zodiac339 said: Rod5 said: I don't think most actually resent the softcappers/4* rosters for winning PvE because their enemies were under-powered.What I do think people resent is any of those same players moaning now it's been fixed and their unfair advantage taken away. Thing is, it's not actually fixed. Changing from a curve in scaling difficulty that rewards skill in play to sudden jumps in difficulty that rewards the biggest, heaviest bludgeon just shifts the problem in a different direction. SCL difficulty is an incomplete and lazy solution to the scaling issue that put the biggest players at a disadvantage to those still working in tier 4.
Rod5 said: I don't think most actually resent the softcappers/4* rosters for winning PvE because their enemies were under-powered.What I do think people resent is any of those same players moaning now it's been fixed and their unfair advantage taken away.
sh81 said: FokaiHI said: You guys are right. They should keep it the same. Weaker rosters should be able to place higher than better rosters. That makes sense. My bad. Placement trophies for everyone. Or, how about instead they find a solution to suit all?Open SCL 9 and 10, set the difficulties and rewards such that they present some challenge to higher rosters but are worth it, actually make it engaging to them.And leave SCL 7 and 8 alone where it already works for 4* rosters.Does that sound terrible to anyone? Ill bet it sounds better to everyone though!All they have done is made the game far to easy for 5* players, and kick those below out of placement. Its the worst of both worlds. And it really didnt need to be so.
FokaiHI said: You guys are right. They should keep it the same. Weaker rosters should be able to place higher than better rosters. That makes sense. My bad. Placement trophies for everyone.
sh81 said: Rod5 said: I don't think most actually resent the softcappers/4* rosters for winning PvE because their enemies were under-powered.What I do think people resent is any of those same players moaning now it's been fixed and their unfair advantage taken away. And this here is exactly my issue.Just because 5* players have an unfair disadvantage, it doesnt mean 4* players have an unfair advantage.Again, it doesnt need to be either/or, we dont need to be divided.The game has sucked for you? That sucks. Doesnt mean Ive been given a free ride, or been gaming the system, or been offered a golden challice to rewards I do not deserve.It just means youve had it bad.
Bowgentle said: zodiac339 said: Rod5 said: I don't think most actually resent the softcappers/4* rosters for winning PvE because their enemies were under-powered.What I do think people resent is any of those same players moaning now it's been fixed and their unfair advantage taken away. Thing is, it's not actually fixed. Changing from a curve in scaling difficulty that rewards skill in play to sudden jumps in difficulty that rewards the biggest, heaviest bludgeon just shifts the problem in a different direction. SCL difficulty is an incomplete and lazy solution to the scaling issue that put the biggest players at a disadvantage to those still working in tier 4. PVE rewarded "skill in play""LOL.
Rod5 said:Yes, we've had it bad in PvE. Now it's a level playing field. So it's fine. And fair. You find it too hard, drop a CL. I genuinely don't see your point.
Yes, we've had it bad in PvE. Now it's a level playing field. So it's fine. And fair. You find it too hard, drop a CL. I genuinely don't see your point.
Rod5 said: sh81 said: Rod5 said: I don't think most actually resent the softcappers/4* rosters for winning PvE because their enemies were under-powered.What I do think people resent is any of those same players moaning now it's been fixed and their unfair advantage taken away. And this here is exactly my issue.Just because 5* players have an unfair disadvantage, it doesnt mean 4* players have an unfair advantage.Again, it doesnt need to be either/or, we dont need to be divided.The game has sucked for you? That sucks. Doesnt mean Ive been given a free ride, or been gaming the system, or been offered a golden challice to rewards I do not deserve.It just means youve had it bad. Yes, we've had it bad in PvE. Now it's a level playing field. So it's fine. And fair. You find it too hard, drop a CL. I genuinely don't see your point.
Milk Jugz said: I've heard 5* players say before that boosted 4* are no joke. I also know that the last scaling test I finished #14, I don't have any champ 5s, but as a 3* roster I dumped too much iso into 5s. Now with 32 champ 4s my best 8 characters are still under covered 5*, my top 3 PHX @ 420 3/3/5, IM46 @ 375 5/5/1, CAP @ 360 0/4/3. This change is actually going to reduce my scaling slightly. I do not use my 5* for PVE when I have enough 4* on the boost list, which has been the case for awhile now. Phoenix is getting dusty on that shelf. Some of the complaints out here like we will never be able to place high again is crazy. As mentioned before I placed #14 in the last test, definitely in the midst of 5* rosters. It will be possible to place highly in CL8 still, especially when top tier 4* characters are boosted. With R4G and Medusa boosted this week, I foresee I'll be fine, at least in Unstable Iso.
DarthDeVo said: Rod5 said: sh81 said: Rod5 said: I don't think most actually resent the softcappers/4* rosters for winning PvE because their enemies were under-powered.What I do think people resent is any of those same players moaning now it's been fixed and their unfair advantage taken away. And this here is exactly my issue.Just because 5* players have an unfair disadvantage, it doesnt mean 4* players have an unfair advantage.Again, it doesnt need to be either/or, we dont need to be divided.The game has sucked for you? That sucks. Doesnt mean Ive been given a free ride, or been gaming the system, or been offered a golden challice to rewards I do not deserve.It just means youve had it bad. Yes, we've had it bad in PvE. Now it's a level playing field. So it's fine. And fair. You find it too hard, drop a CL. I genuinely don't see your point. Drop a CL? To where? CL6, where they don't even give a 4* in progression? How, pray tell, is that supposed to help my 4* development? Guess I'll just do that, stay right where I am in terms of roster development and suck up the rewards that should be going to 3* rosters. Yeah, real great solution. It's a poor design that has SCL 8 open for ranks 52 and above when the cap is 125. That's more than half of all ranks crammed into one level. They need to open SCL 9 and 10 to space things out, rather than cramming all players at the 3* tier and above into the two final SCLs.I'm with @sh81. Why not find a solution that works for everyone? Or has PvE been so bad for you for so long that you really don't care if this screws over another class of players who've apparently had it too good for too long?
Bowgentle said: Milk Jugz said: I've heard 5* players say before that boosted 4* are no joke. I also know that the last scaling test I finished #14, I don't have any champ 5s, but as a 3* roster I dumped too much iso into 5s. Now with 32 champ 4s my best 8 characters are still under covered 5*, my top 3 PHX @ 420 3/3/5, IM46 @ 375 5/5/1, CAP @ 360 0/4/3. This change is actually going to reduce my scaling slightly. I do not use my 5* for PVE when I have enough 4* on the boost list, which has been the case for awhile now. Phoenix is getting dusty on that shelf. Some of the complaints out here like we will never be able to place high again is crazy. As mentioned before I placed #14 in the last test, definitely in the midst of 5* rosters. It will be possible to place highly in CL8 still, especially when top tier 4* characters are boosted. With R4G and Medusa boosted this week, I foresee I'll be fine, at least in Unstable Iso. Grocket isn't boosted.Medusa on her own is slow.Good luck, the 4* boosted list isn't great for Unstable.Wait. Cyke. OK yeah.
Spudgutter said: DarthDeVo said: Rod5 said: sh81 said: Rod5 said: I don't think most actually resent the softcappers/4* rosters for winning PvE because their enemies were under-powered.What I do think people resent is any of those same players moaning now it's been fixed and their unfair advantage taken away. And this here is exactly my issue.Just because 5* players have an unfair disadvantage, it doesnt mean 4* players have an unfair advantage.Again, it doesnt need to be either/or, we dont need to be divided.The game has sucked for you? That sucks. Doesnt mean Ive been given a free ride, or been gaming the system, or been offered a golden challice to rewards I do not deserve.It just means youve had it bad. Yes, we've had it bad in PvE. Now it's a level playing field. So it's fine. And fair. You find it too hard, drop a CL. I genuinely don't see your point. Drop a CL? To where? CL6, where they don't even give a 4* in progression? How, pray tell, is that supposed to help my 4* development? Guess I'll just do that, stay right where I am in terms of roster development and suck up the rewards that should be going to 3* rosters. Yeah, real great solution. It's a poor design that has SCL 8 open for ranks 52 and above when the cap is 125. That's more than half of all ranks crammed into one level. They need to open SCL 9 and 10 to space things out, rather than cramming all players at the 3* tier and above into the two final SCLs.I'm with @sh81. Why not find a solution that works for everyone? Or has PvE been so bad for you for so long that you really don't care if this screws over another class of players who've apparently had it too good for too long? The problem, aside from everyone's hyperbolic responses, is that we are talking about the top 10 in a bracket. 1%. You can't really make the claim that it "screw over another class of players," when it is a fraction of the playerbase. We can all agree that opening up cl9 and cl10 should help, so aim your issues at the devs for that. In the mean time, there are plenty of 5* rosters playing longer just because they improved their roster. Just like in pvp, our goal as a playerbase should be to push the devs toward a system that is equitable and fair for as many as possible, and that it keeps newcomers and vets as engaged as possible.
Rod5 said: You choose the level of enemies you fight...how can that possibly be unfair?
Wumpushunter said: Rod5 said: You choose the level of enemies you fight...how can that possibly be unfair? You choose the enemies but you must also choose the reward and now the two don't mesh anymore. Lots will be pushed from 8 to 7, those in 7 will be pushed down to 6 and 6 people can't do anything because CL5 rewards won't progress their game.There are a half dozen ways to fix pve, this change is lazy and benefits one group on backs of another. 1. fold placement into progression.2. add higher CLS3. cut brackets down from 1000 4. Lock out characters based on CL
DesertTortoise said: Wumpushunter said: New McG said: Wumpushunter said: Sorry for using forum terms incorrectly. Slumming is the problem and it is not some simple issue that only impacts a few people. Yes, and it impacts many, many in a positive light. Judging from your post in the SHIELD rewards thread, you've been playing just shy of a year. Do you really think you should be automatically locked into competing for the highest level rewards against the highest levelled rosters in every single event? Against vets that have spent 3 years more than you building them up? High end rosters (which does not include my very above average one nearly to the same degree) have been penalized for years if they had the audacity to take the best characters to max level. On a level playing field (i.e. the same enemies, not exponentially higher scaled ones) they SHOULD reap the best rewards. That's what a high end roster should allow you to do. The best rewards in CL 8 not 5 or 6, or do you advocate taking candy from babies? Should the great 5 stars take top 10 in every CL? It's better for the game that players are given the choice what rewards and challenges are worth their time rather than having the game punish you for pushing your roster above a certain level. As it stood, boosted 4-star heavy rosters were the kings of PvE, which was ridiculous, and now it's rosters with champed 5-stars which is more fitting. I'm not sure why you think someone who has a roster that has played four times longer than you owes you a reason for wanting to go down an SCL if they deem it to be a better use of their time.
Wumpushunter said: New McG said: Wumpushunter said: Sorry for using forum terms incorrectly. Slumming is the problem and it is not some simple issue that only impacts a few people. Yes, and it impacts many, many in a positive light. Judging from your post in the SHIELD rewards thread, you've been playing just shy of a year. Do you really think you should be automatically locked into competing for the highest level rewards against the highest levelled rosters in every single event? Against vets that have spent 3 years more than you building them up? High end rosters (which does not include my very above average one nearly to the same degree) have been penalized for years if they had the audacity to take the best characters to max level. On a level playing field (i.e. the same enemies, not exponentially higher scaled ones) they SHOULD reap the best rewards. That's what a high end roster should allow you to do. The best rewards in CL 8 not 5 or 6, or do you advocate taking candy from babies? Should the great 5 stars take top 10 in every CL?
New McG said: Wumpushunter said: Sorry for using forum terms incorrectly. Slumming is the problem and it is not some simple issue that only impacts a few people. Yes, and it impacts many, many in a positive light. Judging from your post in the SHIELD rewards thread, you've been playing just shy of a year. Do you really think you should be automatically locked into competing for the highest level rewards against the highest levelled rosters in every single event? Against vets that have spent 3 years more than you building them up? High end rosters (which does not include my very above average one nearly to the same degree) have been penalized for years if they had the audacity to take the best characters to max level. On a level playing field (i.e. the same enemies, not exponentially higher scaled ones) they SHOULD reap the best rewards. That's what a high end roster should allow you to do.
Wumpushunter said: Sorry for using forum terms incorrectly. Slumming is the problem and it is not some simple issue that only impacts a few people.
Rod5 said: Wumpushunter said: Rod5 said: You choose the level of enemies you fight...how can that possibly be unfair? You choose the enemies but you must also choose the reward and now the two don't mesh anymore. Lots will be pushed from 8 to 7, those in 7 will be pushed down to 6 and 6 people can't do anything because CL5 rewards won't progress their game.There are a half dozen ways to fix pve, this change is lazy and benefits one group on backs of another. 1. fold placement into progression.2. add higher CLS3. cut brackets down from 1000 4. Lock out characters based on CL Notwithstanding that softcapped rosters should never have been earning the rewards they have in the first place, I agree with a lot of that. 1) and 2) are absolutely the right way to go. Placement in PvE is and has always been a nonsense really. 3) won't happen and 4) won't change much - big rosters have 4*s well into the 300s, quite a few have 370s.
Rod5 said:I'm in 5* land, I don't get 5* rewards, that's not how it works. They should and will open up higher CLs, and I look forward to it. Until then folks need to adjust their expectations, yes they've had it very good for a long time.
acescracked said: Let me get this straight.Some posters think it's uncool that 5* rosters will have easier clears now and can drop CL's for t20 and better placement.Some of those same posters think it's cool that 4* rosters (soft capped or not) had easier clears and could enter higher CL's for t20 and better placement over 5* rosters.Do I have those positions correct?