Scaling Tied To S.H.I.E.L.D. Clearance Levels (5/25/17)

Options
1…1617192122…25

Comments

  • zodiac339
    zodiac339 Posts: 1,948 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    PVP Placement: Top 5 is almost invariably 5* tier. Those players still have to put effort into coordinating with other shielded playersin order to make points and not lose them to another 5* player. Biggest guns win.
    Roster scaled PVE Placement: Top 5 highly variable. Often dependant on whether or not you have the boosted characters at Champ levels (this is where the 5* players have issue). Even mostly 3* players have a chance. Effort and capability wins.
    Static Levels PVE Placement: 5* tier destroys without making an effort. Thanos plus 2 other Epic Champs trivializes everything. Placement is not supposed to be trivial.

    I understand the frustration Epic players face in Scaling PVE. Scaling was made with the expectation that you will use boosted characters to deal with enemies scaling past your roster. Epic players effectively have no boosted heroes, and the enemy scaling can get bizzarely difficult from what has been discussed. They have also leveled themselves out of being able to use strategies that the majority of players use, and instead rely on the same few sledgehammers all the time. Those same slegehammers beat down the majority of players in PVP already. Is there any actual reason why players who rely on skill and strategy rather than Thano5 shouldn't have PVE as a place they can actually compete?
  • JVReal
    JVReal Posts: 1,884 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    I always play CL8.  Only fair to do the test in CL8.  The 3 easier nodes stayed easy same as usual, but the 3 harder nodes had a bigger jump immediately.  Starting around 245 and ending around 330 or 340?  I don't recall exactly.  They were tougher immediately but ended around the same as they did before for me in my personal scaling.

    I agree with earlier comments that it was a tough one to gauge it on because there are a lot of Goon only nodes that don't paint a realistic picture of the scaling intensity (until you start seeing giant strike tiles and one small cascade wipes out your team).

    I couldn't believe the number of players shouting that the sky was falling and complaining about perceived scaling before even jumping into the test, and jumping into CL7 instead of CL8.  That just felt wrong to me.  For a valid test, we should have been kept in the CL we played the last PVE in, just to make sure we got a better comparison.

    I liked a lot of the suggestions thus far.  Limiting your CL range that you can participate in, or restricting certain rarities at certain Clearance Levels, things to dissuade larger rosters from overpowering lower Clearance Levels.

    Who doesn't like walking up to the mole bop game at an arcade and slapping all the moles and maxing out the tickets in the kiddy section?  But is it good sportsmanship? Not really.  It's fun on occasion, but to sit there and hog it while there's a line of kids that it was designed for behind you... that's just not nice.
  • zodiac339
    zodiac339 Posts: 1,948 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited May 2017
    Options
    JVReal said:

    Who doesn't like walking up to the mole bop game at an arcade and slapping all the moles and maxing out the tickets in the kiddy section?  But is it good sportsmanship? Not really.  It's fun on occasion, but to sit there and hog it while there's a line of kids that it was designed for behind you... that's just not nice.
    Good analogy. Trivial missions tend toward that for the rest of us, while the harder missions are more satisfying to get through.
  • NewMcG
    NewMcG Posts: 368 Mover and Shaker
    Options
    zodiac339 said:
    Is there any actual reason why players who rely on skill and strategy rather than Thano5 shouldn't have PVE as a place they can actually compete?
    I don't have any champed 5*s. I also don't see a reason why someone who has levelled their roster should automatically be at a competitive disadvantage in any particular mode. If you run track and there's someone who has trained for a long time and has a far superior time in the 100M dash, they don't make them put on ankle weights to keep things "fair" for the rest of the participants.
  • Rick_OShay
    Rick_OShay Posts: 765 Critical Contributor
    Options
    New McG said:
    zodiac339 said:
    Is there any actual reason why players who rely on skill and strategy rather than Thano5 shouldn't have PVE as a place they can actually compete?
    I don't have any champed 5*s. I also don't see a reason why someone who has levelled their roster should automatically be at a competitive disadvantage in any particular mode. If you run track and there's someone who has trained for a long time and has a far superior time in the 100M dash, they don't make them put on ankle weights to keep things "fair" for the rest of the participants.
    You are correct and the scaling for 5* rosters has been a bit too much - 
    However, when 5* rosters are dropping down to CL7, that is like high-school track athletes running against middle-schoolers. We probably will not see a happier medium until CL9 finally comes around, dangerously assuming they scale up the awards decently between the levels.
    I stayed in CL8 for this test, and 5* rosters cleared 4x in 35 minutes. Whut?!  
    Did anyone see times in CL7? I've only seen posts that state they were able to shave 30+ minutes off their times.
  • zodiac339
    zodiac339 Posts: 1,948 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    New McG said:
    zodiac339 said:
    Is there any actual reason why players who rely on skill and strategy rather than Thano5 shouldn't have PVE as a place they can actually compete?
    I don't have any champed 5*s. I also don't see a reason why someone who has levelled their roster should automatically be at a competitive disadvantage in any particular mode. If you run track and there's someone who has trained for a long time and has a far superior time in the 100M dash, they don't make them put on ankle weights to keep things "fair" for the rest of the participants.
    I hope that doesn't mean you think players with access to an SCL should be unable to actually play in it. Players still relying on 3*s and not finished covering 4*s will gain access to SCL 8. They will probably not expect to get good placement, but if the answer is Static Enemy Levels based on SCL, even progression goes out of range as enemies start topping 100 or more levels beyond what they have. Given how the progression rewards have been shoved way to the back, transitioning and building players need to be able to get them.
    Having everyone fight the same thing, the same level. It's not the solution. The devs need to fix how enemies scale past a certain point. Once the average level passes 370, the upper level of enemies needs to slow down a lot. With an average level of 450, an Epic player should be seeing enemies probably a bit lower than that. Is that what they already see? But completely gutting enemy difficulty so that it's utterly trivial for one group next to impossible for another group is not a fix to the problem. It's just replacing one problem for a minority section of the player base with another problem for a much larger section of the player base.
  • Starfury
    Starfury Posts: 719 Critical Contributor
    Options
    JVReal said:

    I couldn't believe the number of players shouting that the sky was falling and complaining about perceived scaling before even jumping into the test, and jumping into CL7 instead of CL8.  That just felt wrong to me.  For a valid test, we should have been kept in the CL we played the last PVE in, just to make sure we got a better comparison.

    To be fair, it's not their fault that the actual test isn't what was announced.

    Brigby's chart stated quite clearly that the hardest node would start at 260-300 and rise by 25 levels per clear. Did anyone get a node scaling up to 360? If not, something went wrong, either on the communications side or on the implementation of the test.
  • Starfury
    Starfury Posts: 719 Critical Contributor
    Options
    New McG said:
    zodiac339 said:
    Is there any actual reason why players who rely on skill and strategy rather than Thano5 shouldn't have PVE as a place they can actually compete?
    I don't have any champed 5*s. I also don't see a reason why someone who has levelled their roster should automatically be at a competitive disadvantage in any particular mode. If you run track and there's someone who has trained for a long time and has a far superior time in the 100M dash, they don't make them put on ankle weights to keep things "fair" for the rest of the participants.
    And if you're boxing, you're not allowed to just enter any weight class you prefer on that day.
  • Riguez
    Riguez Posts: 22 Just Dropped In
    Options
    So after reading 19 pages, the only conclusion that I can get to is that the only people really enjoying the test are the ones with really high rosters, and the discussion is now whether the rest of us SHOULD enjoy the update or just accept the SCL downgrade.

    I am a regular SCL8 player and used to get enemies capping at 312 at the hardest node, so the test's 323 is not that big of a deal... however I still spend too much time so if this ends up staying, I'll probably move to SCL7 until my roster is powerful enough to breeze through SCL8.
  • NewMcG
    NewMcG Posts: 368 Mover and Shaker
    Options
    Starfury said:
    New McG said:
    zodiac339 said:
    Is there any actual reason why players who rely on skill and strategy rather than Thano5 shouldn't have PVE as a place they can actually compete?
    I don't have any champed 5*s. I also don't see a reason why someone who has levelled their roster should automatically be at a competitive disadvantage in any particular mode. If you run track and there's someone who has trained for a long time and has a far superior time in the 100M dash, they don't make them put on ankle weights to keep things "fair" for the rest of the participants.
    And if you're boxing, you're not allowed to just enter any weight class you prefer on that day.
    I know a little about boxing, but you can certainly try and fight at higher weights, just not lower ones without getting to the proper threshold. (It just probably won't go that well for you if you're not capable of punching above your weight.)
  • Tiger_Wong
    Tiger_Wong Posts: 1,018 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    I've been a SCL8 player almost since its inception. So I stayed with SCL8. You can see a couple nodes start out way higher but they cap at lvl 320. It's not a big deal for me as I've got 14 4* champed and hovering around lvl 273. But I know why I've been handling it well though.....

    the highest lvl of my 5* is Black Widow at 2/2/3 at 345. I can get her to 360 but.... I know that's just gonna up the enemies level. So I give my other 5* covers but don't lvl them higher than 330. Even though ive got.....

    Strange 5/3/3
    thanos 3/5/2

    i think sandbagging is the way to go to transition to 4*. Idc about placement awards. I know the players who are 5* tight are gonna get the highest, so I don't even try for top 20. I just try to do the best and fastest I can, make sure I hit all the progressions, clear all nodes 6x and maybe a couple more if I can. It's working itself out in the end as I'm gonna champ 4* Cage tomorrow and 4* Blade sometime next week. 

    I honestly think some of you guys just want everything handed to you. Just wake up and free covers and ISO! Put in the work, and you'll get your rewards. 

    Or just keep dropping to SCL7. I got no complaints. I might finish top 25 for once tomorrow if I push it. Thanks guys!


  • Starfury
    Starfury Posts: 719 Critical Contributor
    Options
    New McG said:
    Starfury said:
    New McG said:
    zodiac339 said:
    Is there any actual reason why players who rely on skill and strategy rather than Thano5 shouldn't have PVE as a place they can actually compete?
    I don't have any champed 5*s. I also don't see a reason why someone who has levelled their roster should automatically be at a competitive disadvantage in any particular mode. If you run track and there's someone who has trained for a long time and has a far superior time in the 100M dash, they don't make them put on ankle weights to keep things "fair" for the rest of the participants.
    And if you're boxing, you're not allowed to just enter any weight class you prefer on that day.
    I know a little about boxing, but you can certainly try and fight at higher weights, just not lower ones without getting to the proper threshold. (It just probably won't go that well for you if you're not capable of punching above your weight.)
    Noone will prevent you from putting on ankle weights in the 100m dash either.

    Anyways, the boxing metaphor makes perfect sense, once you remove personal scaling, you need a way to keep the heavyweights from just dominating every SCL. That's what the weight classes in boxing are all about.
    The SCL limits as they are in this test do the exact opposite, they only prevent featherweights from trying to fight a hopeless battle in higher SCL.
  • DeNappa
    DeNappa Posts: 1,369 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    Orion said:
    So, I'm one of those 5* players that dropped down to CL7 to see what it was like.

    <snip>

    So I was able to do the final grind for one sub and the initial clears for the next in less than 1 hour.  That's fantastic.  It normally takes 2 1/2 hours and I'm falling asleep before I finish.  Is the smaller CL7 rewards worth 1.5 hours less of grind time?  Hell yeah it is.  Plus I can get top 5 rewards instead of top 100 rewards in CL8 because I didn't want to put that much time into PvE every day.
    If many 5* players are dropping down to SCL7, the 4* players who need the placement prizes will see that source dry up because they can't compete with champed Thano5 rosters.

    I know this is an issue for all clearance levels. I dropped down to SCL5 because I didn't need the Gwenpool progression cover (already have 5 green). Figured it's easier to reap the CP rewards there. Hovering around 2nd place... for 3* placement cover rewards I don't really need, but for extra HP that's also nice. But even I am trumped by the #1 in my slice who has a 5* Thanos roster that does the initial clear in like 30 minutes :mrgreen:

    GrumpySmurf1002 said:
    Starfury said:
    I can totally follow your line of reasoning.

    But the problem is that if the system goes live like this, everyone who isn't already in 5* land can completely forget about placement, in any SCL.
    Disagree, I don't think many 5* players are dropping down to CL6 and below.

    The issue I do agree with is 4* transitioners have it much harder with this test.  But there are solutions, and I'd like to think they'll be addressed somehow.

    Broader picture:  No matter what change is made, some portion of the player base will get screwed.  I think the reason you're seeing more positivity than normal is because it's not very often the high-end portion of the forum base isn't the one screwed.
    As pointed out by several, it becomes a calculation on the player's part of investment vs rewards. If someone judges that the rewards are too minimal compared to the effort they have to put in, they're going to drop down to a level where it's acceptable for them.

    For me, I dismissed SCL7+ very quickly because the progression rewards were useless to me and I didn't want to invest in placement rewards either (even if i did, I doubt if i *could*).  Between SCL's 4-6, 5 seemed the best effort/reward ratio for CP.
  • Starfury
    Starfury Posts: 719 Critical Contributor
    Options
    Yeah, if the 4* progression reward is a 6th cover I can't possibly use, I might as well drop down to SCL 4 and get exactly the same ~7000 iso / 2 cp per day from node rewards with 1/3 of the time investment, for only a minimal loss in overall rewards.

    Maybe if node rewards also scaled with SCL, you could make higher SCL more attractive as well. (Although at some point, they'll need another ISO sink for people, if they just keep upping ISO income)

  • Nick441234
    Nick441234 Posts: 1,496 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    Having completed this event now, my overall feeling is that this is a positive change, in general. I like the idea of improving my roster and knowing exactly what level of enemy I will face. I do think CL9 needs to at least come with this change if it is to become permanent so that CL8 can top out slightly below what it did this event and CL9 can then top out at 400. 
  • donnel
    donnel Posts: 17 Just Dropped In
    Options
    I've had a generally positive experience with the test format. The game has pretty outrageous time requirements if you want to keep up with weekly events at a high level; any steps in the direction of reducing the daily play content of 2+ hrs is a good thing. 

    I do feel the concerns are valid regarding the impact on player competitiveness. PVP events are free-for-all's where the strongest rosters (i.e. biggest spenders) have a tremendous advantage. For story mode to mirror this advantage would reserve high level gameplay mainly for the people who pull out their wallets. Would anyone not currently invested in the game want to play something where the entrance fee for end game is thousands of dollars (or alternatively, years of progression and hoarding)? I don't think that's a healthy way to structure a game's reward structure. 

    Story mode placement competition is currently a completely arbitrary system of bracketing and time slots and CL levels. Here's a suggestion; we know what "competitive" story mode looks like at this point. Anyone who completes the grind to 1pt within 40min-1hr can usually get placement within the top10. Why not just set this as the bar for t5/t10 rewards? Don't make it about how fiercely other players in your personal bracket are competing with you to clear in as little time as possible. Make rewards readily available as long as players hit the performance levels we know to correspond with high placement today. 
  • NewMcG
    NewMcG Posts: 368 Mover and Shaker
    edited June 2017
    Options
    Starfury said:
    New McG said:
    Starfury said:
    New McG said:
    zodiac339 said:
    Is there any actual reason why players who rely on skill and strategy rather than Thano5 shouldn't have PVE as a place they can actually compete?
    I don't have any champed 5*s. I also don't see a reason why someone who has levelled their roster should automatically be at a competitive disadvantage in any particular mode. If you run track and there's someone who has trained for a long time and has a far superior time in the 100M dash, they don't make them put on ankle weights to keep things "fair" for the rest of the participants.
    And if you're boxing, you're not allowed to just enter any weight class you prefer on that day.
    I know a little about boxing, but you can certainly try and fight at higher weights, just not lower ones without getting to the proper threshold. (It just probably won't go that well for you if you're not capable of punching above your weight.)
    Noone will prevent you from putting on ankle weights in the 100m dash either.

    Anyways, the boxing metaphor makes perfect sense, once you remove personal scaling, you need a way to keep the heavyweights from just dominating every SCL. That's what the weight classes in boxing are all about.
    The SCL limits as they are in this test do the exact opposite, they only prevent featherweights from trying to fight a hopeless battle in higher SCL.
    Except if the prize for the heavyweight matches is $100,000, and featherweight is 10 bucks, no heavyweight would bother trying to slip down to that division. Same for SCLs. No 5* tier player is going down below 7 on a regular basis once they get this dialed in. The useful rewards just aren't there for that level of player.

    And yes, part of it is probably to try and segregate the SCLs by player "level" the way they probably have intended the entire time the game has been played. Until now, roster-based scaling was the least painful way to try and work things on the development side, but I doubt the intention was to have to exponentially scale the difficulty higher and higher on the top end to account for the new 5* tier of characters, while allowing rosters to intentionally hamstring themselves to keep the game easier, while both compete for the same rewards if they're in the same SCL.

    If this were an MMO, the higher SCLs could be looked at as the end-game raid-type content. You want to have a chance? Gear up. Or in the case of MPQ, build your roster properly. In MMO terms, soft-capping a roster would be like keeping a character at level 40 when the cap is 80, and expecting to be on even footing when going head to head with a max level, geared-up player. In most things in life, the more accomplished participant should win, and this transition starts moving things in that direction for MPQ.
  • Nick441234
    Nick441234 Posts: 1,496 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    Alsmir said:
    That test just flooded the SCL 7, 8 with 5* players who kicked anyone else out of placement spots. Same thing that we had in PvP for long time.
    Not my experience. I dropped to 7 as felt the scaling was too high for me in 8. I still finished top 25 with only 5 clears of each node. I dont use any 5*s. 

Categories