kinda get locked into then using that 5* all the time. Though i think most players always use at least one of their highest characters each node.

deadtaco

acescracked wrote:

They also shouldn't get an unreal advatage either. The single cover 5* can't be ignored when that player has an all 1*, 2* or even developing 3* roster. If scaling didn't change for them they could clear nodes way faster than same roster without a single 5* cover.

Now they kinda get locked into then using that 5* all the time. Though i think most players always use at least one of their highest characters each node.

The only way to prevent that is to put up a gate to prevent players from getting higher level characters until they meet some goal. Like no 4 or 5* characters until you champ a 3*.

I was in this case as I got an OML and Phoenix while still in 2* territory. This was just before the scaling change and PVE was closed off to me. I had no means to advance at that point other than PVP, which was slow going as I was also an easy target.

If rare characters are mad available to new players then they should not be stopped from playing the game as much as anyone. And yes, I was locked into OML for a while after that.

Phumade

I would love it if they just said:

SCL 8: Open Class anybody runs anything.
SCL 7: No 5*, 4*& 3* only (including max champed 4*), No 2*, No 1*

SCL 6: No 5*, all 1* to 4* chars (including max champed 4*)
SCL 5 and lower can keep the same scl requirements.


But overall:
The top 2 clearance levels should be considered Whale tier players. (All tactics are legal, CCs, bakers, snipers). Some restrictions are fine if your trying to separate the 500+ 5* from the regular 5*. But absolutely, there should be an open tier where players can employ any playstyle or tactic that they can devise.

The next 3 tiers should be reserved for the 4* and 3* characters. Yes many people have earned 5* (but they are more trophy brags than viable chars). Its reasonable to have some gradiation for those who's 4* are over level 300 and those that are champed but 20 levels below. I also think there needs to be one SCL that lets them "grill and bake" with lower level 1*, 2*.

Putting aside the debate about CCs. Its abundantly clear that well over 90% of the players don't know how to correctly recognize and connect how MMR and Scaling are affecting their choice of opponents. Which ultimately means they don't have skills or knowledge to work as coordinated alliance. Ultimately its sloppy and boring gameplay if your forced to play in isolation without social connection to other similar players.

I'd be happy to be in a cut throat open class sCL10 if that meant I could work with 5 other knowledgeable players to break open an alliance invasion from other elite T5 alliances, or make a cc train, or wolf pack snipe another alliance etc...


To train that level of play means people have to work together and coordinate at a very close and detailed level. Those skills are only developed by practicing them at lower levels and developing new tactics.

I was on the FoX KOS list for close to 10 seasons and I can guarantee that experience made me far sharper in recognizing when my hops were too long, and much more strategic in how I chose targets and alliance partners.

SummerGlau

Iron Man being boosted should have increased my scaling for this event (286 vs OML/Phoenix/IMXLVI all at 270)
I don't think he did