5* Soft-Capping: Worth It?

Polares

Softcapping makes sense? Yes it does, softcapping 5s at 360 is a very intelligent choice that will help you a lot in PvE. And not just that, the most important thing is that softcapping makes all your roster relevant. Once you go 450 your 4s, 3s become irrelevant. In a softcapped roster you can use all your 5s with all your 4s, and this is a very important reason to softcap, at least until you can champ 4 to 6 5s that is when I think it is better to jump to full 5 land.

huktonfonix wrote:

Lots of community bickering on this, but honestly this all goes back to poor game design and should be addressed as such. A very successful game designer (Mark Rosewater, Magic the Gathering) has stated repeatedly that one of the tenets of good game design is to incentivize players to do things that lead to fun game play. If the best ways to succeed at the game involve strategies that are counter intuitive and unfun, players will learn and follow those strategies, but they'll resent the game and eventually quit.

There are examples of counter intuitive, unfun strategies being beneficial in most games, but they're extremely rare in a well-designed game. To carry the football analogies further, think of Brian Westbrook taking a knee on the one yard-line against Dallas instead of scoring, or teams playing their backup QB after clinching the conference. Most of the time it is obviously best to field your strongest team and score as many points as possible, and the times when teams have incentive not to do so tend to cause controversy if not outrage.

....

TL;DR - we can argue with each other about the right way to play the game, but it is ultimately the responsibility of the game designers to craft a game that properly rewards the style of play that they want and that is fun for the players. This game is littered with countless examples of failures to meet that responsibility, and instead coasts on its addictive nature (pokemon syndrome), popular license, and robust community.

Yeah that is basically it.

It is the same as playing SCL7 when you can play SCL8 because the rewards are so similar there is no point in going SCL8. Or as someone else pointed out, it is like being 'forced' to hoarding.

There are things really hard to fix, like PvP, but softcapping/scaling IS super easy to fix. It really is.

Reecoh

broll wrote:

It's statistically preposterous that he has only 1 4* champ but full covered 5*.

I don't think it's preposterous. I have just champed my second 4* in the last week, and I also got my 13th cover for 5* Strange this week as well.

I had hoarded all of of the Legendary tokens & CP I had received (minus a bit of very early play) for the first 10 or so months of game play while I moved through 2* & 3* roster building, and then dumped it all at once to jump into 4*. I feel like all of the advice I had read while learning about the game led to this conclusion, and I expect it's not uncommon.

When I did spend it all, I put it all into Legendary tokens. I knew I'd have fewer pulls, but since I was HP & ISO limited anyway, I wanted to limit the possible number of 5* pulled to the 3. After that and another ~3 months I have maxed 1 5*, with some help from CS doing cover swaps.

That being said, I have no plans of leveling any 5* beyond 270 until I have many 4*s champed and they start pushing my scaling up when boosted. I'm primarily a PVE player and my difficulty on the harder nodes went up when I added my 5* characters & each of the two 4*s were champed (just rostering 1 5* increased the nodes by about 10 levels) even though none of those characters were in the top levels of my boosted roster at the time.

TxMoose

Skrofa wrote:

On topic though.
As the game stands... For pve there is no reason whatsover not only to level 5* but even to roster them at all!

I understand your point, but don't necessarily agree with it. oml with yellow. strange with blue and yellow covered. thanos with black covered. bolt with black covered. there are many 5s that are game changing no matter the scaling, even in pve. pve (high end ranking) is all about speed and those I mentioned (other than oml, he's just a pack saver) are very, very fast.

Fightmastermpq

TxMoose wrote:

Skrofa wrote:

On topic though.
As the game stands... For pve there is no reason whatsover not only to level 5* but even to roster them at all!

I understand your point, but don't necessarily agree with it. oml with yellow. strange with blue and yellow covered. thanos with black covered. bolt with black covered. there are many 5s that are game changing no matter the scaling, even in pve. pve (high end ranking) is all about speed and those I mentioned (other than oml, he's just a pack saver) are very, very fast.

And this is my point. At the end of the day, players that are using these characters while keeping them under-leveled to take T10 PvE spots over 5* players are abusing a broken scaling mechanic. It's part of the game, and you can play it how you want. But I hate players that do this just as much as I hate the game. Yes, I'm hating the player AND the game.

Skrofa

TxMoose wrote:

Skrofa wrote:

On topic though.
As the game stands... For pve there is no reason whatsover not only to level 5* but even to roster them at all!

I understand your point, but don't necessarily agree with it. oml with yellow. strange with blue and yellow covered. thanos with black covered. bolt with black covered. there are many 5s that are game changing no matter the scaling, even in pve. pve (high end ranking) is all about speed and those I mentioned (other than oml, he's just a pack saver) are very, very fast.

You are absolutely right about that, but still, very specific covers. I have oml with 1 red. Bolt with yellow. Spidey green. Widow black. Strange purple. Not much help.

spiderpool

Fightmastermpq wrote:

TxMoose wrote:

Skrofa wrote:

On topic though.
As the game stands... For pve there is no reason whatsover not only to level 5* but even to roster them at all!

I understand your point, but don't necessarily agree with it. oml with yellow. strange with blue and yellow covered. thanos with black covered. bolt with black covered. there are many 5s that are game changing no matter the scaling, even in pve. pve (high end ranking) is all about speed and those I mentioned (other than oml, he's just a pack saver) are very, very fast.

And this is my point. At the end of the day, players that are using these characters while keeping them under-leveled to take T10 PvE spots over 5* players are abusing a broken scaling mechanic. It's part of the game, and you can play it how you want. But I hate players that do this just as much as I hate the game. Yes, I'm hating the player AND the game.

If they want us to fully level our characters then they shouldn't make so darn hard to do so. Right now I have 17 champed 4 stars and I have a 9 cover oml at lvl 390 ( highest he can get) and I have a 13 cover Thanos at 380.

I could level Thanos to max level... or I can use my very limited iso to champ my 4blade and teen Jean that each have several covers in my que. One of these options will give me a deeper 4* roster, a better selection of champed 4*'s to choose from and some champ rewards. Maybe if they didn't make it so hard to level characters up I might consider champing thanos, but....

Then what? My next highest character will be a champed 4 , my highest one is 284, or a 390 oml. From what I've heard maxing a 5* changes your mmr to a position where you will see nothing but double champed 5*'s and I'll be trying to fight them with just one. I'll be a sitting duck. Why would I do this? And what the heck would I do when the pvp event is 3* Thanos and I can't use 5* Thanos at all?

Choosing to use the scarce iso I have to better my 4* and improve my enjoyment of the game seems like just smart resource management more than gaming the system. Maybe once I get several 5* up to 13 covers I'll consider spending the 2 million ish iso to do so but to level up just Thanos seems foolish.

Daredevil217

Fightmastermpq wrote:

And this is my point. At the end of the day, players that are using these characters while keeping them under-leveled to take T10 PvE spots over 5* players are abusing a broken scaling mechanic. It's part of the game, and you can play it how you want. But I hate players that do this just as much as I hate the game. Yes, I'm hating the player AND the game.

The way I see it, I'll never be a softcapper now that I am in 4* land. I have 10 champed 4s and I think all the rest are at level 70. I just started bringing some up to level 140 to compete in Crash. But that still leaves, what? 30+ (and counting) 4* characters that I could still bring to 270. Not to mention the 2* farm where I am considering opting to roster new versions rather than sell and re-roster. And then there's the occasional new 3* release to champ. So if I have a max-covered OML that I keep at the same level as my 4* champs but choose to use my iso to level up other characters instead, does that make me a soft-capper?

I think there is a VERY small percentage of players (if any?) who have more iso than they have iso needs. So if someone decides to use their iso to champ a third OBW, and a new 4*, while leaving Old Man Logan at a level similar to their 4*, is that soft-capping?

Or is someone upset that they rocked their own scaling and hates everyone else for how they decided to spend their iso?

bbigler

Fightmastermpq wrote:

TxMoose wrote:

Skrofa wrote:

On topic though.
As the game stands... For pve there is no reason whatsover not only to level 5* but even to roster them at all!

I understand your point, but don't necessarily agree with it. oml with yellow. strange with blue and yellow covered. thanos with black covered. bolt with black covered. there are many 5s that are game changing no matter the scaling, even in pve. pve (high end ranking) is all about speed and those I mentioned (other than oml, he's just a pack saver) are very, very fast.

And this is my point. At the end of the day, players that are using these characters while keeping them under-leveled to take T10 PvE spots over 5* players are abusing a broken scaling mechanic. It's part of the game, and you can play it how you want. But I hate players that do this just as much as I hate the game. Yes, I'm hating the player AND the game.

Well, if you hate it so much, why not quit then?

StarScream

I will do almost anything to piss off someone who bought their roster, so I suppose I am going to be softcapping my ***** characters when it is time.

grunth13

StarScream wrote:

I will do almost anything to piss off someone who bought their roster, so I suppose I am going to be softcapping my ***** characters when it is time.

All this hate is not good for your soul. Take a deep breathe, hold it and count to ten and then go find another game to play.

StarScream

grunth13 wrote:

StarScream wrote:

I will do almost anything to piss off someone who bought their roster, so I suppose I am going to be softcapping my ***** characters when it is time.

All this hate is not good for your soul. Take a deep breathe, hold it and count to ten and then go find another game to play.

I have a better idea. Go annoy someone else.

Heartburn

broll wrote:

Fightmastermpq wrote:

astrp3 wrote:

But do the devs not like softcapping because they feel it is unfair to other players or because it's unfair that a player who gets covers for a 5* feels they can't use them? I would guess that a number of players who softcap don't like doing it either, but feel they have to in order to progress.

I just rostered my first 5*s this weekend because I am now at a point where I usually have three boosted 3*s so adding a 5* won't affect my scaling. Before that, I sold off about a dozen 5*s and didn't like the fact that I had to do so at all. When you pull a 5* from an LT and immediately say "Oh tinykitty, another 5*," it seems like something is rotten in the state of MPQ. I don't plan on using my 5*s until I get them adequately covered, but I'd still rather not have had to sell them off.

Then again, I don't like scaling period, no matter how it's done. I first encountered it in Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion and hated it. I've played lots of RPGs over the years (starting with Wizardry I - yes, I'm that old), and always enjoyed leveling up and building my characters almost as much as I enjoyed completing the story. With scaling, I felt there was no point in leveling them up at all. For RPGs, I preferred the old-school method, where leveling up characters meant you could either beat up on the easy sections of the game (though the rewards wouldn't be worth it) or proceed to the harder areas of the game that weren't open to you before.

Of course, MPQ is a competitive game, so removing scaling entirely would be more difficult. I think there are ways they could do it, but it's kind of a moot point since I don't think it's ever going to happen.

As for grilling/cupcakes etc. (I'm not up on the lingo as I have never used a Line room), one could argue (and I'm not saying I agree) it isn't in the spirit of the game to benefit from anything besides your own roster strength and skill, other than when the developers intended that you do so. Alliance events are designed specifically for alliances to cooperate but I'd guess that the devs never intended for people to do so for individual awards in PvP. But as you say, that's probably another thread.

If they didn't want alliances to work together in PvP then IMO they wouldn't have alliance rewards there.

And if they didn't want people to soft cap their would just be a max level button... We can all play this game...

i was thinking it would be an experience system, where characters forced to level through use, hopefully with some added benefit like a fourth skill that levels as you do or a multiplier that enhances your skills. This way the benefit of soft capping is fleeting. Also, we only have this problem because of poor design. if there was not scaling( or such sharp scaling) in story mode only a set levels of enemies, there would be no real incentive to hold your power back the challenge and competitions could be in the unreleased story clearance levels 9 and 10.

Fightmastermpq

Daredevil217 wrote:

Fightmastermpq wrote:

And this is my point. At the end of the day, players that are using these characters while keeping them under-leveled to take T10 PvE spots over 5* players are abusing a broken scaling mechanic. It's part of the game, and you can play it how you want. But I hate players that do this just as much as I hate the game. Yes, I'm hating the player AND the game.

So if I have a max-covered OML that I keep at the same level as my 4* champs but choose to use my iso to level up other characters instead, does that make me a soft-capper?

So if someone decides to use their iso to champ a third OBW, and a new 4*, while leaving Old Man Logan at a level similar to their 4*, is that soft-capping?

Yes and yes. The people doing it know they are doing it. When you have ISO to spend and you make a choice to champ a 4* that you will hardly ever use over the 5* that you use in virtually all of your PvE fights with the reasoning of not wanting to mess up your scaling then you are quite obviously soft capping.

Fightmastermpq

StarScream wrote:

I will do almost anything to piss off someone who bought their roster, so I suppose I am going to be softcapping my ***** characters when it is time.

YEAH! **** all those players that pay to support a game so I can play it for free, amirite?!?!?!?!?

StarScream

Fightmastermpq wrote:

StarScream wrote:

I will do almost anything to piss off someone who bought their roster, so I suppose I am going to be softcapping my ***** characters when it is time.

YEAH! tinykitty all those players that pay to support a game so I can play it for free, amirite?!?!?!?!?

I do not like people who pay for their rosters. I may never get to where they are, but I earn my way every step. That is something they can't say.

Piro_plock

Fightmastermpq wrote:

YEAH! tinykitty all those players that pay to support a game so I can play it for free, amirite?!?!?!?!?

Let's be honest: we don't pay because of our great generosity. We pay to gain a competitive advantage. It wouldn't be the case if you could buy only cosmetic things (skins, avatars etc.) - but here you pay to supercharge your progress. Not from the kindness of your heart, so all those F2Ps can have fun - but to beat them.

Softcapping is a very sound strategy in PVE (and a bit in PVP because of easier MMR), because it gives you the edge for free. It works inside the confines of the system the developers created - a poorly designed system, but we work with what we have, don't we? I'm all for fixing that system so that leveling your characters would always be advantageous (like tying the rewards to the difficulty of the nodes), but for now you can't reject it as an invalid. The argumentation resembles the one regarding cupcakes too much and we all know how the discussion on that topic always goes.

Daredevil217

Fightmastermpq wrote:

Daredevil217 wrote:

Fightmastermpq wrote:

And this is my point. At the end of the day, players that are using these characters while keeping them under-leveled to take T10 PvE spots over 5* players are abusing a broken scaling mechanic. It's part of the game, and you can play it how you want. But I hate players that do this just as much as I hate the game. Yes, I'm hating the player AND the game.

So if I have a max-covered OML that I keep at the same level as my 4* champs but choose to use my iso to level up other characters instead, does that make me a soft-capper?

So if someone decides to use their iso to champ a third OBW, and a new 4*, while leaving Old Man Logan at a level similar to their 4*, is that soft-capping?

Yes and yes. The people doing it know they are doing it. When you have ISO to spend and you make a choice to champ a 4* that you will hardly ever use over the 5* that you use in virtually all of your PvE fights with the reasoning of not wanting to mess up your scaling then you are quite obviously soft capping.

I leveled up every single 2* (before farming was a thing) and only after that, I leveled every single 3* (again, before champs). And I'm now working on every single 4*.

All characters are essential at some point so they all get used. But yes there are some I use much more than others.

I don't "hate" people who choose to spend their Iso maxing their best characters. If they choose to limit their options to 2-3 characters in order to dominate more power to them.

I think it's silly to "hate" people who choose to spend their Iso leveling their characters evenly, even the ones they rarely ever use.

So when it comes down to it you really just don't like people who spend their Iso different than you.

Sounds like a personal problem.

huktonfonix

Fightmastermpq wrote:

Daredevil217 wrote:

Fightmastermpq wrote:

And this is my point. At the end of the day, players that are using these characters while keeping them under-leveled to take T10 PvE spots over 5* players are abusing a broken scaling mechanic. It's part of the game, and you can play it how you want. But I hate players that do this just as much as I hate the game. Yes, I'm hating the player AND the game.

So if I have a max-covered OML that I keep at the same level as my 4* champs but choose to use my iso to level up other characters instead, does that make me a soft-capper?

So if someone decides to use their iso to champ a third OBW, and a new 4*, while leaving Old Man Logan at a level similar to their 4*, is that soft-capping?

Yes and yes. The people doing it know they are doing it. When you have ISO to spend and you make a choice to champ a 4* that you will hardly ever use over the 5* that you use in virtually all of your PvE fights with the reasoning of not wanting to mess up your scaling then you are quite obviously soft capping.

Not that it really matters, but is your issue strictly with people who use their 5s and bring them up to a useful level for pve but don't champ? Or also people who leave their fully-covered fives "on the bench" at 255 in order to use 4s instead?

Fightmastermpq

huktonfonix wrote:

Fightmastermpq wrote:

Daredevil217 wrote:

Fightmastermpq wrote:

And this is my point. At the end of the day, players that are using these characters while keeping them under-leveled to take T10 PvE spots over 5* players are abusing a broken scaling mechanic. It's part of the game, and you can play it how you want. But I hate players that do this just as much as I hate the game. Yes, I'm hating the player AND the game.

So if I have a max-covered OML that I keep at the same level as my 4* champs but choose to use my iso to level up other characters instead, does that make me a soft-capper?

So if someone decides to use their iso to champ a third OBW, and a new 4*, while leaving Old Man Logan at a level similar to their 4*, is that soft-capping?

Yes and yes. The people doing it know they are doing it. When you have ISO to spend and you make a choice to champ a 4* that you will hardly ever use over the 5* that you use in virtually all of your PvE fights with the reasoning of not wanting to mess up your scaling then you are quite obviously soft capping.

Not that it really matters, but is your issue strictly with people who use their 5s and bring them up to a useful level for pve but don't champ? Or also people who leave their fully-covered fives "on the bench" at 255 in order to use 4s instead?

The former is my issue with people, the latter my issue with the broken game mechanics.

archmag

Orion wrote:

Then the devs better understand their own game and fix scaling for 5* rosters. Because right now there's absolutely no reason why anyone should ever level their 5*s past 360. And this is from someone with 2 5* champs and another one at 420.

Why 360? I see no reason the level them above the top 4* characters. They start affecting the scaling as soon as you do that, as boosting does not effect scaling (even though there is a rumor going on that it does affect it, it does not).

For quite a while my roster had ~10-14 4* champions at around 280 level + OML at 300. Enemies in last node after 4 clears had level 323, no matter if I had some of my 4* champs boosted or didn't.

Few days ago I leveled up my OML to 360 and in the next event enemies in final node after 4 clears had level 335. So they gained 12 extra levels. Does not look much, but if I compare two enemies - Muscle level 323 has 23k hp, Muscle level 335 has 26k hp, it means that all my roster (except OML) became 10% weaker. I don't see why I should level them up to make my remaining roster, that I put a lot of work into, weaker.

It's stupid mechanic that makes the game harder when you become stronger.