elvy75 said: zodiac339 said: Magic said: This change is calling for scl9 to top at 400 and scl10 at 450 (previous top level for the championed rosters... more or less). Scl8 should end around 300 (preferably)-350. Is that true? The cap was 450? And 5* players were complaining when they can champ their heroes up to 550? What kind of smolcat is that?Do 5* players in PVP only attack Legendary and below players? Or do they have to fight other Epic players too? It's foolish of them to expect this PVE test to be the way of things. No matter how much they spent or built, they don't have the privilege to get more Progression rewards and more Placement rewards for fighting trivially weak opponents. Every one of us suffers when entering a new tier. Every one of us has to deal with the higher scaling, the harder enemies, when we've only got 1 or 2 heroes in the new tier to count on.If they really wanted to be competetive PVE players, they would have been the "softcappers" they seem to feel such disdain for. But how do they start their PVP climbs? Hitting Legendary and lower rosters. Taking easy points until they have to fight bigger rosters. Do they actually want end end to "softcapping"? Do they want PVP to be a constant slugfest against other Epic rosters with absolutely nothing to get some easier points from? Personally, I doubt they want that, since they love the trivial effort for the rewards they're getting from this test.Do us a favor: Play the game the way it's been and stop whining for things you aren't privileged to have. Rewards require effort. Make some. As a 5* player i normally had to fight my last grind with 440 scaling. And those scale to higher level of health than most of 5* characters, and take a lot of time to deal with. Also it is not unusual for 5* roster to wipe against that kind of scaling, but it doesn't happen often. When it comes to pvp, i fight seeds at the beginning and from there on its all dual 5*, ranging from 450-480 in my MMR range. I suppose this is what you call Epic roster? After some 1100 points or so MMR open and i am able to see other teams, but i will not hit anything that gives me less then 50 points per match, and only 5* rosters are actually worth points i am looking for. PVP is the constant fight against the same strength opponents. I don't know in which world do you think we live? The issue with PVP is that after certain period MMR breaks down, and it happens to those early climbers, so they will be presented with easier teams to climb on, but someone has to generate points in the slice. But as more and more people join the slice, there are more people in your MMR range, and you cant queue easy teams anymore.The reason why we like this PVE change is not because we want to play trivial matches, and get best rewards, it is because it takes away lots of time commitment that PVE was, if you wanted to play it competitively. And that we finally feel that all building of our roster was worth it.
zodiac339 said: Magic said: This change is calling for scl9 to top at 400 and scl10 at 450 (previous top level for the championed rosters... more or less). Scl8 should end around 300 (preferably)-350. Is that true? The cap was 450? And 5* players were complaining when they can champ their heroes up to 550? What kind of smolcat is that?Do 5* players in PVP only attack Legendary and below players? Or do they have to fight other Epic players too? It's foolish of them to expect this PVE test to be the way of things. No matter how much they spent or built, they don't have the privilege to get more Progression rewards and more Placement rewards for fighting trivially weak opponents. Every one of us suffers when entering a new tier. Every one of us has to deal with the higher scaling, the harder enemies, when we've only got 1 or 2 heroes in the new tier to count on.If they really wanted to be competetive PVE players, they would have been the "softcappers" they seem to feel such disdain for. But how do they start their PVP climbs? Hitting Legendary and lower rosters. Taking easy points until they have to fight bigger rosters. Do they actually want end end to "softcapping"? Do they want PVP to be a constant slugfest against other Epic rosters with absolutely nothing to get some easier points from? Personally, I doubt they want that, since they love the trivial effort for the rewards they're getting from this test.Do us a favor: Play the game the way it's been and stop whining for things you aren't privileged to have. Rewards require effort. Make some.
Magic said: This change is calling for scl9 to top at 400 and scl10 at 450 (previous top level for the championed rosters... more or less). Scl8 should end around 300 (preferably)-350.
udonomefoo said: No champed 5*, so I went down to SCL7Overall time commitment was better. If this was the first step toward a progression only pve structure then i'd say it's great. I don't believe that's the case.
zodiac339 said: As for feeling like your roster was worth it, getting better gear in games has always, almost invariably, meant fighting bigger, stronger, scarier things. Why should MPQ suddenly become vastly different from that?
New McG said: zodiac339 said: As for feeling like your roster was worth it, getting better gear in games has always, almost invariably, meant fighting bigger, stronger, scarier things. Why should MPQ suddenly become vastly different from that? If the prize for something is the exact same thing, but one person is fighting level 125s, and the other is fighting 450s, does that sound remotely fair?
zodiac339 said: New McG said: zodiac339 said: As for feeling like your roster was worth it, getting better gear in games has always, almost invariably, meant fighting bigger, stronger, scarier things. Why should MPQ suddenly become vastly different from that? If the prize for something is the exact same thing, but one person is fighting level 125s, and the other is fighting 450s, does that sound remotely fair? Unfortunately, they don't yet get to fight for anything they actually need. The failing of the delay on SCL 9 and 10. It's the same for PVP too, more or less. They need something to build their Epic heroes, but all they get is Legendaries (and the 15 extra CP at 1200 that almost nobody below Epic can get). If they open SCL 9/10 with a requirement to join of average roster strength 450 for 9 and 500 for 10, I'll be a litlle sad I don't get the new prizes, but it would be nice for them to get something that truly is for them. I'll stay here in SCL8, get top ten now and then, be impressed when a 3-star roster gets the win, and still sadly look at the top 5 PVP spots being held by Epic players.Capping enemies well below the Epic tier doesn't make anything fair for anyone. We're locked out of Legendary reward placement we need, and they are getting Legendary reward placement that they barely need (aside from Champion rewards like the LTs and CPs those rewards slowly give).
New McG said: zodiac339 said: New McG said: zodiac339 said: As for feeling like your roster was worth it, getting better gear in games has always, almost invariably, meant fighting bigger, stronger, scarier things. Why should MPQ suddenly become vastly different from that? If the prize for something is the exact same thing, but one person is fighting level 125s, and the other is fighting 450s, does that sound remotely fair? Unfortunately, they don't yet get to fight for anything they actually need. The failing of the delay on SCL 9 and 10. It's the same for PVP too, more or less. They need something to build their Epic heroes, but all they get is Legendaries (and the 15 extra CP at 1200 that almost nobody below Epic can get). If they open SCL 9/10 with a requirement to join of average roster strength 450 for 9 and 500 for 10, I'll be a litlle sad I don't get the new prizes, but it would be nice for them to get something that truly is for them. I'll stay here in SCL8, get top ten now and then, be impressed when a 3-star roster gets the win, and still sadly look at the top 5 PVP spots being held by Epic players.Capping enemies well below the Epic tier doesn't make anything fair for anyone. We're locked out of Legendary reward placement we need, and they are getting Legendary reward placement that they barely need (aside from Champion rewards like the LTs and CPs those rewards slowly give). I'd say new release events are still pretty important regardless of player tier.
zodiac339 said: Sort of. Not getting that top 100 on release is pretty crippling if you want to progress on the following event. However, the way to get an actually usable new character is to buy the 40 packs from their PVP (now that I realize that the featured Legendary is the only Legendary there. Thanks for helping me notice that Gamor4 red!) PVE release placement should probably feel less important to those who are just going to buy 40 packs like that.
revskip said: Alsmir said: I'm seriously concerned about future of this game. At this time, not because of recent changes, but because of attitude of 5* players.I know that entire 5* meta is weird, inconsistent and drastically needs changes + improvements. Set lvl difficulties don't fix that, unless they come with SCL 9, 10 and changes to reward structure. 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.5* players got super easy fights, but everyone else got slapped into the face. That fixes nothing and you don't have to be that smart to realize that.It troubles me when I read "Let's make that permament, my opponents are super easy now and I can do full clear in 25 minutes." What about people who don't have 5* rosters? 3* players were pushed out of CL8, others keep facing similar or stronger opponents, but you only think about yourself. Disguisting. Not trying to be snarky but should 3* rosters really be taking top ten spots at the highest possible SCL? I think if implemented correctly the test could work to do something that has been lacking for a while and that is spacing out the players a bit more which will help everyone. SCL 8 should be for the top rosters, they spent the time and/or money to get the end game content (until they add 9/10). SCL 7 should be for 4* rosters and 4* transitioners who have enough support 3*s that they can punch above their weight. SCL 6 should be for early 4* transitioners and strong 3* teams, etc. Stratifying the SCLs a little better than they have will help everyone. The two issues I see with the test are people who up until now were able to compete at the top SCL will feel a bit bummed that they can no longer get a shot at the very top rewards, and that some of the biggest rosters are dropping down to other SCLs for a super easy mode eating up rewards meant for rosters that are less developed. The latter seems to be far less widespread, in my bracket in SCL 7 there really are only two 5* rosters in the top ten. I think if they implemented a floor as well as a ceiling people would be more likely to go to the most appropriate SCL for their roster. I really liked KGB's general concept:KGB said:With this new scaling system DG3 should consider turning all clearance levels into a form of Heroic.SCL1: 1* characters only + the 2,3&4* essentialSCL2-3: 1&2* characters only + the 3&4* essentialSCL4-5: 1-3* characters only + the 4* essentialSCL6-7: 1-4* characters onlySCL8: any characters--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------This way if someone with a top tier roster decides they want to drop down for an event for whatever reason they are still using the appropriate type of roster for the SCL they are playing in and aren't just stomping over everyone in their bracket by using their characters that others at the SCL don't have access to. Most people who are solidly in 5* land have high level 4*s so they wouldn't be at any competitive disadvantage going to SCL 7 and using their 4*s there. Most people with 4*s also have high level 3*s so if they chose to drop down to SCL 5 they would still retain an advantage but a much smaller one.
Alsmir said: I'm seriously concerned about future of this game. At this time, not because of recent changes, but because of attitude of 5* players.I know that entire 5* meta is weird, inconsistent and drastically needs changes + improvements. Set lvl difficulties don't fix that, unless they come with SCL 9, 10 and changes to reward structure. 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.5* players got super easy fights, but everyone else got slapped into the face. That fixes nothing and you don't have to be that smart to realize that.It troubles me when I read "Let's make that permament, my opponents are super easy now and I can do full clear in 25 minutes." What about people who don't have 5* rosters? 3* players were pushed out of CL8, others keep facing similar or stronger opponents, but you only think about yourself. Disguisting.
Alsmir said:If you can just dump a truck of money to cruise into 5* land and suddenly start grabbing top placements rewards with ease
Alsmir said: revskip said: Alsmir said: I'm seriously concerned about future of this game. At this time, not because of recent changes, but because of attitude of 5* players.I know that entire 5* meta is weird, inconsistent and drastically needs changes + improvements. Set lvl difficulties don't fix that, unless they come with SCL 9, 10 and changes to reward structure. 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.5* players got super easy fights, but everyone else got slapped into the face. That fixes nothing and you don't have to be that smart to realize that.It troubles me when I read "Let's make that permament, my opponents are super easy now and I can do full clear in 25 minutes." What about people who don't have 5* rosters? 3* players were pushed out of CL8, others keep facing similar or stronger opponents, but you only think about yourself. Disguisting. Not trying to be snarky but should 3* rosters really be taking top ten spots at the highest possible SCL? I think if implemented correctly the test could work to do something that has been lacking for a while and that is spacing out the players a bit more which will help everyone. SCL 8 should be for the top rosters, they spent the time and/or money to get the end game content (until they add 9/10). SCL 7 should be for 4* rosters and 4* transitioners who have enough support 3*s that they can punch above their weight. SCL 6 should be for early 4* transitioners and strong 3* teams, etc. Stratifying the SCLs a little better than they have will help everyone. The two issues I see with the test are people who up until now were able to compete at the top SCL will feel a bit bummed that they can no longer get a shot at the very top rewards, and that some of the biggest rosters are dropping down to other SCLs for a super easy mode eating up rewards meant for rosters that are less developed. The latter seems to be far less widespread, in my bracket in SCL 7 there really are only two 5* rosters in the top ten. I think if they implemented a floor as well as a ceiling people would be more likely to go to the most appropriate SCL for their roster. I really liked KGB's general concept:KGB said:With this new scaling system DG3 should consider turning all clearance levels into a form of Heroic.SCL1: 1* characters only + the 2,3&4* essentialSCL2-3: 1&2* characters only + the 3&4* essentialSCL4-5: 1-3* characters only + the 4* essentialSCL6-7: 1-4* characters onlySCL8: any characters--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------This way if someone with a top tier roster decides they want to drop down for an event for whatever reason they are still using the appropriate type of roster for the SCL they are playing in and aren't just stomping over everyone in their bracket by using their characters that others at the SCL don't have access to. Most people who are solidly in 5* land have high level 4*s so they wouldn't be at any competitive disadvantage going to SCL 7 and using their 4*s there. Most people with 4*s also have high level 3*s so if they chose to drop down to SCL 5 they would still retain an advantage but a much smaller one. I guess I just don't understand why so many people expect that your games and placement are supposed to get much easier, when you have stronger roster. Maybe I'm silly, but I hope that is not the main idea behind MPQ. I;d like to imagine that devs want the game to be fun and engaging for all rosters. Not the 5* beat anyone else, 4* beat similar and weaker rosters, but instead facing similar opponents no matter at what level of transition you are.If you can just dump a truck of money to cruise into 5* land and suddenly start grabbing top placements rewards with ease (already happening in PvP) then this is a massive waste of time and just an e-peen contest.
My GOD, why are you so bitter in all your posts?
Did a whale steal your lunch money and buy a 40 pack with it?
Alsmir said:If you can just dump a truck of money to cruise into 5* land and suddenly start grabbing top placements rewards with ease (already happening in PvP) then this is a massive waste of time and just an e-peen contest.
KGB said: With this new scaling system DG3 should consider turning all clearance levels into a form of Heroic.SCL1: 1* characters only + the 2,3&4* essentialSCL2-3: 1&2* characters only + the 3&4* essentialSCL4-5: 1-3* characters only + the 4* essentialSCL6-7: 1-4* characters onlySCL8: any charactersNow if you want to drop down to SCL7 you can only use your 4* and below so those champed 5* won't be blowing through nodes that are capped at 270.It also means if you don't have good boosted 4* characters or want to take a break from high level PvE on an event you can drop to SCL5 or so and just take your 2&3* character teams out again for nostalgia reasons.KGB
ZootSax said:I really like this idea quite a bit. If they opened up SCL9 and had something like two 4*'s in the progression to make it demonstrably better than SCL8 and implemented the "heroic" system similar to what you described, I feel like it would be a solid improvement across the board.
WEBGAS said: So this change is good for top roster players, but an abomination for all the others stuck in 4* transiction and even worse for those who are still in 2*-3* transiction.
GrumpySmurf1002 said: ZootSax said:I really like this idea quite a bit. If they opened up SCL9 and had something like two 4*'s in the progression to make it demonstrably better than SCL8 and implemented the "heroic" system similar to what you described, I feel like it would be a solid improvement across the board. Two 4s would be nice, but I'm not sure that's enough incentive to keep people from dropping down. Especially now with vaulting, I don't foresee players having a problem skipping old 4*s in favor of easier competition/scaling.Thing to keep in mind is that the 5* players are also fairly well loaded in 4s, some boasting ones lvl 340+. They won't have a problem dropping to 7 and using those characters (heck, they might welcome the change of pace).From players perspective, this is ultimately a "how do i get the most rewards for the least amount of time." Devs need to keep that in mind as they set their scaling/rewards, because 1000iso isn't gonna be enough incentive to get someone to play an extra (up to) 2 hours a day.
I think they should absolutely keep the ability to pick between several different SCLs so the players can choose what best fits their time commitment... keeping the choice of "how do i get the most rewards for the least amount of time." is extremely valuable.
I'd love to see the devs hit the drawing board w.r.t. what rewards should be given at what SCLs, approach it in an organized way, de-emphasize placement rewards or cut them out completely and bake those rewards into a better progression reward structure. I think the progression reward structure should take priority and the enemy levels should be re-tweaked to fit the best progression increments they can come up with...
Personally, I'd love to see placement rewards completely trivialized if not eliminated and progression rewards just build on each other as SCL increases... Have all the progression rewards of SCL X be achieved in SCL X+1 by 60-70% of whatever they deem max progression should be. That would make comparing one SCL's rewards with another SCL's extremely easy for anyone considering dropping down a level or two, they should be able to make a much more informed decision.