@ArchusMonk said: 1* (3 Powers) should be 1908 covers 16x13=208 to make 16 max 1*. 8 bindings produces 8 2* level 94 x 50 level each = 400 covers to make 8x max 2*. 4 max bindings produces 4 3* level 191 x 75 more levels each x 2 covers per level = 600 covers to make 4x max 3*. 2 max bindings produces 2 4* level 303 + 1 extra cover x 66 2/3 more levels each x 3 covers per level = 400 covers to make 2x max 4*. 1 max binding produces a 5* level 475 x 75 more levels x 4 covers per level = 300 covers. Total = 1908 covers. This is simply not correct. The OP had a math error in his post. He only did 4 bindings instead of 8 at level 1. THE NUMBER OF COVERS REQUIRED DOES NOT CHANGE REGARDLESS OF HOW YOU DECIDE TO ASCEND. The devs said as much in their post. I don’t know why you insist on fighting math. Find me an example where it isn’t like that. I’ll save you time. That example does not exist. You can't fight math, and this is EXACTLY what Icex was trying to demonstrate without the math. It's a simple math formula. There is no number N that will fall outside the formula or fail to produce the same results.
@ArchusMonk said: 1* (3 Powers) should be 1908 covers 16x13=208 to make 16 max 1*. 8 bindings produces 8 2* level 94 x 50 level each = 400 covers to make 8x max 2*. 4 max bindings produces 4 3* level 191 x 75 more levels each x 2 covers per level = 600 covers to make 4x max 3*. 2 max bindings produces 2 4* level 303 + 1 extra cover x 66 2/3 more levels each x 3 covers per level = 400 covers to make 2x max 4*. 1 max binding produces a 5* level 475 x 75 more levels x 4 covers per level = 300 covers. Total = 1908 covers.
This is simply not correct. The OP had a math error in his post. He only did 4 bindings instead of 8 at level 1. THE NUMBER OF COVERS REQUIRED DOES NOT CHANGE REGARDLESS OF HOW YOU DECIDE TO ASCEND. The devs said as much in their post.
I don’t know why you insist on fighting math. Find me an example where it isn’t like that. I’ll save you time. That example does not exist.
You can't fight math, and this is EXACTLY what Icex was trying to demonstrate without the math. It's a simple math formula. There is no number N that will fall outside the formula or fail to produce the same results.
You seem to be saying two contradictory things here: 1) It shouldn't matter whether you're Binding a Max Champ & a Max Level or two Max Champs, the total number of covers required should be the same. 2) But the only "error" you can find in my math is that I am Binding a Max Champ & a Max Level, and my math doesn't match your math when you're Binding two Max Champs. You haven't actually found any problems with my math, you just assert that you're right and I'm wrong.
So... allow me to point out the error you made in your math:
1★: 16 characters x 13 covers = 208 covers
[BIND: 8 level 94, 2★ characters]
2★: 8 characters x 50 levels x 1 cover per level = 400 covers
[BIND; 4 level 191, 3★ characters: 50 extra covers worth of credit (50 levels x 1 cover per level) towards 200 covers necessary to Max Champ 3★ = 1/4 of 100 levels = 25 levels of credit. 166 + 25 = 191]
3★: 4 characters x 75 levels x 2 covers per level = 600 covers
[BIND; 2 level 336+2/3, 4★ characters: 200 extra covers worth of credit (100 levels x 2 covers per level) towards 300 covers necessary to Max Champ 4★ = 2/3 of 100 levels = 66+2/3 levels of credit. 270 + 66+2/3 = 336+2/3]
4★: 2 characters x 33+1/3 levels x 3 covers per level = 200 covers
[BIND; 1 level 525, 5★ character: 300 extra covers worth of credit (100 levels x 3 covers per level) towards 400 covers necessary to Max Champ 5★ = 3/4 of 100 levels = 75 levels of credit. 450 + 75 = 525]
5★: 1 character x 25 levels x 4 covers per level = 100 covers
208 + 400 + 600 + 200 + 100 = 1,508 covers
This agrees with my earlier math, and contradicts your answer of 1,908 covers
@meadowsweet said: @ArchusMonk said: 1* (3 Powers) should be 1908 covers 16x13=208 to make 16 max 1*. 8 bindings produces 8 2* level 94 x 50 level each = 400 covers to make 8x max 2*. 4 max bindings produces 4 3* level 191 x 75 more levels each x 2 covers per level = 600 covers to make 4x max 3*. 2 max bindings produces 2 4* level 303 + 1 extra cover x 66 2/3 more levels each x 3 covers per level = 400 covers to make 2x max 4*. 1 max binding produces a 5* level 475 x 75 more levels x 4 covers per level = 300 covers. Total = 1908 covers. This is simply not correct. The OP had a math error in his post. He only did 4 bindings instead of 8 at level 1. THE NUMBER OF COVERS REQUIRED DOES NOT CHANGE REGARDLESS OF HOW YOU DECIDE TO ASCEND. The devs said as much in their post. I don’t know why you insist on fighting math. Find me an example where it isn’t like that. I’ll save you time. That example does not exist. You can't fight math, and this is EXACTLY what Icex was trying to demonstrate without the math. It's a simple math formula. There is no number N that will fall outside the formula or fail to produce the same results. You seem to be saying two contradictory things here: 1) It shouldn't matter whether you're Binding a Max Champ & a Max Level or two Max Champs, the total number of covers required should be the same. 2) But the only "error" you can find in my math is that I am Binding a Max Champ & a Max Level, and my math doesn't match your math when you're Binding two Max Champs. You haven't actually found any problems with my math, you just assert that you're right and I'm wrong. So... allow me to point out the error you made in your math: 1★: 16 characters x 13 covers = 208 covers [BIND: 8 level 94, 2★ characters] 2★: 8 characters x 50 levels x 1 cover per level = 400 covers [BIND; 4 level 191, 3★ characters: 50 extra covers worth of credit (50 levels x 1 cover per level) towards 200 covers necessary to Max Champ 3★ = 1/4 of 100 levels = 25 levels of credit. 166 + 25 = 191] 3★: 4 characters x 75 levels x 2 covers per level = 600 covers [BIND; 2 level 336+2/3, 4★ characters: 200 extra covers worth of credit (100 levels x 2 covers per level) towards 300 covers necessary to Max Champ 4★ = 2/3 of 100 levels = 66+2/3 levels of credit. 270 + 66+2/3 = 336+2/3] 4★: 2 characters x 33+1/3 levels x 3 covers per level = 200 covers [BIND; 1 level 525, 5★ character: 300 extra covers worth of credit (100 levels x 3 covers per level) towards 400 covers necessary to Max Champ 5★ = 3/4 of 100 levels = 75 levels of credit. 450 + 75 = 525] 5★: 1 character x 25 levels x 4 covers per level = 100 covers 208 + 400 + 600 + 200 + 100 = 1,508 covers This agrees with my earlier math, and contradicts your answer of 1,908 covers
@meadowsweet said:
You're correct up to up to level 3 - 1208 covers produces 4x 3* level 266. After this is where your math falls apart.
It should be BIND; 4 level 266 3 star. 4 star characters 100 extra covers worth of credit (100 levels / 3 covers per level) = 33 1/3 levels. It's 270 + 33 1/3 =level 303 1/3, so each of those 4* requires 66 2/3 more levels x 3 covers per level = 200 more covers EACH = 400 covers.
This is confirmed with the example Kolence gave from IceX
IceIX gave the example on discord of two level 266 Iron Man copies merging into a level 303 (and some change in shards I guess?). It shows that the 100 levels you gave to the 2nd 3-star copy is only worth 33 levels for the 4-star.
Then the next level you made the same mistake.
It should be BIND: 2 level 370 4 star. 5 star characters 100 extra covers worth of credit (100 levels / 4 covers per level) = 25 levels. 450 + 25 = 475. 75 levels to 550 x 4 covers per level = 300 covers.
1208 + 400 + 300 = 1908.
This data is CONFIRMED by IceX in a photo someone else took from a discord chat.
Look guys, I've read every post in all 18 pages of this thread. All my math and analysis are based on things the devs have directly said, not assumptions or guesswork. Now if the system rolls out and doesn't end up working the way they intended, that's on them, but the basis for all my work is the way the devs have said they intend the system to work.
All that mathing makes my head hurt... can we just go back to HULK SMASH!
@ArchusMonk said: You're correct up to up to level 3 - 1208 covers produces 4x 3* level 266. After this is where your math falls apart. Then the next level you made the same mistake. This data is CONFIRMED by IceX in a photo someone else took from a discord chat. Look guys, I've read every post in all 18 pages of this thread. All my math and analysis are based on things the devs have directly said, not assumptions or guesswork. Now if the system rolls out and doesn't end up working the way they intended, that's on them, but the basis for all my work is the way the devs have said they intend the system to work.
Okay, so the possibilities are: 1) The devs are launching badly written code that does not properly credit you for the covers you have invested. It really does cost 400 more covers (27% more) to get a 1★ to level 550 using only Max Champ characters. Because... they're penalizing you for receiving champ rewards? Or they just screwed up on their math? 2) @IceIX incorrectly understands the math involved and is mis-speaking on Discord; that is not the programming that will actually be rolled out 3) There is an as-of-yet unidentified error in my original math... but that math error that also perfectly agrees with what I would consider "proper credit" for Binding two Max Champs?
@IceIX said:Wait, so what happens if I have two 266 3-Stars and Bind them to make a 4-Star? I can make a 4-Star with a 166 and a 266, so do I just lose the extra covers from using a 266 instead? You’ll automatically get the “extra” covers in credit towards the next rarity. So in this case, you’d get the 4-Star Ascended character and 100 covers worth of credit towards those new levels, just like Saved Covers work when you Champion a character.
I guess it depends if IceIX means "100 covers worth of credit" literally or figuratively. It would appear they are only giving you 100 covers' worth of credit for 3★ & 4★ Max Champs, even though they should be worth 200 & 300 covers respectively?:
2★: 50 levels x 1 cover per level = 50 covers 3★: 100 levels x 2 cover per level = 200 covers 4★: 100 levels x 3 cover per level = 300 covers 5★: 100 levels x 4 cover per level = 400 covers
Or put another way, your level to level credits should be: 2★: Max Champ-ing costs 25% compared to a 3★ 3★: Max Champ-ing costs 66.7% compared to a 4★ 4★: Max Champ-ing costs 75% compared to a 5★
But if IceIX is correct and they're truly only giving 100 covers worth of credit: 4★: 100 covers / 300 needed = 33.3% credit, should be 66.7% 5★: 100 covers / 400 needed = 25% credit, should be 75%
But the Devs must know about the change in exchange rates, right? They seem to be claiming they are correctly giving you 50 / 200 = 25% = 25 levels = Level 191 3★ characters. They aren't just giving you a flat 100 cover credit at that level, because that would be over-crediting you. But then at the next two levels they make the opposite mistake and under-credit you?
@meadowsweet said: @IceIX said:Wait, so what happens if I have two 266 3-Stars and Bind them to make a 4-Star? I can make a 4-Star with a 166 and a 266, so do I just lose the extra covers from using a 266 instead? You’ll automatically get the “extra” covers in credit towards the next rarity. So in this case, you’d get the 4-Star Ascended character and 100 covers worth of credit towards those new levels, just like Saved Covers work when you Champion a character. I guess it depends if IceIX means "100 covers worth of credit" literally or figuratively. It would appear they are only giving you 100 covers' worth of credit for 3★ & 4★ Max Champs, even though they should be worth 200 & 300 covers respectively?: 2★: 50 levels x 1 cover per level = 50 covers 3★: 100 levels x 2 cover per level = 200 covers 4★: 100 levels x 3 cover per level = 300 covers 5★: 100 levels x 4 cover per level = 400 covers Or put another way, your level to level credits should be: 2★: Max Champ-ing costs 25% compared to a 3★ 3★: Max Champ-ing costs 66.7% compared to a 4★ 4★: Max Champ-ing costs 75% compared to a 5★ But if IceIX is correct and they're truly only giving 100 covers worth of credit: 4★: 100 covers / 300 needed = 33.3% credit, should be 66.7% 5★: 100 covers / 400 needed = 25% credit, should be 75% But the Devs must know about the change in exchange rates, right? They seem to be claiming they are correctly giving you 50 / 200 = 25% = 25 levels = Level 191 3★ characters. They aren't just giving you a flat 100 cover credit at that level, because that would be over-crediting you. But then at the next two levels they make the opposite mistake and under-credit you?
I'm not sure what you are referencing. Do you mean this table?
Ascension Level Up Chart
If this is the table you mean, then I think you're mis-interpreting it. It's not a table where you multiply "credits". It's a table where you multiply how many covers you need to level up. So at the 3 star level where the multiplier is 2, you need 200 1 star or 2 star covers to achieve 100 champ levels. When you level up 2 max champs, you have 50 covers of "credit" at the 3 star level. 50 covers / 2 covers per level = 25 levels. That is where the 25 levels comes from for going from 166 to 191.
I'm not sure what you mean by "under-credit"? At the 4 star level where the multiplier is 3, you need 300 1 star or 2 star or 3 star covers to achieve 100 champ levels. When you level up 2 max champs, you have 100 covers of "credit" at the 4 star level. 100 covers / 3 covers per level = 33 1/3 levels. That is how you get from 270 to 303 1/3.
I'm not sure what you are arguing in this section below.
Where are you getting those numbers? Do you mean ISO8 costs? If so, I don't think that's what they are trying to balance.
>
1) The devs are launching badly written code that does not properly credit you for the covers you have invested. It really does cost 400 more covers (27% more) to get a 1★ to level 550 using only Max Champ characters. Because... they're penalizing you for receiving champ rewards? Or they just screwed up on their math? 2) @IceIX incorrectly understands the math involved and is mis-speaking on Discord; that is not the programming that will actually be rolled out 3) There is an as-of-yet unidentified error in my original math... but that math error that also perfectly agrees with what I would consider "proper credit" for Binding two Max Champs?
I hope everyone gets to the bottom line of this thread: 1. It takes a ton of covers to ascend to 550 2. You maximize champ rewards by Binding 2 max champs, but it takes the same amount of covers however you do it. 3. You could sacrifice champ rewards to get a higher level fighter now (i.e. 370 Polaris + 270 Polaris = 450 Polaris) 4. Champ rewards are better ascending than recycling in the same tier for 1s, 2s and 3s. Of course, anything is better than selling 1 covers for 100 ISO. 5. Champ rewards are nearly the same ascending 4*s and I would be glad to present that data if anyone wants to see it. 6. The game should have more variety with ascended characters but that will take time.
My highest dupe 4* is Cap Marvel at 340, a function of a decent character so fave'd at some points who was also around during the time of latest 12 boosted odds. She is 6.5 years old, released in Jan 2017.
Reality is for the vast majority ascension of double max 4s is a long laborious process. Lots of theoretical talk in here, but be interested to see if ascended 4* start appearing in my MMR world soon.
I am still 30 covers from having a double max dupe and another 3+ years from another 100 covers for dupe #3 or an ascended lvl 500 5*. Collecting 100 covers, never mind 300 covers for a 550 is not quick.
One debated point is 4* rewards vs ascended 5* rewards, I take the quicker drip of 4* champ rewards and guaranteed 5* from feeders over the 5* alternate.
From the character playability as ascended side - as a player I am happy with the rotating boost and large number of 5* characters at my disposal, I still get a good weekly variety style of play. I don't see a benefit to my daily play to add ascended 4*s into the mix so I will likely not be ascending 4s. (but then again I've still got 30 Cap Marvels to collect before I need to decide!)
Pulling classics speeds up the process pretty significantly -- ask @ThaRoadWarrior. I've got a ton of 4* dupes, including a bunch of double-max guys, ready to go for tomorrow.
@ArchusMonk said: I'm not sure what you are referencing. Do you mean this table? If this is the table you mean, then I think you're mis-interpreting it. I'm not sure what you mean by "under-credit"? I'm not sure what you are arguing in this section below. Where are you getting those numbers?
I'm sorry if I'm not explaining it well enough for you to follow.
You are not properly converting the value of 100 levels of Max Champ upgrades before you divide them by the cost of the next tier. Your math says: 100 levels of 3★ Max Champ upgrades = 100 covers. 100 covers / (3 covers per 4★ level) = 33.3 levels 100 levels of 4★ Max Champ upgrades = 100 covers. 100 covers / (4 covers per 5★ level) = 25 levels
You're saying "1 level = 1 cover", regardless of the tier. By your math: 1 level of 3★ Max Champ upgrades = 1 cover = 1 level of 4★ Max Champ upgrades
But... that math doesn't work. "Levels" are not interchangeable between 3★ & 4★ characters. You should be converting back to the actual common currency: covers. That's why your level 550 costs 400 more covers than mine. Not all levels are created equal: 2★ = one 1★ cover 3★ = two 1★ covers 4★ = three 1★ covers 5★ = four 1★ covers
If you convert back to covers first, the math looks like this instead: 100 levels of 3★ Max Champ upgrades = 200 covers. 200 covers / (3 covers per 4★ level) = 66.7 levels 100 levels of 4★ Max Champ upgrades = 300 covers. 300 covers / (4 covers per 5★ level) = 75 levels
Your math is cheating yourself out of the credit for the covers you have invested in the increasingly more expensive levels as you go higher and higher. You are giving away levels that you have earned and paid for, and forcing yourself to pay for the same levels a second time, making it more expensive and slower for yourself.
You said yourself that the math MUST match, regardless of whether players are using Max Champ or Max Level characters (or anything in between.) So do the exercise for yourself: run through the math, upgrading characters to Level 550 using the bare-minimum Max Level characters wherever possible. If you come up with a different answer than you arrived at using only Max Champ characters, then you know that it cannot be correct - they MUST match.
@Kolence and @meadowsweet it appears I owe you both an apology. Despite the stated goals of the devs, there DOES appear to be a tax for getting the champ rewards before ascending. I didn't understand the way you did your math, so I re-ran your numbers in a way that I understand, and they were correct @meadowsweet
16 max champ 1* x 13 covers = 208 covers.
Ascending them x8 creates 8 2 star level 94. Levelling 4 of those to 144 costs 50 covers each = 200 covers.
Ascending 4 max champ 2 star 144 and 4 max level 2 star 94 creates 4 3 star 166. Levelling 2 of those to 266 costs 100 x 2 covers per level x 2 toons = 400 covers.
Ascending 2 max champ 3 star 266 and 2 max level 3 star 166 creates 2 4 star 270. Levelling 1 of those to 370 costs 100 x 3 covers per level = 300 covers.
Ascending 1 max champ 4 star 370 and 1 max level 4 star 270 creates 1 5 star 450. Levelling that to 550 costs 100 x 4 covers per level = 400 covers.
Total 1508 covers. That's a 400 cover tax to get those champ rewards. That's probably worth it, but still you are correct. I just don't understand where those covers go. I'll have to ponder that.
For 2 star ascension, 4 2 star 144 and 4 2 star 94 costs (63x4 + 13x4) = 304 covers.
Ascending those creates 4 3 star 166. Levelling 2 of those to 266 costs 100 x 2 covers per level x 2 toons = 400 covers.
Total 1404 covers. The max champ method requires 1804 covers. Again, a 400 cover tax.
For 3 star ascension, 2 3 star 266 and 2 3 star 166 costs (113x2 + 13x2) = 252 covers.
Ascending those creates 2 4 star 270. Levelling 1 of those to 370 costs 100 x 3 covers per level = 300 covers.
Total 952 covers. The max champ method requires 1152 covers. That's a 200 cover tax.
For 4 star ascension, 1 4 star 370 and 1 4 star 270 costs 126 covers.
Ascending those creates a 5 star 450. Levelling that to 550 costs 400 covers.
Total 526 covers. The max champ method costs 526 covers. No tax.
I really don't know where those tax covers "go", but you guys were correct! This doesn't change the value proposition for 1* ascending, and probably not 2* ascending, but maybe for 3* ascending?
Thanks for keeping after me!
@ArchusMonk, like I said, hopefully @IceIX just misspoke and that's not the actual plan?
If not, hopefully the devs realize their unintentional error and fix it before releasing?
If not, hopefully they'll roll out retroactive rewards to the folks who immediately Bind two Max Champ characters and miss out on champ levels at the next tier?
If not, hopefully they have a good explanation at why they decided the two methods (Max Champ vs. Max Level) should not match one another?
In the FAQ, IceIX describes the extra levels as being applied "just like Saved Covers work", so we should get the champion level rewards on the higher tier character.
18 freaking pages of this and there's still confusion.
I've been skipping all the math stuff because I assume it's not optimal to Ascend every single character possible right away, and I am absolutely, unquestionably, 100% going to spend all day doing that immediately whenever this drops.
@entrailbucket said: I've been skipping all the math stuff because I assume it's not optimal to Ascend every single character possible right away, and I am absolutely, unquestionably, 100% going to spend all day doing that immediately whenever this drops.
Really looking forward to you doing a writeup on your results in a separate post so the rest of us can see how it's playing out.
KGB
Should I be recruiting and leveling 1* dupes so I can use them to ascend once they’re eligible? I have one set of max level but I’m guessing we shouldn’t be selling anything at this point?
@ArchusMonk No worries. At least I got to be called an Unbeliever. And my name's not even Thom...
Here's the table just for 1-star ascension. I tried making it online for markdown, but it's either impossible, or not on a phone, or I suck.
EDIT - Pffft. Messed up the starting 13 covers while copying to that online table generator. Now the covers counts are good.
@Kolence @meadowsweet @ArchusMonk Alright, I’ve done the comparison and must admit that you guys are right. Ascending to 550 with max+min champs takes fewer covers than max+max champs. Why? It’s because you pay the cover/level ratio (3:1 or 4:1) an extra time for 3-Stars and two extra times with 2-Stars. So, that’s 200 more covers with 3-Stars and 400 more covers with 2-Stars. This doesn’t happen going up 1 tier, like 4-Stars would.
Now comes the harder math problem - which method gives you better champ rewards? I’m assuming the max+min champ method will because you jump to the next tier faster, but I want to confirm that.
@bbigler said:@Kolence @meadowsweet @ArchusMonk Alright, I’ve done the comparison and must admit that you guys are right. Ascending to 550 with max+min champs takes fewer covers than max+max champs. Why? It’s because you pay the cover/level ratio (3:1 or 4:1) an extra time for 3-Stars and two extra times with 2-Stars. So, that’s 200 more covers with 3-Stars and 400 more covers with 2-Stars. This doesn’t happen going up 1 tier, like 4-Stars would. Now comes the harder math problem - which method gives you better champ rewards? I’m assuming the max+min champ method will because you jump to the next tier faster, but I want to confirm that.
@bbigler said:@Kolence @meadowsweet @ArchusMonk Alright, I’ve done the comparison and must admit that you guys are right. Ascending to 550 with max+min champs takes fewer covers than max+max champs. Why? It’s because you pay the cover/level ratio (3:1 or 4:1) an extra time for 3-Stars and two extra times with 2-Stars. So, that’s 200 more covers with 3-Stars and 400 more covers with 2-Stars. This doesn’t happen going up 1 tier, like 4-Stars would.
No. You get strictly more champ rewards for some extra low level covers, if you wait with merging. Now, it's the same question as with opening tokens when you may not be able to roster everything. But that's too complicated for me.
We'll "waste" some 1's and 2's while waiting for the next batches. Or, some might hoard the standard and elite/heroic tokens for a while. I know I won't be able to resist checking how quickly 1*s can progress...