Difficulty Levels Based on S.H.I.E.L.D. Clearance Levels - Update (8/4/17) *Updated

zodiac339 · August 2017

Yeah, the big questions would be about Boss events and Gauntlet runs. While Boss level should remain determined by round, would side mission scaling be based on roster level, increasing from trivial to easy to normal as the event progresses, or would it jump up in flat increases, matching an SCL difficulty model? Flat enemy levels would end up excluding newer players from making even minor contributions, unless personal progress was turned into a selectable SCL choice. Naturally, low level rosters are already at a handicap against growing bosses, but it's the difference between making minor contributions from side missions and getting some sparse rewards versus spending 2 days with nothing to do but play Deadpool Dailies.
With Gauntlet, I could see the merit of flat enemy levels. I'd already suggested before that what Gauntlet should actually be is a season to season event running all the way to the new season starting with no boosted characters involved, but instead increasing enemy levels, going up into the 270 to possibly 300 range at the end. It would present a effective measuring stick against your roster growth. Naturally, it would be trivial at that point for any tier 5 or high 4 roster, so a 4th leg or a small number of unlockable missions beyond 300 could offer an LT or respectable chunk of CP to those able to complete it.

Phumade · August 2017

zodiac339 said:

Yeah, the big questions would be about Boss events and Gauntlet runs. While Boss level should remain determined by round, would side mission scaling be based on roster level, increasing from trivial to easy to normal as the event progresses, or would it jump up in flat increases, matching an SCL difficulty model? Flat enemy levels would end up excluding newer players from making even minor contributions, unless personal progress was turned into a selectable SCL choice. Naturally, low level rosters are already at a handicap against growing bosses, but it's the difference between making minor contributions from side missions and getting some sparse rewards versus spending 2 days with nothing to do but play Deadpool Dailies.

The scaling in Boss events is already independent of your roster. Everyone starts with easy side nodes, easy boss. The side nodes get harder every 8 hrs with big jumps after 24, and 48 hrs. The boss node gets harder with ever level defeated. Your roster isn't factored into the scaling at all

Bowgentle · August 2017

Phumade said:

show previous quotes

zodiac339 said:

Yeah, the big questions would be about Boss events and Gauntlet runs. While Boss level should remain determined by round, would side mission scaling be based on roster level, increasing from trivial to easy to normal as the event progresses, or would it jump up in flat increases, matching an SCL difficulty model? Flat enemy levels would end up excluding newer players from making even minor contributions, unless personal progress was turned into a selectable SCL choice. Naturally, low level rosters are already at a handicap against growing bosses, but it's the difference between making minor contributions from side missions and getting some sparse rewards versus spending 2 days with nothing to do but play Deadpool Dailies.
The scaling in Boss events is already independent of your roster. Everyone starts with easy side nodes, easy boss. The side nodes get harder every 8 hrs with big jumps after 24, and 48 hrs. The boss node gets harder with ever level defeated. Your roster isn't factored into the scaling at all

Roster sure is figured in.
I doubt 4* players were seeing level 440+ side nodes in the end.

Milk Jugz · August 2017

Bowgentle said:

show previous quotes

Phumade said:

zodiac339 said:

Yeah, the big questions would be about Boss events and Gauntlet runs. While Boss level should remain determined by round, would side mission scaling be based on roster level, increasing from trivial to easy to normal as the event progresses, or would it jump up in flat increases, matching an SCL difficulty model? Flat enemy levels would end up excluding newer players from making even minor contributions, unless personal progress was turned into a selectable SCL choice. Naturally, low level rosters are already at a handicap against growing bosses, but it's the difference between making minor contributions from side missions and getting some sparse rewards versus spending 2 days with nothing to do but play Deadpool Dailies.
The scaling in Boss events is already independent of your roster. Everyone starts with easy side nodes, easy boss. The side nodes get harder every 8 hrs with big jumps after 24, and 48 hrs. The boss node gets harder with ever level defeated. Your roster isn't factored into the scaling at all

Roster sure is figured in.
I doubt 4* players were seeing level 440+ side nodes in the end.

I don't remember the exact numbers now. But, at some point the side nodes become basically impossible, while the boss was "easy"

zodiac339 · August 2017

Phumade said:

show previous quotes

zodiac339 said:

Yeah, the big questions would be about Boss events and Gauntlet runs. While Boss level should remain determined by round, would side mission scaling be based on roster level, increasing from trivial to easy to normal as the event progresses, or would it jump up in flat increases, matching an SCL difficulty model? Flat enemy levels would end up excluding newer players from making even minor contributions, unless personal progress was turned into a selectable SCL choice. Naturally, low level rosters are already at a handicap against growing bosses, but it's the difference between making minor contributions from side missions and getting some sparse rewards versus spending 2 days with nothing to do but play Deadpool Dailies.
The scaling in Boss events is already independent of your roster. Everyone starts with easy side nodes, easy boss. The side nodes get harder every 8 hrs with big jumps after 24, and 48 hrs. The boss node gets harder with ever level defeated. Your roster isn't factored into the scaling at all

I know the Bosses (with the exeption of Boss Rush and Kaecilius) have set levels per round. I'm pretty sure the side missions, however, are designed with increasing degrees of scaling difficulty based on roster and using a similar scaling algorithm to the PVE trivial/easy/normal/hard difficulty as you go through the 8-hour resets. Could be wrong though. I don't typically ask what enemy levels other people are facing on side missions. Can any tier 5 players confirm or deny that side missions start going into the level 400+ range for them, because they never reach those levels for me. With the number of players saying the side missions end up harder than the Boss, I have to guess they're scaling up in such a way for them.
EDIT: I see the confirmation made above while I was writing. I got too much to say some times.

Phumade · August 2017

It will definitely go up to the 400s for my roster. By the end, side nodes end up slightly harder than what I typically see on a standard event.

Wumpushunter · August 2017

Allow anyone to play any CL, release CL 9, lock characters out of certain CLs. This will keep each CL competitive with out need for adjustments later. Those that want no restrictions just want to slum on occasion.

zodiac339 · August 2017

Wumpushunter said:

Allow anyone to play any CL, release CL 9, lock characters out of certain CLs. This will keep each CL competitive with out need for adjustments later. Those that want no restrictions just want to slum on occasion.

I hate the idea of not being able to use the full roster as much as anyone else. I really hope the merit of scaling down heroes within your roster to meet an SCL ceiling can be realized and appreciated. Naturally, highest SCL should have no such roster ceiling, but placing a level cap and allowing your full roster sounds a lot better than having some of your favorite and hard-built heroes completely excluded should you choose a lower SCL.
As an example of what I mean, if you have a level 450 Thanos, you would use Thanos at level 450 in SCL8, but if you were drop down to SCL6, you would still be able to use that fully-covered, Championed Thanos, but he would be scaled down to an SCL cap of about level 255. Legendaries, likely 300+, would also be capped at 255 (and probably more effective than the Epic). Added benefit, relatively speaking, your boosted legendaries and non-boosted legendaries would be equally effective as they would all be at the same level within the SCL, so you would have a full range of effective combos available rather than just relying on your boosted heroes exclusively.

Beer40 · August 2017

broll said:

show previous quotes

zodiac339 said:

Milk Jugz said:

zodiac339 said:

Milk Jugz said:

broll said:

Beer40 said:

Justice Jacks said:

broll said:

People should be able to compete within their SCLs, if not what are the SCLs for?

I agree. The problem was they introduced CLs before they introduced fixed scaling. The reality is people below rank 100 should not able to select CL8. Below 80-85 should not be in CL7. And so on. The original caps don't make sense in the current meta, but fix that selection issue and you'll have many low-rank rosters complaining too, so just leave it as is and those rosters can select a proper CL or continue to learn the hard way.

But the one issue that should be addressed is that there should also be a limit as to how far you can select under your scaling. Maybe only be able to go down 1 CL from the max you qualify for? 2? Without that, then the low-level rosters really do get hurt event after event.

But as it stands now, the developers let you choose to try for better rewards than your rank/roster allows you to truly compete for. If some choose to punch up to the high CLs, so be it. But with that choice, comes consequence, like with any other choice.

Sorry, while you may have a point about certain ranks only able to select certain clearance levels (whether I agree or not with that) your numbers are off.

I'm rank 90 and the scaling in 8 is right around what I was seeing with roster based scaling. It could be argued that CL8 is actually designed more for me in mind than someone who is above rank 100. That's a different topic altogether tho. I just wanted to get some accurate info in here before people start running with ideas, no offense.

And there is the problem with the SR system i was just talking about (on a small scale). I'm SR 96 and my scaling pre-change was max 310. He's SR 90 and he says his didn't change so he was about 330. So despite being 6 levels higher my scaling was 20 level lower. Because SR != Roster level.

Yeah, SR is not a good quantifier of roster strength. I'm less than 1k xp from 104, my max scaling before change was around 370ish. Your only about 8 levels below me but your scaling was 60 levels lower?? He is 14 levels below me and scaling 40 levels lower?? That's way too all over the place!!

So you must have rushed a smaller number of heroes to a higher level (level 310 or so Legendaries?). I'm at a slower build, looking to Champ everyone and try to roughly even out their levels with a top 5 from 293 to 287, and scaling from roster topped out my enemies at 330. Perfect for SCL8. My Shield Rank is 106. As far as SR is concerned, the system would give me access to SCL9 if it were out. I'll have to content myself with 8. I'm just not in a rush. Good fortune to those who can handle the jump.

No, I have 32 champ 4s. 293 is the highest, 271 lowest. Most in the 273-284 range. IDK what I've done for all the xp. I'm usually a green checker, get to 900 in pvp consistently for the last 3-4 seasons, DDQ every day. I've dropped a few starks over the year and a half+, a couple treasures, but mostly just loonies (1/month), and I VIP (For the record, I have no shame supporting something I do EVERY DAY at $30/month, costs me $1/day (not bad for the enjoyment it gives me)). I'm even hoarding LTs and CP for the past 2.5 months, though I have spent some LTs when close to a rank up (100-150 away) to get it (maybe the last 3 ranks). I don't usually buy daily deals unless I need to move my 2 farm faster. I open every token, except legend (barring the previous exception mentioned). IDK, I just haven't missed a day in 600-something days......

Your highest is 293? Why would your enemies go to 370? Gah! How did that scaling system actually work? Our rosters top out at a similar level, but my hard mission is 40 levels below yours. Was.

I had the same question. Is 293 your highest overall or do you have some 5*s you leveled higher? My roster is pretty comparable to yours (26 4* champs levels between 287 & 271). I wouldn't think 6 level difference in highest 4*s would equal 60 levels difference in enemy scaling. But who knows, this just further points to roster-based scaling being goofy and I'm glad it's gone.

I looked at your roster to compare it to mine for scaling. Its pretty similar without going character by character for differences (maybe that adds up?). The only thing obvious is that I leveled a 5* OML up to 285 and maybe in the scaling mechanics, a level 285 5* is weighted more highly than a level 285 4*? I have to agree with you that I'm glad roster scaling is gone!

Avalanche Kincaid · August 2017

After playing 2 events with the new scaling, it's kind of getting boring. Any plans to bring out CL9 for at least a little bit of challange? All these new awesome 4* will never get to be used at this rate. I used to hate heroics, but with fixed scaling it would actually be fun. Give us back true heroics again. You can even include all the 2* so everyone can play.

GuiPerdigao · August 2017

Hello everyone. I think the forum don't have that many posts from new players.

I'm currently on day 64 and I think I know my place. I know I should not be playing PVP...and I know that my best option is to grind PVE.

I'm thankful that now I'm able to choose which SCL I'll play, because otherwise I would have to play SCL5, when my 2* roster can handle only SCL4.

However, what annoys me is to see a much higher level player with much developed roster playing the same SCL that I.

Does a guy with a 4* developed roster, with a bunch of 5* have to come and play in SCL4? To fight for 3* covers in the best places? That's really anoying...the only place I should be able to go well. Since I started playing for real I got placed top5 in the 5 PVEs I played, 2nd place whas the best I got. But there is awlays some really high level dude placed among the top when they should be playing other SCL.

There should be a limit to wich SCL you could play depending on the level of your champions, allowing you to choose only between 3 SCLs...a mix between the new system and the older one. Or the event should trim down the levels of the heros in a way that it wouldn't be unffair.

Beer40 · August 2017

GuiPerdigao said:

Hello everyone. I think the forum don't have that many posts from new players.
I'm currently on day 64 and I think I know my place. I know I should not be playing PVP...and I know that my best option is to grind PVE.

I'm thankful that now I'm able to choose which SCL I'll play, because otherwise I would have to play SCL5, when my 2* roster can handle only SCL4.

However, what annoys me is to see a much higher level player with much developed roster playing the same SCL that I.

Does a guy with a 4* developed roster, with a bunch of 5* have to come and play in SCL4? To fight for 3* covers in the best places? That's really anoying...the only place I should be able to go well. Since I started playing for real I got placed top5 in the 5 PVEs I played, 2nd place whas the best I got. But there is awlays some really high level dude placed among the top when they should be playing other SCL.

There should be a limit to wich SCL you could play depending on the level of your champions, allowing you to choose only between 3 SCLs...a mix between the new system and the older one. Or the event should trim down the levels of the heros in a way that it wouldn't be unffair.

There's just no good solution. Sure, people have suggested some, but every idea has had its flaws.

Not to mention, your post is very vague. "4* developed roster, with a bunch of 5*" is widely open to interpretation.

Point being, I have 21 champed 4*. Two-thirds of them are at 270-271. That's pretty developed, in my opinion, but its not even close to a lot of people. Do you know what I don't have? A single max champ 3*. And the way things work is the more I farm my 2*, the better I'm able to level my 3*, the better I'm able to level/champ my 4*, which hopefully leads to enough CP/LL/CL pulls that I can eventually level/champ 5*.

So my level 204 Daken needs those 3 covers for top 10 finish every bit as much as you do. The alternative is 1 Yondu cover, which will put him at some variation of 1/0/0 based on color.

And there are LOTS of people just like me, including whoever it is you are talking about*

*Disclaimer: Its not me that is doing this or being talked about. I'm just explaining the reality of the game.

Long story short, lots of people need those covers and complaining about placement...well, there's a reason there are progression rewards.

Edit: hoping to clarify, if its not clear: You're complaining that event placement is hurting your progression. But everyone has game progression goals and outside of event progression or buying your progression, the only other way to progress your game is thru placement...which directly negatively affects someone else's game progression. Its just the way it works.

SpringSoldier · August 2017

@Beer40

I'm really curious: how can you have so many champed 4* and not a single 3*? Did you sell them at some point?

Bowgentle · August 2017

SpringSoldier said:

@Beer40

I'm really curious: how can you have so many champed 4* and not a single 3*? Did you sell them at some point?

Max champed.
He probably has a ton champed, but none maxed.

Beer40 · August 2017

Yea, its max champed that I don't have any of. 251 Deadpool is the highest. All are champed. 30 at 200+ and 14 between 176-199. I don't know what the Forum would officially call my roster/player rank but Low Level 4* player seems right to me. And that's the point I was making to the person who complained. A lot of us don't max everyone before moving to the next star tier. Things are very fluid, so its tough to tell anyone who could either want to quickly smash thru SCL4 for placement or just to have decent scaling for their 3* again to stay out.

beyonderbub · August 2017

Beer40 said:

I don't know what the Forum would officially call my roster/player rank but Low Level 4* player seems right to me.

I would call it 3*-4* transitioner. And I agree that if your personal goal is to advance your 3*s, then the strategy of dropping SCLs to get three 3* covers instead of 1 yondu cover is pretty sound. We all don't progress our rosters the same way or share the same playstyles and play times. If a higher level roster can't or doesn't want to invest the time it would take to acheive progression at a higher level SCL, then they should have the option to drop down and breeze through a lower level SCL.

jamesh · August 2017

So one side effect of this new scaling system is that the final hard node in Thick as Thieves was a lot easier than before. Previously, it was scaled to a higher level to compensate for the fact that you were just facing two enemies. Now the two enemies have the same levels as an equivalent node with three enemies.

It's going to be interesting to see what happens when they rerun the Hulk event next time, with the nodes against solo Hulk.

Bowgentle · August 2017

jamesh said:

So one side effect of this new scaling system is that the final hard node in Thick as Thieves was a lot easier than before. Previously, it was scaled to a higher level to compensate for the fact that you were just facing two enemies. Now the two enemies have the same levels as an equivalent node with three enemies.

It's going to be interesting to see what happens when they rerun the Hulk event next time, with the nodes against solo Hulk.

He'll be 330, just like Mags and Hood are 330.

bluewolf · August 2017

Bowgentle said:

show previous quotes

jamesh said:

So one side effect of this new scaling system is that the final hard node in Thick as Thieves was a lot easier than before. Previously, it was scaled to a higher level to compensate for the fact that you were just facing two enemies. Now the two enemies have the same levels as an equivalent node with three enemies.

It's going to be interesting to see what happens when they rerun the Hulk event next time, with the nodes against solo Hulk.

He'll be 330, just like Mags and Hood are 330.

Run Hulk more, then! (Just kidding, that 7 day event is a slog.). But it will remove the fun posts comparing Hulk levels.....

jamesh · August 2017

Right, and that will be significantly easier than in the past, where he was supposed to be a challenge for 3 characters to take on.

Difficulty Levels Based on S.H.I.E.L.D. Clearance Levels - Update (8/4/17) *Updated

Comments

Welcome!

Welcome!

Quick Links

Categories