Shield Clearance Levels (SCLs) don't line up with actual roster strength

bbigler

This is a potential problem for new players, a new SCL opens up to them because of their rank, so they play in that SCL in order to get better rewards, but end up getting clobbered AND getting low placement rewards as well.  Even in PVP, this is a problem, because when I moved up to higher SCLs, my opponents got tougher despite having the same roster as the event before.  Now, being a veteran player who chose to restart the game, I didn't fall for this trap, but I'm sure other new players have.  I wanted to point this out to the devs and anyone else who cares to comment. 

For example, this past weekend I reached Shield Rank 65, which opened up SCL 9 to me, but do I have usable 4*s or 5*s?  No way, my fighters consist of 3*Champs at levels 170 to 180.  I don't even have all 3*s champed, just half of them.  So, why would the game allow me to play at SCL 8 or 9 with a roster like that?  It's like a trap. 

Now, I will admit that I've been farming XP from 1* covers (which new players may figure out), but even if I didn't, I would still qualify for SCL 8 PVE, which honestly is difficult for me.  Sure, I can beat level 330 enemies, but it's hard and requires health packs.  If I tried playing SCL 9 PVE, I would lose.  PVP is better, but I can't get good placement rewards anymore.  Anyway, this general truth of my top SCL being beyond the strength of my roster has been true since my 1st week after the restart.  Perhaps it's not a big deal, but I wanted to mention it. 

plano78

They are giving you options; it's not like you HAVE to opt up. Jeez.

Jwallyr

1) SCL in Versus doesn't have any impact on the opponents with which you are presented. It's (allegedly, supposedly) based on your MMR (matchmaking rating/ranking) which is thought to be something like the average level of your highest 3 to 5 characters, based on rough estimates from player observation since we have no other useful data on how Versus matchmaking actually works.

I agree that your Versus SCL should impact who you are matched against, but at current it mostly just impacts your rewards. What's worse is that the enforced minimum bracket forces players up brackets when they may not want to play at that level, and it's 100% opaque and arbitrary why that should be the case.

2) I feel like learning the relationship between enemy levels and difficulty is kind of a core mechanic of the game. Sure, it's possible for players to accidentally join a bracket that's "too high", but that's only going to happen once or twice before a player will either learn to gauge what their roster can handle (a core part of the game) or will quit in disgust because they just don't get it. People in that second category are unlikely to last long in this kind of game anyway, so I'm not sure that having high-end SCLs open up laughably early (which they do) is really that big of a problem.

Just my 2 cents.

Dormammu

There's no way to gauge exactly what a player is or isn't ready for based on the XP system. There's too many variables. It's a lot better than it was when we got XP from things like opening a Standard Token and receiving a 1-star, or giving out a Team-Up to an alliance mate, or winning in a PvE node.

But it's either this or go back to roster-based scaling. I'll take this and the new guys are just going to have to figure it out.

(Many of us have made the mistake of joining a SCL that is too high or too low. Sometimes we have to fall before we learn to walk.)

broll

They never have. I yelled this for a while back when the system launched. I eventually gave up. 

Rod5

I checked to see if there is much of a guide in-game, and it points players towards this forum.

Persephone

I made a similar complaint on thread 

https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/74674/player-feedback-survey-discussion-with-bonus-5th-anniversary-questions#latest

(I apologize if I linked to the discussion wrong.  First time doing that.)

Maybe if we all complained about it loud enough, the developers would look into readjusting SR to SCL ratio. 

One could hope....

Phumade

The mistake is that SCL only relates to your opponents TANGENTIALLY at best.

SCL relates to rewards!!!!!  not difficulty.

As explained many many times in many many different threads.  You share the same pool of opponents whether you are in SCL 1 or 9.  The only thing SCL indicates is how good the rewards are.  Any delineation of vet / noob / exp whale / forum monkey is based on your individual interpretation.  The system doesn't care how good or bad the players actually are.

If 500 baby 4* want to sign up for scl9.  The system will flat out give them the next 500 bracket slots.

if 500 mega whales (lvl 550) want to play in scl 7.  The system will let them sign up for the next 500 bracket slots.

The  "guidelines" you see quoted on the sighnup screen are mere suggestions that have nothing to do with where people actually sign up.


Winning placement prizes in scl has less to do with roster strength and more to do with understanding how people signup and decide upon scl brackets.  

shardwick

SCL is a double-edged sword. The plus is that you can pick the difficulty of enemies (pve) and the rewards (pve/pvp) that is best for you but others can too so if you're a new player, maybe you have some champed 2s and decently leveled 3s and want to play in cl3 people with far more advanced rosters can also play in that bracket even if they really have no business being down there since the rewards are pretty much junk.

I remember earlier this year I was playing on my backup account I had leveled up enough so that I could unlock Story and I was so pumped. I was going to destroy my competition. I finished my clears of a sub and then looked at the roster of the guy in first. He had a level 420 5*. Remember that we're talking about clearance level ONE. Ok, maybe just an anomaly. Maybe he accidentally picked cl1 when he usually plays on higher levels. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. Next few events I played on cl2 and cl3. The top 10 was like almost  nothing but 3-4* transitioners and 4* players. 

The current system is pretty broken for pve. Granted it's better than the old one but still. 

UNC_Samurai

The reward increase from CL7 to 8 and then 9 certainly isn’t inspiring people to challenge themselves.

TPF Alexis

shardwick said:

I remember earlier this year I was playing on my backup account I had leveled up enough so that I could unlock Story and I was so pumped. I was going to destroy my competition. I finished my clears of a sub and then looked at the roster of the guy in first. He had a level 420 5*. Remember that we're talking about clearance level ONE. Ok, maybe just an anomaly. Maybe he accidentally picked cl1 when he usually plays on higher levels. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. Next few events I played on cl2 and cl3. The top 10 was like almost  nothing but 3-4* transitioners and 4* players.

Man, that is a jerk move. I do sometimes drop way down when I need a break (currently playing in SCL5, actually), but when I do, I always sign up for a slice that I can't play optimally, or otherwise make sure I'm not going to be taking top placement away from someone who actually belongs in that SCL.

Jwallyr

In keeping with the general conversation about SCLs being correlated with roster strength and/or rewards, I have a story to tell.

For reasons that don't deserve exploration at this time, I happened to be up shortly after 1AM last night after my 5.7 slice had rolled over. I checked the event and saw that there were already several rosters with full clears, and a quick check revealed that the top 10 was packed with champed 5star players, who I can only assume were slumming in hopes of scoring high placement in SCL 7 to get Shuri covers to try and squeeze out an extra LL before Shuri's champ rewards are updated to give Okoye covers.

IMO, the rewards should almost always be sufficiently improved at higher SCLs that players capable of handling those SCLs should have no reason to slum. The fact that it's worth their time to drop down to SCL7 (and in so doing, completely screw over players like myself who can't really compete at SCL8 or 9) is indicative that the rewards at higher SCLs are not good enough to keep players up there. It's just a bad experience all around.

bbigler

The time sink of PVE is ridiculous!  Which is why choosing a lower SCL in order to clear faster is appealing.  My typical daily routine is this:

DDQ = 6 matches
PVE = 60+ matches
PVP = 20 matches
Shield Sim = 3 matches
**I'm not counting Lightning Rounds**

So, if I can save time playing PVE, I should, but I also want the 4* progression reward, so SCL 7 is probably the sweet spot.  The extra difficulty (and time) in SCL 8 is not worth the marginal difference in rewards.  I'm thinking that even with champed 5*s I may still want to play SCL 7 in PVE to reduce that time sink.  But if they open up SCL 10 by then with 5* progression rewards, I'll feel obligated to play it.

bbigler

Jwallyr said:

In keeping with the general conversation about SCLs being correlated with roster strength and/or rewards, I have a story to tell.

For reasons that don't deserve exploration at this time, I happened to be up shortly after 1AM last night after my 5.7 slice had rolled over. I checked the event and saw that there were already several rosters with full clears, and a quick check revealed that the top 10 was packed with champed 5star players, who I can only assume were slumming in hopes of scoring high placement in SCL 7 to get Shuri covers to try and squeeze out an extra LL before Shuri's champ rewards are updated to give Okoye covers.

IMO, the rewards should almost always be sufficiently improved at higher SCLs that players capable of handling those SCLs should have no reason to slum. The fact that it's worth their time to drop down to SCL7 (and in so doing, completely screw over players like myself who can't really compete at SCL8 or 9) is indicative that the rewards at higher SCLs are not good enough to keep players up there. It's just a bad experience all around.

Yes and yes.  The source of the problem is not good enough rewards in SCL 8 and 9.  Come on devs, fix it already.

Jwallyr

Between the time sink and the fact that every single time slice is awful for me, I have to agree. Whether I'm trying to catch a "lazy" 5.7 slice or trying to somehow squeeze 2 hours of MPQ into my work hours >_> the end result is that I'm dumping an inordinate amount of time into this game for diminishing returns as you move up the scale. The *only* rewards that matter to me at current are 4stars and CP (which translate into 4stars), so playing lower than SCL7 is not really a great option, but when slummers drop down and remove even the potential of t10? Might as well do my 5 clears for max prog and call it a day.

Jaedenkaal

At least one reason why SCL isn't a good measure of roster strength is because not all characters are equally effective. Any system that assumes that all 3* (or 4*, or 5*) covers are of equal play value will fail to accurately gauge the strength of your roster.

fmftint

 Why? Because brackets need bodies to fill them

fmftint

 Why? Because brackets need bodies to fill them

broll

Jwallyr said:

IMO, the rewards should almost always be sufficiently improved at higher SCLs that players capable of handling those SCLs should have no reason to slum. The fact that it's worth their time to drop down to SCL7 (and in so doing, completely screw over players like myself who can't really compete at SCL8 or 9) is indicative that the rewards at higher SCLs are not good enough to keep players up there. It's just a bad experience all around.

Agreed, I beat that drum for a long time, eventually my hands got tired.  Granted they seem to be much more response to feedback now vs when I was doing it.  Maybe it's worth sounding that alarm again and see if we get a different result.

Jwallyr

OJSP said:

Jwallyr said:

For reasons that don't deserve exploration at this time, I happened to be up shortly after 1AM last night after my 5.7 slice had rolled over. I checked the event and saw that there were already several rosters with full clears, and a quick check revealed that the top 10 was packed with champed 5star players, who I can only assume were slumming in hopes of scoring high placement in SCL 7 to get Shuri covers to try and squeeze out an extra LL before Shuri's champ rewards are updated to give Okoye covers.

Whatever the reason for them joining SCL7, it wouldn’t be to get the extra LT from champion rewards. Or, if that was their intention, they would be disappointed. The update will occur before the end of the event. They won’t get the Shuri covers before the Okoye covers.

Might just be for the eventual Okoye covers themselves, but either way the result is SCL-appropriate players (like myself) getting crowded out of rewards by slummers. Give appropriate rewards at higher SCLs and the experience improves for everybody, IMO.

Phumade

Jwallyr said:

Give appropriate rewards at higher SCLs and the experience improves for everybody, IMO.

Doubtful honestly.

While cover rewards are the main and most important reason to select a scl and a bracket with scl.  That's really not what drives the join decision for a big chunk of people.

And ultimately its that "chunk of people" that effectively takes you out of placement.

People have already said it best.  because of time, avoid other, and convenience reasons,  there are very compelling reasons to drop in scl in both pvp and pve.


You could give LT to the entire top 10 , and there is a very real chunk of veteran players who will say.  "not worth the time and effort to compete for T10,  drop to scl7 and slum it for 25% of the effort.  In fact the better the rewards,  the more competition in 10, means more vets will seek out easier placements in lower brackets.