Would you be in favor of Hero level caps on different SCLs in PVE?

zodiac339 said:

Qubort said:

zodiac339 said:

Borstock said:

zodiac339 said:

Borstock said:

zodiac339 said:

Borstock said:

Nothing stopping me from hitting below my weight class, either.

And that is the problem attitude. "Nobody's stopping me from exploiting it. Nobody's stopping me from guaranteeing that people can't even compete at the level they're expected to be in." Reversal of injustice does not make one just. It makes one petty.

There's nothing petty about it. If I make the choice to have an easier time in the game and willingly forfeit the better rewards, there's nothing wrong with that. Maybe I don't want to spend the time one event burning through health packs and grinding against high level opponents. Maybe I want the game to be a little easier for a few days. Maybe I want to play with unboosted portions of my roster. Everyone can choose to do it, which makes it fair, not petty. 

And for the record, I've never done it. I always compete in the highest CL offered, which now has me competing against stronger rosters than my own regularly. 

Ah, then you aren't a tier 5 player who had been suffering from inbalanced scaling. I too remain in SCL 8, which holds the same levels I was facing before (aside from 2* required Hey Demi! Please cap that so our 2-stars aren't a burden!) I try to resist the temptation to compete down. Top 100 on a release gets me all I actually need.
The issue, you understand, isn't "having an easier time". It's "hitting below your weight class". Many players are simply unable to play up to the highest tier, so they have nowhere else to go and belong in SCL 7 or 6 (or lower, development depending) they deserve a place to develop with fair chance to compete with their peers while developing. They can no longer hit upwards with the old scaling and still compete with veterans, if they were. They must stay in the lower zone until ready to advance. Every cover they can manage to get helps that, and so placing is important for them to get there. With no actual leash of any kind (I truly doubt reward differences will ever be significant enough to change things), competition with their peers is taken away. Stronger rosters encroach where they don't belong and, with little effort, eliminate the chance to place. I could do it. I know I could. Even in 8, Grockmora with Medusa cuts through missions like the Scythe of Death. If I went to 7, facing enemies with far less health, I would be part of the problem. With capping, not denying a roster, but bringing what tou have in line with intended difficulty within the tier, I would still be murdering missions probably, but it would at least give the players who actually belong there a fighting chance.

I don't see the point. You've stated Top 100 rewards are all you need. How many people are really committing to lower levels on a regular basis in every single slice that they're destroying the lower tiers by 100 slots?

Is that really what's happening?

On a release, yes. Top 100. For me in my SCL. The thing is, even for releases, I have stayed in my SCL. Every person that drops down out of their own SCL means one more person playing that lower SCL pushed out of the top 100 for a release, while the invaders rush their way into top 10. Every person who moves in their takes with them an unfair advantage over the ones who belong. And for non-releases, it's so much worse, due to the reward structure as it was designed. SCL7 just gets some tokens if they don't make top 50. That is a problem, and like the scaling, it's the developers' fault, but they aren't fixing it. For every 3-4 players players with Epic champs taking top spots in 7, there's another 15-20 with developed Legendaries, all of them pushing players who belong in 7 out of that top 50, denying them covers they probably need for development and following event.
If you're in 8, and have a roster that belongs there, should stay there when 9 opens, you may not be pushed out of top 100, or even top 50, but how aggravating will it be to see top ten still dominated by tier 5 players hitting down for placement on a regular basis, with no kind of equalizing force to give you any reasonable chance?
I'm satisfied with top 100 release and the cover needed for full play on the following event. But I want a reasonable chance to truly compete at my tier once 9 is open.

The unfair advantage you speak of is they have a better roster. You're suggesting a 3 star player should be able to get 3 covers of a brand new four star while in scl6, while a 4/5 star roster should get zero if they are the 101st best player stuck in 8. That's simply absurd. All that does is encourage soft capping.

The better roster will still be a better roster. The tier 4-5 player will have fully covered and championed 4*s that can be respecced as needed and access to better combos. The advantage is still there. The unfair part is bringing that down to a tier that's intended for players still developing rosters and who have no better place to go. Players deserve a fighting chance within their intended tier. The veteran will still have an advantage in strength with heroes capped down to 255 vs the player who has a handful that need boosting just to reach the cap, but it's a difference of finishing 10-15 minutes faster capped down vs 40 minutes faster with no limitations. With a level capping system, nobody is "stuck in 8". And none of it encourages softcapping either. Unless you level up, you won't have the option to move up to something better. With a high level roster you can get good rewards, drop down and still have about the best roster there, and move back up next event. The advantage just shouldn't be so overwhelming against players who can't move up and are playing where they're supposed to be.