OSCORP HEROIC - MAY 8-14

morgh

Thank you for the answer - I really appreciate it.
It's only a bit sad that it's during an event with a new and such a great character, but I already kinda figured and came to terms with the fact that I cannot hope for 2 covers of Lazy Daken.

(it also is a bit strange that mine PvE ranking is so high while I do not see the usual heavy hitters and people getting top 1-2 places complaining about their scaling)

IceIX

SolidQ wrote:

IceIX wrote:

I don't know what SolidQ's in-game name is so I can't check into rating there.

Gragas Icex i can change in-game name to SolidQ?

PM me if that's something you want to do either way: Change here to in-game or in-game to this one.

Unknown

Havent been able to beat a single node with this roster. Level 150 juggs and 200 ares...sigh.

Unknown

Thanks for a heroic where there are at least a few good characters to choose from.

My lazy dakkens!

NorthernPolarity

ZenBrillig wrote:

NorthernPolarity wrote:

Have you guys considered a ceiling on how high the starting MMR of a player for each event can be based on the players roster strength? (viewtopic.php?f=8&t=7030 had my suggestion for this) Seems like it would be a relatively simple fix that would solve a lot of the complaints that you guys are getting.

You can't, as you suggest, just calculate roster strength as by averaging levels. There is a world of difference between the strengths of different characters, not to mention star-tiers. An 85 OBW is hardly on par with an 85 Loki.

My suggestion would average the 3 highest leveled characters on your team and use that as a heuristic to impose the scaling cap. It seems reasonable to have the 3 highest leveled characters in your team determine your general roster strength. The intended purpose of this was to just say "Oh, if your top 3 guys are level 85, then that means that you're probably a 2* player so a maximum starting level for your next PvE event of 60 would probably be reasonable". It doesn't matter if the system can't distinguish between a level 85 loki vs a level 85 obw player because its only setting the starting levels: they can undershoot this number to give some leeway for the players with weaker rosters and let community/player scaling within that event adjust for the players with stronger rosters. You can obviously game the system by only having a single level 141 and 2 85s as your strongest guys, but the benefits seem marginal since that would theoretically be the difference of only say 20 starting levels.

JamieMadrox

NorthernPolarity wrote:

ZenBrillig wrote:

NorthernPolarity wrote:

Have you guys considered a ceiling on how high the starting MMR of a player for each event can be based on the players roster strength? (viewtopic.php?f=8&t=7030 had my suggestion for this) Seems like it would be a relatively simple fix that would solve a lot of the complaints that you guys are getting.

You can't, as you suggest, just calculate roster strength as by averaging levels. There is a world of difference between the strengths of different characters, not to mention star-tiers. An 85 OBW is hardly on par with an 85 Loki.

My suggestion would average the 3 highest leveled characters on your team and use that as a heuristic to impose the scaling cap. The intended purpose of this was to just say "Oh, if your top 3 guys are level 85, then that means that you're probably a 2* player so a maximum starting level for your next PvE event of 60 would probably be reasonable". It doesn't matter if the system can't distinguish between a level 85 loki vs a level 85 obw player because its only setting the starting levels: they can undershoot this number to give some leeway for the players with weaker rosters and let community/player scaling within that event adjust for the players with stronger rosters.

Well realisticaly they could go so far as to take in to account the rarity of the character as well as it's level. So a level 100 3* would be the same as a level 85 2*and a level 65 2* is the same as a level 50 1*. Or whatever the scaling is between rarities.

Unknown

Jamie Madrox wrote:

NorthernPolarity wrote:

ZenBrillig wrote:

NorthernPolarity wrote:

Have you guys considered a ceiling on how high the starting MMR of a player for each event can be based on the players roster strength? (viewtopic.php?f=8&t=7030 had my suggestion for this) Seems like it would be a relatively simple fix that would solve a lot of the complaints that you guys are getting.

You can't, as you suggest, just calculate roster strength as by averaging levels. There is a world of difference between the strengths of different characters, not to mention star-tiers. An 85 OBW is hardly on par with an 85 Loki.

My suggestion would average the 3 highest leveled characters on your team and use that as a heuristic to impose the scaling cap. The intended purpose of this was to just say "Oh, if your top 3 guys are level 85, then that means that you're probably a 2* player so a maximum starting level for your next PvE event of 60 would probably be reasonable". It doesn't matter if the system can't distinguish between a level 85 loki vs a level 85 obw player because its only setting the starting levels: they can undershoot this number to give some leeway for the players with weaker rosters and let community/player scaling within that event adjust for the players with stronger rosters.

Well realisticaly they could go so far as to take in to account the rarity of the character as well as it's level. So a level 100 3* would be the same as a level 85 2*and a level 65 2* is the same as a level 50 1*. Or whatever the scaling is between rarities.

But even then, there's huge disparities in power between 100 3*s. If you let me pick both sides of a match, giving 3 level 100 3*s to each side, I'll win 100% of the time...

NorthernPolarity

Jamie Madrox wrote:

NorthernPolarity wrote:

ZenBrillig wrote:

NorthernPolarity wrote:

Have you guys considered a ceiling on how high the starting MMR of a player for each event can be based on the players roster strength? (viewtopic.php?f=8&t=7030 had my suggestion for this) Seems like it would be a relatively simple fix that would solve a lot of the complaints that you guys are getting.

You can't, as you suggest, just calculate roster strength as by averaging levels. There is a world of difference between the strengths of different characters, not to mention star-tiers. An 85 OBW is hardly on par with an 85 Loki.

My suggestion would average the 3 highest leveled characters on your team and use that as a heuristic to impose the scaling cap. The intended purpose of this was to just say "Oh, if your top 3 guys are level 85, then that means that you're probably a 2* player so a maximum starting level for your next PvE event of 60 would probably be reasonable". It doesn't matter if the system can't distinguish between a level 85 loki vs a level 85 obw player because its only setting the starting levels: they can undershoot this number to give some leeway for the players with weaker rosters and let community/player scaling within that event adjust for the players with stronger rosters.

Well realisticaly they could go so far as to take in to account the rarity of the character as well as it's level. So a level 100 3* would be the same as a level 85 2*and a level 65 2* is the same as a level 50 1*. Or whatever the scaling is between rarities.

Yeah, taking into account star tiers would make the algorithm smarter: I was just giving an example of how a very simple algorithm would be enough to implement this new feature.

daveomite

Bar looks to already be almost half way now. After my first clear at the beginning, I have less than 4k points, and now about 4k behind the leader.

Unknown

IceIX wrote:

We've got a few changes in the works for how scaling is worked out that we're doing testing on to make sure that we don't accidentally break things with it. While I hate having to deliver bad news like I just did, we'd rather move a little slower on testing and making sure that scaling changes work properly than have something like The Hunt where a scaling change creates an unintended "OMG everyone is looking at 300s" situation.

Any chance the details of these changes might be shared with the community? The scaling rules already changed a few times, and each time some players were hit particularly hard without really knowing what they were being punished for. Once you find yourself in excessive scaling country your next weeks will be pretty miserable, no escape, so it would feel somewhat fair to know in time which play style to avoid.

elusive

So, I'm assuming any points not earned when the City portion shuts down are lost, right? Trying to decide if I need to keep an eye on things and grind everything down to 1 (I shudder to think what that'd do to my MMR) or not stress over it. Sorry if it's been answered, tried looking through a few of the pages and saw almost nothing but conversation on scaling and rubberbanding.

Unknown

daveomite wrote:

Bar looks to already be almost half way now. After my first clear at the beginning, I have less than 4k points, and now about 4k behind the leader.

FYI, if you go to the Event Rules tab, it tells you the completion rate. As of this post, the bar is 35% complete.

Unknown

elusive wrote:

So, I'm assuming any points not earned when the City portion shuts down are lost, right?

More importantly, is rubberbanding isolated to the current City event or will it carry over to the next event? Please, let it be the latter, it would make sleep and work so much less inconvenient.

Unknown

daveomite wrote:

Bar looks to already be almost half way now. After my first clear at the beginning, I have less than 4k points, and now about 4k behind the leader.

Timezones make me sad.

Woke up to see new event.
Saw it was heroic oscorp again. flashbacks!
See who the buffed heroes are!
Check the forums - see there are subs, first of which will likely close before I finish work in 12 hours time.

I guess I can hope all the crazies will all have entered ASAP, or will enter for a final refresh of sub 1. Might mean I get more of a slacker main.
But of course the main finishes while I'm at work too

NorthernPolarity

Moghwyn wrote:

elusive wrote:

So, I'm assuming any points not earned when the City portion shuts down are lost, right?

More importantly, is rubberbanding isolated to the current City event or will it carry over to the next event? Please, let it be the latter, it would make sleep and work so much less inconvenient.

It's isolated to the current city event (so it's per sub), IceIX confirmed earlier.

Unknown

ok, so I just clicked on a node in the sub that was worth 1553, finished, got 553 INSTEAD and now everything is worth a lot less.... ****?

daveomite

Knock3r wrote:

daveomite wrote:

Bar looks to already be almost half way now. After my first clear at the beginning, I have less than 4k points, and now about 4k behind the leader.

FYI, if you go to the Event Rules tab, it tells you the completion rate. As of this post, the bar is 35% complete.

I did not realize that, thanks. And right, it's not at 50% yet, but certainly close. At this rate, it may be gone before midnight eat time.

Unknown

I just noticed the global points goal went up from 200M to 400M.
I guess too many people were grinding away too hard, too fast.
It's kind of funny.

IceIX

Dr Spaceman wrote:

I just noticed the global points goal went up from 200M to 400M.
I guess too many people were grinding away too hard.

That was my doing/fault. Raised the alarm that City would be finished by midnight or sooner PST at this rate and that's way too quick. Designers looked at points in-flow with the knowledge of the average curve compared to previous Score Target Events, agreed, and flipped a few switches to raise the score. So hate or thank me for that as is your desire.

radiopy

Dr Spaceman wrote:

I just noticed the global points goal went up from 200M to 400M.
I guess too many people were grinding away too hard, too fast.
It's kind of funny.

Yeah, and points fell like a rock. I'm guessing they wanted this thing to take 2.5 days, next sub to take 2.5 days and the main to finish it out with 1 day. Had to make some tweaks given the excitement.