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

1…6791112…25

Comments

  • Jaedenkaal
    Jaedenkaal Posts: 3,357 Chairperson of the Boards
    fmftint said:
    SCL should work like boxing, you can fight above your class but not below. No one should be allowed to drop down for easier competition 
    Prizes in boxing are the same at each weight class, though, aren't they? (all other things being equal)
  • broll
    broll Posts: 4,732 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited May 2017
    bbigler said:
    broll said:
    bbigler said:
    I really like this new PVE scaling concept, but it needs some adjustments:

    1. Lower the max level for SCL8 to 350.  If this is too easy for 5* rosters, then introduce SCL9 with higher levels and better rewards and they will go there instead.
    2. Only allow players to go down one SCL, which still gives them the choice but doesn't make it unfair to players in those lower levels. 
    3. Track the clearing times, roster strength and enemy levels for the top 50 in each slice and make future adjustments to the enemy levels so that it takes about 1 hr for 4 clears.

    I completely disagree with 2.  If someone wants to drop down many levels to breeze thru they should be able to.  If people sniping low levels for T1/T5 becomes a problem then they need to look at the gap between the placement rewards between levels.  
    It's already a problem for newer players, which is unfair to them.  Perhaps you're advocating it because you do it yourself?
    It's a problem now because of the fact that difference in rewards between values isn't great.  My point is that the better fix for this problem is to make the gap in rewards between each level should be wider so that:
    1.  When you get to a new SCL you get a feeling of reward for your accomplishment.
    2.  It's such a big difference between that someone wouldn't want to drop regularly because it would hurt their progression.
    (this should apply to both placement and progression rewards, but placement is the larger problem)

    Taking away the ability to chose what level you want to play at is core to the mechanic.  Take that way and you might as well scrap it all and just auto assign everyone.  It's a QoL change to allow people to play at their difficulty preference.
  • Wjohnson992
    Wjohnson992 Posts: 175 Tile Toppler
    edited May 2017
    I thought they wanted to stop people hording. Unless they increase iso rewards the rest are really moot. All the covers in the world aren't any use if you cant get them leveled in time and have to sell the covers anyway. I'm gunna have to keep hording!
  • Orion
    Orion Posts: 1,295 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited May 2017
    A large part of the problem is that D3 has written themselves into a corner with Clearance Levels.  They know that they'll only ever be allowed to have 10 CLs, but they've planned them horribly.  Having CL8 open to levels 47+ is terrible - there's a HUGE difference in rosters between level 47 and say, 87.  Nevermind the whales who are all 100+.  CL8 should be at least 75+ right now, that way they can open up a 100+ CL9 in the future and a 125+ CL10 way in the future.  As it is, they can't really adjust the rewards for CL8 like the vets want, because it has to be appropriate for people who are as low as level 47.

    Do they feel like they can't lock people out of CLs that they used to be able to access?  If someone who's level 50 right now suddenly finds themselves unable to access CL7 or CL8, is that a big deal?  It gives them something to aspire to.  And then D3 can really make the rewards appropriate to the rosters in that CL.  If the rewards are good enough, no one will be slumming it in a CL that's below their station.  OK, a few would, but a lot less that this test will show.
  • acescracked
    acescracked Posts: 1,197 Chairperson of the Boards
    fmftint said:
    SCL should work like boxing, you can fight above your class but not below. No one should be allowed to drop down for easier competition 
    As in boxing where you can lose weight to make the weigh in for the lower weight class then do the same in MPQ.  5*s get benched.

    I'm sure I'd TKO you still in your weight class. Gimme da championship belt!
  • MissChinch
    MissChinch Posts: 509 Critical Contributor
    Wjohnson992 said:
    I thought they wanted to stop people hording. Unless they increase iso rewards the rest are really moot. All the covers in the world aren't any use if you cant get them leveled in time and have to sell the covers anyway. I'm gunna have to keep hording!

    This is a tangent, but ISO has gotten a lot more available...  I think what we're seeing in terms of hoarding on account of ISO is no longer a rate problem, but a large backlog of ISO need problem, point being it gets better with time at the current games mechanics.  I actually like atomic changes vs trying to fix everything in one release so theres no traceability.
  • Dragon_Nexus
    Dragon_Nexus Posts: 3,701 Chairperson of the Boards
    Okay, remember with Thanos how you said the developers, for once, wanted to run something new and lean on the side of "Let's start this off easy and ramp up later if we need to"?

    Where did that go? The majority of people have to be at CL8 by now, I'd have thought. How does "level 200-400" solve the issue of "Enemies are too high level"?

    This feels quite punishing now to go for the highest rewards. Especially since the jump from CL7 to CL8 offers little difference with rewards, but a whopping 100 level increase in terms of difficulty.
    It's another example of the effort put in not matching the rewards coming back.
  • udonomefoo
    udonomefoo Posts: 1,630 Chairperson of the Boards
    I'm SCL 90 and I'll be doing SCL 6 for this event (Ranks 27+ hahaha)

    All I care about is CP, if you're telling me I can clear the whole event in 1/3rd of the time and just get a little less cp (28 vs 33) and one less 4* cover then that's what I'm going to do.  I might even go lower.
  • MissChinch
    MissChinch Posts: 509 Critical Contributor
    Orion said:
    A large part of the problem is that D3 has written themselves into a corner with Clearance Levels.  They know that they'll only ever be allowed to have 10 CLs, but they've planned them horribly.  Having CL8 open to levels 47+ is terrible - there's a HUGE difference in rosters between level 47 and say, 87.  Nevermind the whales who are all 100+.  CL8 should be at least 75+ right now, that way they can open up a 100+ CL9 in the future and a 125+ CL10 way in the future.  As it is, they can't really adjust the rewards for CL8 like the vets want, because it has to be appropriate for people who are as low as level 47.

    Do they feel like they can't lock people out of CLs that they used to be able to access?  If someone who's level 50 right now suddenly finds themselves unable to access CL7 or CL8, is that a big deal?  It gives them something to aspire to.  And then D3 can really make the rewards appropriate to the rosters in that CL.  If the rewards are good enough, no one will be slumming it in a CL that's below their station.  OK, a few would, but a lot less that this test will show.


    Yeah it feels like they blew about 4/5ths of their available granularity on the 2->3* transitioning rosters and below, leaving them little granularity to work with for what amounts to the longest part of the game...   but are they tightly coupled to 10 SCLs ?   Am I missing something that would prevent them from slapping down 8 more SCLs with cutoffs at around levels 60, 75, 90, 105, 120, 135...  etc ?


    (FWIW I don't buy the sparsely populated SCL argument...  even if you don't have 1000 people to fill out a bracket in each time slice, sim up some players to make it look like you do and spread out the distribution...  aside from a whole bunch of new names that may look computer generated if they have a poor algorithm for selecting names, nothing will change...)

  • Nick441234
    Nick441234 Posts: 1,496 Chairperson of the Boards
    How is this fair? My scaling maxes out currently at 305, which my roster can handle. I dont fancy its chances against level 400. You are forcing me down to SCL7 and weaker rewards with this poor system. 
  • MissChinch
    MissChinch Posts: 509 Critical Contributor
    nick_chicane said:
    How is this fair? My scaling maxes out currently at 305, which my roster can handle. I dont fancy its chances against level 400. You are forcing me down to SCL7 and weaker rewards with this poor system. 


    Its fair because everyone going for the SCL8 rewards will be fighting the same level enemies.


    I'm in your boat though, this will likely prevent me from being able to go SCL8 and force me down into SCL7...  I'm looking at SCL4 when I don't care about the 4* progression cover...


    Its fair, but its also going to amount to less rewards for you in the near term.


    Handicapping isn't fair, its a mechanism you can use to try to ensure everyone has fun and can play together... if handicapping were actually fair you would see outta shape dads playing Lebron and the Cavs while being spotted 400 points, and golfers all taking their handicaps on the PGA...



  • Nepenthe
    Nepenthe Posts: 283 Mover and Shaker
    @MissChinch I think the SC10 is a Marvel canon thing. I've heard games aren't allowed to go beyond that because 10 is like the SHIELD Director's clearance level.

    I think one of the disconnects people are seeing here is that Shield Rank is not a very good judge of roster strength, and the SR requirements for CL 7 and 8 were always pretty low if they're supposed to be the top of the current game.
  • Jwhitmire36
    Jwhitmire36 Posts: 52 Match Maker
    I haven't the time to read through 9 pages of posts so forgive me if this has been talked about.  My SCL is 71 and I've played in SCL 8 for quite a while.  In Deadpool VS MPQ my essential node start levels are:
    4* - 121
    3* - 110
    2* - 80

    To keep closely equivalent start levels I have to drop down to SCL 5 and take a reduction in rewards???   I know this is a Test and subject to change, my hope is that this highlights that SCL level is not necessarily an accurate representation of your roster level.

    Adding this on top of vaulting and 5 clears for max progression is really discouraging for me personally.
  • Beer40
    Beer40 Posts: 826 Critical Contributor
    Pongie said:
    May be obvious but this is likely the breakup of scl compared to your roster progress

    SCL 1:  30 - building up 1*
    SCL 2:  55 - 1* maxed (40-50), building up 2* (<94)
    SCL 3:  84 - 2* championed (94+), building up 3* (<166)
    SCL 4: 140 - 2* maxed (144), 3* championed (166+)
    SCL 5: 180 - 3* championed (166-266), building up 4* (<270)
    SCL 6: 230 - 3* maxed (266), 4* championed (270+)
    SCL 7: 260 - 4* championed (270+), building up 5* (255+)
    SCL 8: 400 - 4* championed (270-370), 5* championed (450+)

    Having boosted characters means you may be able to keep up with the scaling within your SCL
    This says I should be SCL 5. **** it, I'm going to SCL 8. Because that's where I've been and that's where I'll stay. Its MY house and no scaling is taking it away. You all can have your lower clearance levels.

     "Fear" is a four-letter word, ladies! You wanna go peepee in your big-boy slacks, keep it to yourself!"
  • MissChinch
    MissChinch Posts: 509 Critical Contributor
    Nepenthe said:
    @MissChinch I think the SC10 is a Marvel canon thing. I've heard games aren't allowed to go beyond that because 10 is like the SHIELD Director's clearance level.

    I think one of the disconnects people are seeing here is that Shield Rank is not a very good judge of roster strength, and the SR requirements for CL 7 and 8 were always pretty low if they're supposed to be the top of the current game.

    Thanks, I didn't know where the SCL10 cap was coming...  So they just need to change the level requirements for SCL and the rewards at each level and they can still get 10 increments to work, the gradient is just off now.
  • Tajit
    Tajit Posts: 2 Just Dropped In
    Jwhitmire36 said:
    I haven't the time to read through 9 pages of posts so forgive me if this has been talked about.  My SCL is 71 and I've played in SCL 8 for quite a while.  In Deadpool VS MPQ my essential node start levels are:
    4* - 121
    3* - 110
    2* - 80

    To keep closely equivalent start levels I have to drop down to SCL 5 and take a reduction in rewards???   I know this is a Test and subject to change, my hope is that this highlights that SCL level is not necessarily an accurate representation of your roster level.

    Adding this on top of vaulting and 5 clears for max progression is really discouraging for me personally.
    I'm at basically the same point as you: couple shield ranks higher, but the enemies I face are a couple levels lower.

    http://i.imgur.com/97ehNy0.jpg is my starting SCL 8 4star node.

    I've got all the 3s champed, but the 4s don't have enough covers to do so yet. If I drop down to level 5 to face the stuff I can actually fight, my progression rewards go from three 3s and a 4 to one 3 and a 2? What good does that do me?
  • MissChinch
    MissChinch Posts: 509 Critical Contributor
    Tajit said:
    Jwhitmire36 said:
    I haven't the time to read through 9 pages of posts so forgive me if this has been talked about.  My SCL is 71 and I've played in SCL 8 for quite a while.  In Deadpool VS MPQ my essential node start levels are:
    4* - 121
    3* - 110
    2* - 80

    To keep closely equivalent start levels I have to drop down to SCL 5 and take a reduction in rewards???   I know this is a Test and subject to change, my hope is that this highlights that SCL level is not necessarily an accurate representation of your roster level.

    Adding this on top of vaulting and 5 clears for max progression is really discouraging for me personally.
    I'm at basically the same point as you: couple shield ranks higher, but the enemies I face are a couple levels lower.

    http://i.imgur.com/97ehNy0.jpg is my starting SCL 8 4star node.

    I've got all the 3s champed, but the 4s don't have enough covers to do so yet. If I drop down to level 5 to face the stuff I can actually fight, my progression rewards go from three 3s and a 4 to one 3 and a 2? What good does that do me?

    I plan on making my decision based on the 4* progression cover...  if its a cover I will just have to sell for 1000 ISO then I'll drop down to SCL4 or 5, spend less than a minute a fight and only miss out on a few CP over 3-4 days.  Itll be a net loss in resources but it will be a big jump in the time:reward ratio.  I wont like getting less, but the massive increase in time efficiency ought to justify it for me.
  • crackninja
    crackninja Posts: 444 Mover and Shaker
    Honestly the results seem very predictable...not much incentive to play 8 over 7.  The strongest rosters in each bracket taking the top slot.  Likely people will have success with their clears because they will be able to choose difficulty they are comfortable with, which may lead the devs to be satisfied with the results even though there are some glaring competitive concerns there.
    All in all I am excited for the direction though,  just hope the version that is eventually implemented is well designed. 
  • Bloody_Marvel
    Bloody_Marvel Posts: 209 Tile Toppler
    I'm still debating what SCL to play in.

    A lot of 5* rosters may play SCL 7, but I know that SCL 8 will be comprised of almost only 5* rosters. Competition in SCL 8 might be a lot stiffer than before because the competitive players are now condensed into a few brackets. Lots of people will now probably be playing SCL 7, which will spread the 5* rosters out over more brackets. Placement will likely worsen somewhat for people normally playing SCL 7. It will probably be a massacre in SCL 8.

    I think I got the roster to be able to play SCL 8, but likely not competitively.

    Decisions, decisions.

Categories