WEBGAS said: I am not against scl difficulty, God knows how I hated to be forced to sell my first 5star pulled from tokens,( back in the days)because my 2* - 3* transitioning roster could not afford the increased difficulty in PVE (it was over 1 and half year ago) so the change in difficulty is a MUST.......But the solution given by the latest tests has been awful, a relieve for the 5*rosters but a nightmare for all the other players : ONE STEP FORWARD.....THREE STEPS BACK
Saxomophone said: How about tying difficulty to your shield rank rather than the scl you choose? Might be more accurate than looking at rostered characters and takes away the motivation to drop down for easy placement.
Nepenthe said: Saxomophone said: How about tying difficulty to your shield rank rather than the scl you choose? Might be more accurate than looking at rostered characters and takes away the motivation to drop down for easy placement. Hahahaha, no. Seriously, No. Shield rank is a horribly inaccurate way to judge roster strength. Way too many things that give xp to raise your rank that don't necessarily improve your roster. And you know what doesn't raise your rank? Spending iso to level up your highest tier of characters.
Or selling off your 5*s to reduce scaling...
Shield rank scaling would be going in the opposite direction, it would have all the things they're trying to fix with roster based scaling but abstracting it one more level so its even less accurate.
Using shield rank even as a means of qualifying for SCLs is silly. If SCL difficulty and rewards are adjusted so that its a good difficulty vs reward tradeoff at each level, restricting people from selecting an SCL would be unnecessary.
You just need to give them the freedom to pick what level they think is best for their roster, its bad design if a low level roster is better served by selecting an SCL where they fail everything but the trivial nodes, and likewise bad design if a higher roster is better served selecting an SCL where they stomp every battle in a turn.
Since shield rank is just a very poor quantification of roster strength, the only thing its really good for is metering out simple rewards... like the ISO we get every time we level.
Warbringa said: I basically replied similar that SCL scaling was good but that incentives and/or hard set restrictions were needed to keep 5* players in appropriate SCLs as opposed to simply moving down and scarfing up all the placement rewards in lower SCLs.