Upcoming Change: Character Level Shift

So, this isn't gonna happen on the third, right? I really don't want this to go wrong and us all have to wait until Monday for a fix because of the three day weekend.

IceIX wrote:

show previous quotes

Ghast wrote:

IceIX wrote:

Right now, many many players get to having 3 Level 50 1*s and never level up 2 stars. Why would they? They would have 44 levels before they even became possible replacements for their 1*s. As well, a 3* is only level 15, so they're going to take a ton of work to even get to the 1* max level. So they sit with their 1*s until they get bored with the game since there's "nothing else to do". With this change, suddenly 2*s are more viable at start, and 3*s suddenly become completely viable *and* worthwhile to level up if they get extra covers since they'll be somewhat comparable to a maxed 1*. Gameplay options open up for the people lower down on the totem pole. Repeat this process for the 2* players who look at the 70 level differential to even get started in replacing a 2* and it's a really rough sell for many players who don't see the further value. Cut that differential down significantly and suddenly that's not such a hard thing to do.

That's simply not true. One of the biggest rookie mistakes players make in this game is assuming that a higher level character with 1-2 covers is better than a lower-level character with 10-13 covers. On match damage maybe, but powers win the battle. A single 3* cover becomes a de facto Hulk in the eyes of a 1* player - a harmless giant to one-shot after mopping up the real threat.

This is true, but these same players that we're trying to unstick are also sitting on 2*s that could easily be leveled and viable with perfectly feasible power sets. Same goes for those with 85s with 3*s that are something like 3/2/2 or greater that just don't want to put in the effort to make that extra jump.

perfect example.
a 3/2/2= 7 cover character thats tops (currently) at 64

a 7 cover 64 3* cleanly loses to ...
a 15 cover 60+ pve character
a 7+ cover 2* at level 64 or higher
a max cover 2 star
any higher built 3 star
most pve goons as they tend to deal damage way above their levels given the right board layout (which is a lot easier to come by than you think)

and running that in a pvp enviroment filled with maxed ares/daken/storm/Obw/thor/wolverine and all of the random 85-141 3*s is defensive suicide. theminute you go above 300 points your begging to get an inbox full of crippling point losses. and being perfectly honest the odds of a player (not tanking hard) that has a 7 cover 64 3 star and is still in a max 1* mmr bracket is an anomoly and he/she wont stay there for long.

The number of things a half covered, half leved 3 star lose to FAR outweigh what they can contribute. Only a select number of 3 stars can have such low levels across every colour and still be damaging/useful. Most require 4-5 on one power to even have that power be damaging (like a 5r/0b/2y 3*Cap) and short of lucky win streaks what are the odds of having that build.

I get that you want to give the general impression to new players that the 3 star will be more powerful level up, but It doesn't beat having more covers.

TL:RD -Is there an eta on/or any further plans to address the significantly low availability of 3 star covers relative to the number of ones we keep getting?

IceIX wrote:

show previous quotes

NorthernPolarity wrote:

Hey iceix, ive heard some firsthand accounts from players who were making the 2->3* transition, and were being matched up with relatively reasonable teams, and then levelled a 3* to 100 and started seeing walls of 141s after. Do you know if this is common in the current system? If so, then wouldnt that be an even bigger deterrent against people transitioning into 3*s? I feel like general fear of increasing mmr as a result of starting this transition is going to be big amongst the forumgoers. I only see this affecting the general population, which is probably what the intended audience of this fix was supposed to be anyways.

I can see some players having run into exactly that situation. It's a result of the 3x85 band of players having a relatively small swathe of MMR ratings, so it's easy to hop out of that area and into the wide expanse afterwards and the very large swathe of MMRs that 3* players have. There are a number of completely legitimate (IE have never tanked) 141 style players that just don't do so well in Versus and as a result their MMR is sitting pretty low. Then freshly hatched Post 85s run into them. Add tanking players to that mix and that's a recipe for disaster for transitions. This is lessened however whenever we get batches of 85s moving on up at the same time since the bubble widens. Which we're fully expecting this change to do.

So you're saying that roster level is not directly factored in when matchmaking assigns opponents to you? Based off of what you said in the last two comments, the scenario then is that the 3x85 guy is at some random MMR, gets a level 100 3*, which lets him win more games and is enough to propel him to the next, shark infested MMR pool? I've just heard a bunch of stories where the level of 3* seemed like the direct reason why their MMRs jumped as opposed to what you're implying, which is that the 3* won them more games instead.