New Feature - Champions 2.0 (Live with R287)

ArchusMonk

@Daredevil217 said:
I don’t understand where the tax comes from or what it means despite multiple people breaking it down. I just want to figure out the most optimal way to turn what I have into 5 stars one day lol.

For most 3-Stars I have 3 maxed versions (which I guess is suboptimal but I’ve already done it?) plus a 4th at different levels being farmed.

So I’m thinking best approach, and someone please tell me if I’m wrong, is to immediately bind two of my maxed 3* to create a level 303 4*. Then apply the next 201 covers to this character so they are a level 370 max-champ 4*. THEN, bind my third max champ 3* with the feeder version of the character and they will be a somewhere between a level 270-370 4*. Regardless of their level, I should immediately bind them to them to the first 370 to make a 5*? Is this correct? Or should I get that second character to level 370 as well, then bind/ascend?

I was thinking about your situation. Personally, I would champ 2 of your max champs and then spend the next 200 covers getting it to 370. Then combine your remaining champ with your other (presumably champ but not max) copy of that character just as you said. Then use future covers to send that to 370 to max the juicy 4* rewards. Then ascend those 2 to make a 475 5. You’ve already “paid the tax”, so those are sunk costs for you at this point.

EDIT: I reread what you typed and that was already your plan. Lol

KGB

@Daredevil217 said:
I don’t understand where the tax comes from or what it means despite multiple people breaking it down. I just want to figure out the most optimal way to turn what I have into 5 stars one day lol.

For most 3-Stars I have 3 maxed versions (which I guess is suboptimal but I’ve already done it?) plus a 4th at different levels being farmed.

So I’m thinking best approach, and someone please tell me if I’m wrong, is to immediately bind two of my maxed 3* to create a level 303 4*. Then apply the next 201 covers to this character so they are a level 370 max-champ 4*. THEN, bind my third max champ 3* with the feeder version of the character and they will be a somewhere between a level 270-370 4*. Regardless of their level, I should immediately bind them to them to the first 370 to make a 5*? Is this correct? Or should I get that second character to level 370 as well, then bind/ascend?

Take a look at Kolence's spreadsheet. He's broken it down very nicely.

Take a look at the 3* Ascension chart. Having dual max champed (266) 3*s is fine. It takes 426 covers to get a 1 max champed 4 regardless of whether you start with a pair of 266's or you use 1 266 and 1 166.

It's only once you start trying to move that ascended 3* through the 4* levels that it matters. At that point if you want to get that 3* to 5* you need to get one to 370 and one to 270 to avoid the tax.

KGB

bbigler

Champ Reward Analysis #1
Use 957 x 3-Star covers:

Ascend using 266+167, then 370+271 to 550:
447,500 ISO
25,300 HP
949 CP
48 LT
CP + LT = 86 Pulls

Ascend using 266+266, then 370+370 to 501:
544,000 ISO
13,600 HP
973 CP
53 LT
CP + LT = 92 Pulls

NOTE: I’m using 957 covers instead of 952 because you can get 3 LTs for 5 covers on levels 167, 167 and 271. Remember this analysis assumes you’re starting from scratch.

DAZ0273

Crikey this thread - Mathematics Puzzle Quest is our new game it seems!

ThisisClemFandango

Didn't understand it to begin with and probably even less so after 22 pages.
With the drop rate of mighty tokens this will take an extremely long time to do, well the 4's anyway.

trenchdigger

@Daredevil217
Completely understand why this is confusing people. It is difficult to explain, and also theoretical, as we don't actually know how credits will work.
Also people are doing correct maths but misunderstanding what that maths means.

In summary,
To take a 1* all the way up to 550 takes 1,508 1* covers if at each ascension you always use a max champed and a newly champed to ascend.

If you always use 2 maxed champs each time you ascend then it might still take 1,508 covers or it might take 1,908 covers. This is the "tax".

So what causes the extra 400 covers:
Going from 1* to 1ascend2 is tax free
Going from 1ascend2 to 1ascend3 is tax free
Going from 1ascend3 to 1ascend4 might incur 200 "tax" (see note 1 below)
Going from 1ascend4 to 1ascend5 might incur 200 "tax" (see note 2 below)

How does the tax arise:

Note 1: taking a 1* through 100 3* levels will cost 200 covers. If you only get credit at the rate of 1 cover per levels rather than 2 covers per level then the "tax" is 100 covers for each of the 2 out of 4 champs that you choose to max champ rather than just newly champ. Total tax = 200 covers

Note 2: taking a 1* through 100 4* levels will cost 300 covers. If you only get credit at the rate of 1 cover per levels rather than 3 covers per level then the "tax" is 200 covers for the 1 champ that you choose to max champ rather than just newly champ. Total tax = 200 covers

This may all be moot, as you may actually get credit for all of the covers used to max champ, even when the rate of covers to levels is increased.

I hope this makes sense. I'm sure I would make a terrible teacher!

DAZ0273

@ThisisClemFandango said:
Didn't understand it to begin with and probably even less so after 22 pages.
With the drop rate of mighty tokens this will take an extremely long to do, well the 4's anyway.

To be fair this has always been an extra nerdy game where people have spreadsheets and timers and god knows what else. All the Maths geeks are practically having their best week here! I always said that if any MPQ player ever went on a rampage in real life you could only defeat them with a calculator and excel.

I will just hope to get the 1* Spidey cover I need (not purple!) and then maybe in 2 years come back and read this again and hope it makes sense for the rest of it.

bbigler

EDIT: Champ Reward Analysis #2
Use 1,411 x 2-Star covers:

Ascend using 144+94, then 266+167, then 370+271 to 550:
514,500 ISO
26,060 HP
969 CP
48 LT
CP + LT = 87 Pulls

Ascend using 144+144, then 266+266, then 370+338: (not enough covers to max)
529,000 ISO
9,470 HP
558 CP
37 LT
CP + LT = 59 Pulls

NOTE: I’m using 1,411 covers instead of 1,404 because you can get 3 LTs for 7 covers on levels 167, 167 and 271. Remember this analysis assumes you’re starting from scratch.

rainkingucd

@Daredevil217 said:
I don’t understand where the tax comes from or what it means despite multiple people breaking it down. I just want to figure out the most optimal way to turn what I have into 5 stars one day lol.

For most 3-Stars I have 3 maxed versions (which I guess is suboptimal but I’ve already done it?) plus a 4th at different levels being farmed.

So I’m thinking best approach, and someone please tell me if I’m wrong, is to immediately bind two of my maxed 3* to create a level 303 4*. Then apply the next 201 covers to this character so they are a level 370 max-champ 4*. THEN, bind my third max champ 3* with the feeder version of the character and they will be a somewhere between a level 270-370 4*. Regardless of their level, I should immediately bind them to them to the first 370 to make a 5*? Is this correct? Or should I get that second character to level 370 as well, then bind/ascend?

Exactly where I am right now:

w_ifbbpro

When will it be here in App Store?

bbigler

EDIT: Here's my takeaway from all this and maybe my last comment on this matter.

• The difference in champ rewards between ascending 3-stars with or without a max champ is only 7% in terms of CP & LT. So, I think it's more important to level up faster than get the extra 7% in rewards.
• It's a no-brainer to ascend your 1-stars and 2-stars ASAP using the minimum level because you don't want to pay the reduced cover/level ratio any more times than needed to get to the next level. That's the tax.
• Since they will be releasing ascended characters in batches, I'll roster dupes and save covers instead of hoarding tokens. That way, the ones that can be ascended now will be. Progress now is better than progress later.

Bad

Well, luckily I never sold any max 4* . However being an almost 5 year player those max characters are counted with one hand.
I sold a lot of 3s, of course.
That was the way the farm worked if you didn't want to discharge 2000 hp in a new slot (remember the previous BCS times?)
However I did one thing good and it's to being too lazy to open tokens. I have 2000 standar, 1800 heroic, 2000 elite and 3000 mighty (thanks to my eternal t50 in pve).
And now I'll do nasty things with them, like to finish maxing magik 3 and ascend her to 5* because is a character I like a lot and will help my 5*s.
And well, after x20 odds in classic and now ascend system, I think my days on pulling LL are pretty finished.

meadowsweet

@w_ifbbpro said:
When will it be here in App Store?

Just to be clear, only 3 of 8 of the 1★ characters and 5 of 14 of the 2★ characters will be eligible to Bind & Ascend - they're doing them in batches. So if you're sitting on 15,383 Standard Tokens, you may want to wait until they are 100% unlocked, and not risk "wasting" most of your pulls on the vine? (No idea how long that may be.)

Scofie

@w_ifbbpro said:
When will it be here in App Store?

Ha! Hope you've set aside 20 hours a day for a month to open those, 50 at a time....

ZeiramMR

Was about to post the same thing.

Unless you want to go all-in on the initial set to have those few 1*s setup right away and don't mind the risk of tossing the rest.

entrailbucket

If you've been saving them that long, why open them now at all? It seems quite risky to assume that now will be the most optimal time EVER to cash them in.

Like, what if they introduce some even better thing next year? You'd be completely suboptimal!

Bowgentle

@entrailbucket said:
If you've been saving them that long, why open them now at all? It seems quite risky to assume that now will be the most optimal time EVER to cash them in.

Like, what if they introduce some even better thing next year? You'd be completely suboptimal!

The Nonnel gambit.

ArchusMonk

@trenchdigger said:
@Daredevil217
Completely understand why this is confusing people. It is difficult to explain, and also theoretical, as we don't actually know how credits will work.
Also people are doing correct maths but misunderstanding what that maths means.

In summary,
To take a 1* all the way up to 550 takes 1,508 1* covers if at each ascension you always use a max champed and a newly champed to ascend.

If you always use 2 maxed champs each time you ascend then it might still take 1,508 covers or it might take 1,908 covers. This is the "tax".

So what causes the extra 400 covers:
Going from 1* to 1ascend2 is tax free
Going from 1ascend2 to 1ascend3 is tax free
Going from 1ascend3 to 1ascend4 might incur 200 "tax" (see note 1 below)
Going from 1ascend4 to 1ascend5 might incur 200 "tax" (see note 2 below)

How does the tax arise:

Note 1: taking a 1* through 100 3* levels will cost 200 covers. If you only get credit at the rate of 1 cover per levels rather than 2 covers per level then the "tax" is 100 covers for each of the 2 out of 4 champs that you choose to max champ rather than just newly champ. Total tax = 200 covers

Note 2: taking a 1* through 100 4* levels will cost 300 covers. If you only get credit at the rate of 1 cover per levels rather than 3 covers per level then the "tax" is 200 covers for the 1 champ that you choose to max champ rather than just newly champ. Total tax = 200 covers

This may all be moot, as you may actually get credit for all of the covers used to max champ, even when the rate of covers to levels is increased.

I hope this makes sense. I'm sure I would make a terrible teacher!

We both agree that there is a 400 cover tax for max champing vs. min/maxing. What we don’t agree on is where to account for it. You want to count it later while I count it when you actually pay it. You say it comes later, but both min/max and dual max pay for levels at the same rate at that stage, so wouldn’t both legs be paying a tax there?

We can agree the first ascent costs nothing, so I’ll start at 1Ascend2. At this stage both sides have 8 1Ascend2 level 94. Min/Max spends 50 covers x 4 or 200 covers to get 4 of them to 144. Dual Max spends 50 covers x 8 or 400 covers to get 8 of them to 144. I consider that 200 cover difference the “2 star tax” because you NEVER get those covers back. I know you believe that you got the “value” out of those extra covers with higher levels at the next stage so you don’t consider it the tax. However, I’m a simple man. At this stage, dual Max have spent 200 more covers than Min/Max, and they don’t get that back at the next level. In fact, Dual max are taxed AGAIN at the next level as I’m about to show.

At 1Ascend3 level Min/Max has 4 1Ascend3 level 166 while Dual Max has 4 1Ascend3 level 191. Min/Max spends 400 covers to raise 2 of those 100 levels each (100x2x2). Dual max spend 600 covers to raise all 4 75 levels each (75x4x2). Again Dual Max have spent 200 more covers at this stage than Min/Max, and they don’t get that back at the next level. I consider this the “3 star tax”.

At 1Ascend4 level Min/Max has 2 1Ascend4 level 270 while Dual Max has 2 1Ascend4 level 303 1/3. Min/Max spends 300 covers to raise one of those 100 levels (100 x 3). Dual Max spends 400 covers to raise both 66 2/3 levels (66 2/3 x 3 x 2). Dual Max spent 100 more covers again, but I do not consider this a tax, because at the next level they will spend less, so there is an actual offset for this.

At 1Ascend5 level Min/Max will have 1Ascend5 level 450 and Dual Max will have 1Ascend5 level 475. It will cost Min/Max 400 covers to max and Dual max 300 covers to max.

This is why I consider 4 star to be an untaxed level. You spend the same amount whether you’re on the Min/Max path or the Dual Max path.

I do not think I am “misunderstanding what the math means”. I understand exactly what it means, and I’ve shown exactly why I believe 2 star and 3 star levels carry a cover tax while 4 star does not. It’s because those are the levels where Dual Max are actually spending covers that Min/Max is not. They never get those covers back! Again, I don’t expect to change your mind. I’m just explaining my side since we’re not really disagreeing about the existence of the tax itself - just where it’s being applied.

@Kolence I just looked at your spreadsheet, and I’m not sure why there is variance in our numbers. Am I doing an apples to oranges comparison to what your spreadsheet is showing at different stages or is there a math error somewhere in my analysis?

Riguez

I don't think I've ever waited for an app to update as much as I'm doing right now... almost 2PM where I live and no sign of the update lol

I know how that works though, I'm just venting my anxiety

trenchdigger

@ArchusMonk
All I can say is go max max for the first 2 ascents and min max for the second 2 ascents and calculate the covers.
Then go min max for the first 2 ascents and max max for the second 2 ascents and again calculate the covers.
You will see that the 400 difference only applies on the final 2 ascents.

But again, I emphasise that this whole discussion is based on 2 different calculations of covers because someone assumed that the credit given for max max would be based on levels not covers. At this time, we have no idea if this was a correct assumption or not.