Grand Experiment 2: Treading Water in the SCL 10 Post-Shardpocalypse

Bowgentle

Yeah that Killmonger week was... Not fun.
Of course that was PC (pre Chasm) so... Yeah.

dianetics

@entrailbucket said:
Since we can't predict who's going to be boosted, and we also can't predict which boosted guys will work best with which features (witness: the America Chavez event where Killmonger was boosted, and if you didn't have him, you just lost forever), you can't plan out which guys to target.

Killmonger boosted for Americas pvp was a bloodbath, and it was one of the funnest pvps since boosts were so new at the time.
Very few people were actually running him, but the second time he was boosted everyone ran him.

I completely agree a fat roster outweighs a few maxed characters.

entrailbucket

@dianetics said:

@entrailbucket said:
Since we can't predict who's going to be boosted, and we also can't predict which boosted guys will work best with which features (witness: the America Chavez event where Killmonger was boosted, and if you didn't have him, you just lost forever), you can't plan out which guys to target.

Killmonger boosted for Americas pvp was a bloodbath, and it was one of the funnest pvps since boosts were so new at the time.
Very few people were actually running him, but the second time he was boosted everyone ran him.

I completely agree a fat roster outweighs a few maxed characters.

So...what's weird is that everyone seems to know this and agree with it, but no one does anything with this information. Scroll through rosters in the top 10 alliances, or look at the top of your brackets, and every single roster looks the same -- between 3 and 6 of the same few guys at 550 and absolutely nothing else.

The boosts have been around for a long time now, and new players are still hoarding and going all in. It's bizarre. Everyone says the boosted guys aren't worth using, because nobody has the boosted guys at a high level, so of course they're not worth using.

Bowgentle

I mean... You need what, 2100 pulls to get 3 550s?
So half of that is latest, half is CP.
So, 1050 X 25 = 26k CP.
Converted to classic pulls that's 1300 pulls, at 15% that's about 200 5* covers.
Spread that over 72 5s and you get fewer than 3 covers per 5.

Can you blame the new guys for wanting 3 550s instead of 72 guys getting 3 levels each?

entrailbucket

First off, how dare you. Of course I can blame them -- that's, like, my entire schtick. I'm not going to totally reinvent myself 10 years in!

The problem is short-term thinking (which is an odd thing to do when you're hoarding for literally years). Of course 3 covers isn't significant, but 20 covers
certainly are, or 40 covers, or 100, and you can't get to any of those points without getting 3 covers first. It's like signing up for a marathon and then spending 10 years inventing teleportation, rather than taking one step at a time.

And that's the other thing I don't get. Why on Earth would anyone want to speedrun to the highest levels in a game that has no ending? There's nothing magical or more fun about the 550 game that's missing at lower levels. Getting to the 550 game should just be an unfortunate side effect of hanging around forever -- it actually means you're running out of stuff to do.

Bowgentle

The longer the game goes on, the harder it is to say "keep thinking long term" - who knows if we get another five years now.
...on the other hand, I can totally live with the game ending without me having ever experienced 550 play.
But that's just me, not everyone might be satisfied with an average roster level of 480.

entrailbucket

People have been saying that for 10 years though, and because the game is constructed in such a smart way (massive pressure to get new players to spend, no reliance on whales), they've been wildly successful for way longer than other games of this type and aren't showing signs of decline.

Then there's the other contradiction again...what happens if the game ends while you were hoarding? I'd think if that was your concern, you'd open everything immediately so you could have fun using it immediately.

My major problem, though, is that very few people actually think about this stuff or consider the ramifications of what they're doing. If you want to speedrun the endgame with 3 550 characters, you understand everything that means, and it's still your goal, go for it! But don't do it just because someone else told you it was the only way to play, or the most optimal way to play. There are other ways to do it that are also fun/viable, and the only thing at the end of the treadmill is more treadmill.

ThaRoadWarrior

I was curious, so i calculated it. My average 5* level is 461. Highest is Profe$$or X at 475, lowest are Riri at 390 and Hitmonkey at 315, all the rest are champed.

entrailbucket

Average 5* level is actually the one metric I do keep track of, since that's my roster goal. Mine is 512 right now (not counting duplicates or Wong). The recent feeder changes pushed it up by 10 or 15, I think

entrailbucket

You asked awhile back how I felt about the buffs they've been doing and I said I'd need a boost week to figure it out. So, Silver Surfer is boosted this week and he's REALLY REALLY GOOD now.

I did some pretty extensive testing against 550 Chasm and he was basically a speed bump.

ThaRoadWarrior

Even baby champed, Silver Surfer has been pretty effective this boost week. It's largely been iHulk/SS for me and most of my MMR opponents.

entrailbucket

I didn't see him very much, because the folks in my matchmaking range all use the meta guys. I used hulk and surfer though, and they work well together. Surfer's crazy healing offsets boosted hulk's crazy friendly damage. Anyway I'd say it's a successful buff. Before this, Surfer at 672 was unusable (seriously).

Edit: to expand a bit, 672 Surfer should trivially stomp 550 Chasm because a difference of 120 levels should be very significant, regardless of character. 672 anybody should trivially stomp 550 anybody, and the biggest problem with the 5* tier is that this still isn't true.

I'd feel the same way about it if I was trying to beat 672 Chasm using 550 Surfer -- I should lose that match every single time.

KGB

@entrailbucket said:
I'd feel the same way about it if I was trying to beat 672 Chasm using 550 Surfer -- I should lose that match every single time.

I disagree with that reasoning. If so, you could never punch up in CL10 for example against 550 enemies with Shang or a host of other characters like BRB/Polaris etc (I routinely win the challenge node with L350 characters vs 500+s).

If you are just talking about straight match / power damage then yeah, one should beat the other handily. But cases like Shang who can achieve VERY high match damage boost or a stunner like Polaris etc that can allow the weaker character to win the battle when properly played.

KGB

entrailbucket

I suppose I should rephrase that slightly -- I don't believe you should be able to repeatedly, trivially punch 120 levels up, in PvP or PvE.

I think it's ok for you to have a chance but it should be an extremely difficult fight that requires much greater than normal match-3 skill, luck, boosts, teamups, or all of the above to win.

entrailbucket

Actually, I'm curious how far this should extend down. If players should be able to trivially "punch up" by 120 or more levels, and you're running lvl350 4*, do you often lose to 3* teams in PvP? Would you feel good if you were losing to 1* or 2* teams?

Should every player, from day 1 of playing, be able to clear CL10, or should it be too hard for, say, 1* rosters?

If they don't give some incentive to level your guys up, you end up with softcappers exploiting scaling mechanics to win everything in "easy mode."

ThaRoadWarrior

What would you say is the correct matchup delta users should expect to see in PVP? If I have a 450 surfer boosted to 560, should I be seeing 650 characters in my MMR? If that’s all I’m getting fed to fight I’d hope I at least had a chance to win, maybe not walk all over them though. At least in PVE you self select enemy level.

entrailbucket

I'm not sure. Does the game show you 650s now? In general they do an ok job of hiding fights you have no hope of winning. I've heard that when I was running dual 672s I was totally invisible to 550 players, which was annoying (I like being attacked so I can fight retal wars).

What I was really getting at is that "punching up" doesn't feel as great when you're the one who's being punched. If you're running 450s would you expect to lose to 4* teams? Shouldn't your 560 be a tough fight for unboosted 5*?

Bowgentle

@entrailbucket said:
Actually, I'm curious how far this should extend down. If players should be able to trivially "punch up" by 120 or more levels, and you're running lvl350 4*, do you often lose to 3* teams in PvP? Would you feel good if you were losing to 1* or 2* teams?

Should every player, from day 1 of playing, be able to clear CL10, or should it be too hard for, say, 1* rosters?

If they don't give some incentive to level your guys up, you end up with softcappers exploiting scaling mechanics to win everything in "easy mode."

You realize KGB is running 5s at 350, right?
He IS softcapping.

ThaRoadWarrior

I usually don’t see them on my climb until I get up into full progression type points. Right now ~580 is about as high as I can queue, which is a decent gap that isn’t too bad.

I will say that boosted Moon Knight - still totally unusable. Similarly, Mr sinister seems ill equipped to handle these big Hulks that are coming out to play. I was expecting MK and Hulk to have some synergy with that green outlet, but I think Surfer’s heal is mandatory for survivability.

HoundofShadow

SS's buff is one awesome change. Fire his black hole and wait for it to reach one before switching to full health boosted enemy to down them on the next turn. I'm talking about downing a 160-210k health enemy instantly.