So, in my case, with that 20-30-40-50-...-110 example progression, my 3's would be level 300 to 320. With all 4s champed save for the newest few and most 5's (baby) champed.
That's 4 years after champing started...
Kolence said: The idea would be to make life easier for newer players in their 3*->4* transition.
MoosePrime said: Kolence said: The idea would be to make life easier for newer players in their 3*->4* transition. Is the jump from 266 (max champed 3*) to 270 (fully covered 4*) so large that it needs adjustment?
Therealsmkspy said: Honestly, given the huge amount of 4s and the inability for all of them to feed 5s, I'd like to see 4s feeding 4s (along with more 4s in vaults). No need to make 3s more powerful if transitioning into 4* land is sped up.
Kolence said: What if 3-stars could continue leveling up for another 100 levels to 366? Only, the cost of levels past 266 would keep increasing more and more past 1 cover or 300 shards per level? Like, for example, the first 10 levels would take the equivalent of 20 covers (6k shards) applied. Then, the next 10 would need 30 covers, and so on. The idea would be to make life easier for newer players in their 3*->4* transition.Make the total number of covers (shards) required to reach 366 roughly take the same time it takes to get a 4-star to 370? More time? Less time? Maybe longer to encourage moving to the next tier?Or just prevent leveling any 3-star over 266 in this way unless a player has a 4-star of a same or a higher level already. Anyway, I'm curious to see how others feel about something like this. Would it matter/change things at all? Would some top tier 3-stars, if allowed to be boosted ~450+ in pvp, make everything even worse?
MoosePrime said:Is the jump from 266 (max champed 3*) to 270 (fully covered 4*) so large that it needs adjustment?
DyingLegend said: It already takes way too long to turn and burn a 3 star.