Like I mentioned before, Cav difficulty should be tuned to 6* R3 level of difficulty for all paths except 1 (that is tuned to 6* R2 level of difficulty), to ensure longevity of the difficulty level.
I remember when UC first came out, we had 5* R4 top champs and it was really pretty difficult. Even so, it lasted at most 2 years.
Moving forward, the only way a difficulty can sustain itself is to provide challenging encounters through niche encounters (such as diss track + buffet) or skill encounters (eg AoW + rage), whilst still maintaining a high enough health/attack on the defender that can punish misplays (eg 30-40% of your health in one full combo), but not cripple you (eg full health bar cleared by 2-3 hits).
I'm not necessarily opposed to that. I'd prefer longevity as well. Something to build the roster to complete is far more engaging to me.
However, I do have to ask... why can't they tune it as the player's grow? They have the data (presumably) on how many players complete a piece of content and how many items it requires. Why is tuning cavalier as players grow not an option? Players grow, the monthly event should as well. I guess what I'm saying is it doesn't necessarily have to be at the tippy top of difficulty to still have some longevity to it.
Like I mentioned before, Cav difficulty should be tuned to 6* R3 level of difficulty for all paths except 1 (that is tuned to 6* R2 level of difficulty), to ensure longevity of the difficulty level.
I remember when UC first came out, we had 5* R4 top champs and it was really pretty difficult. Even so, it lasted at most 2 years.
Moving forward, the only way a difficulty can sustain itself is to provide challenging encounters through niche encounters (such as diss track + buffet) or skill encounters (eg AoW + rage), whilst still maintaining a high enough health/attack on the defender that can punish misplays (eg 30-40% of your health in one full combo), but not cripple you (eg full health bar cleared by 2-3 hits).
I'm not necessarily opposed to that. I'd prefer longevity as well. Something to build the roster to complete is far more engaging to me.
However, I do have to ask... why can't they tune it as the player's grow? They have the data (presumably) on how many players complete a piece of content and how many items it requires. Why is tuning cavalier as players grow not an option? Players grow, the monthly event should as well. I guess what I'm saying is it doesn't necessarily have to be at the tippy top of difficulty to still have some longevity to it.
Cause there will always be “new” Cavaliers, so the baseline has to remain the same.
One suggestion I can give to Kabam is possibly to tune Cavalier like how dungeons are tuned.
See, for D7, the number of incoming nodes increases as the room number increases, from a baseline of 2, to 3, to more.
What can be done is to have Cavalier difficulty tuned the same way. What I’m saying is, upon selection of Cavalier difficulty, there’ll be a scale of difficulty to choose from from 1-5, where the number of incoming/global nodes will increase (of course designed and not random) to make it encounters extremely extremely niche and tough, that even the top 0.0001% has a very slim chance of exploring (think Acid Wash Mysterio + Aspect of War).
Rewards wise, it can be scaled to A + x(B) where each additional difficulty chosen will scale the rewards by a certain amount, but also keep a baseline reward for new cavaliers.
However, the catch is that it is ONE quest, ie once you complete/explore it, it is deemed completed/explored so there will be no double dipping of rewards.
In this way, cavaliers can gradually grow into a certain difficulty, and difficulties 1-5 can scale as players progress, even tuning Cav Diff 5 to 6*R4/5s.
I have to agree with you on that one. I have no problem with difficult fights but the thing is some of these nodes are so champion specific that it becomes impossible for an average player to 100% explore. For example one of the nodes in the Deadpool chapter is a poison path and I have no issue with that. However, the Caltrops node is so punishing and will kill you if you dash back more than four times. This makes the list of counters very specific to Robot champs or a stacked Omega Red. I am not saying there shouldn't be difficult nodes. I am saying that there should be nodes which test the skills of the players (Nodes like Bane, or No retreat) rather than shortlisting the possible champion counters.
Why does it feel like some players here are salty that new cav players who don't have enough depth in their roster are able to finish this quest ? Cos this happens to be a side event with experimental difficulty. Let them have their fun while it lasts .Its not gonna be much longer that Kabam will see this and tune to levels of Act 6. That being said I do enjoy this difficulty , its not that hard right now. In the second week the health pools are at 100k approx and few above, I predict they will reach 200k on the last week i guess so, or atleast 150-180k.
I have to agree with you on that one. I have no problem with difficult fights but the thing is some of these nodes are so champion specific that it becomes impossible for an average player to 100% explore. For example one of the nodes in the Deadpool chapter is a poison path and I have no issue with that. However, the Caltrops node is so punishing and will kill you if you dash back more than four times. This makes the list of counters very specific to Robot champs or a stacked Omega Red. I am not saying there shouldn't be difficult nodes. I am saying that there should be nodes which test the skills of the players (Nodes like Bane, or No retreat) rather than shortlisting the possible champion counters.
Asking for a double immune isn’t a really specific requirement, surely you have some 4* in your roster who can do it.
- however they need to make it achievable for those who are just level 55 and not Cavalier yet.
Disagree about that. The level requirement was lowered from 60 in the first place after the outcry from people were cavalier but not level 60. We really don’t need to now also cater to people who aren’t cavalier yet.
I have to agree with you on that one. I have no problem with difficult fights but the thing is some of these nodes are so champion specific that it becomes impossible for an average player to 100% explore. For example one of the nodes in the Deadpool chapter is a poison path and I have no issue with that. However, the Caltrops node is so punishing and will kill you if you dash back more than four times. This makes the list of counters very specific to Robot champs or a stacked Omega Red. I am not saying there shouldn't be difficult nodes. I am saying that there should be nodes which test the skills of the players (Nodes like Bane, or No retreat) rather than shortlisting the possible champion counters.
You have to remember this is nominally aimed at cavalier (or at least high level) players. The content can easily be cleared by a 4* r5 so it would be unreasonable to assume a player at that stage doesn't have any champs that could handle bleed and poison... and there are many! This isn't act6 Mr Sinister where you need a specific champ with a specific synergy at 5* or 6*. Not even close.
The Canadian difficulty so far is good, it’s a bit of a challenge with some nodes, but you just have read them carefully and look who in your rooster fits so solve the problem. This is good, a lot of people are just zerging through the content with two or three champions they love and know. These nodes force you to get deeper into your rooster! And they are challenging but not frustrating! That’s the point! Good Work kabam!
the level of difficulty is balanced with the rewards now, if it's more difficult, the rewards should be greater too. Also, it should be called Legend with exclusive rewards for few end game players like Seatin, KT1, Lagacy, ContestChampions, Prof Hoff, Dork, SweahL, Katy etc. and Whales of Spendings 😄
Like I mentioned before, Cav difficulty should be tuned to 6* R3 level of difficulty for all paths except 1 (that is tuned to 6* R2 level of difficulty), to ensure longevity of the difficulty level.
That's possible, if you're willing to wait another year or two for it to come out. The devs aren't going to make a monthly difficulty tier almost no one can do. Permanent content can be aspirational, where we all work towards eventually doing it like the Abyss, say. But monthly content must be doable by some minimum fraction of the players that exist at the time it is released, or the development effort to make it isn't worth it.
The number of players with R3 rosters that could reasonably attempt such a Cav difficulty is probably way too small to justify the effort. Most of that development effort, which has to be expended every single month, will be going to encounters almost no one will be fighting. There's no way to justify that expense.
Honestly, anyone concerned about longevity should be asking for rewards to be toned down. It is rewards that progress players out of the range of content. And actually if you ask the developers to increase the longevity of content, you will be asking them to tone down rewards because that's the first and last port of call for them. They aren't going to spend development time making something no one can do today, so that no one outlevels it too fast. They'll slow down your leveling instead.
Like I mentioned before, Cav difficulty should be tuned to 6* R3 level of difficulty for all paths except 1 (that is tuned to 6* R2 level of difficulty), to ensure longevity of the difficulty level.
That's possible, if you're willing to wait another year or two for it to come out. The devs aren't going to make a monthly difficulty tier almost no one can do. Permanent content can be aspirational, where we all work towards eventually doing it like the Abyss, say. But monthly content must be doable by some minimum fraction of the players that exist at the time it is released, or the development effort to make it isn't worth it.
The number of players with R3 rosters that could reasonably attempt such a Cav difficulty is probably way too small to justify the effort. Most of that development effort, which has to be expended every single month, will be going to encounters almost no one will be fighting. There's no way to justify that expense.
Honestly, anyone concerned about longevity should be asking for rewards to be toned down. It is rewards that progress players out of the range of content. And actually if you ask the developers to increase the longevity of content, you will be asking them to tone down rewards because that's the first and last port of call for them. They aren't going to spend development time making something no one can do today, so that no one outlevels it too fast. They'll slow down your leveling instead.
You all had a hissy fit about difficult permanent content with Act 6 too though
Like I mentioned before, Cav difficulty should be tuned to 6* R3 level of difficulty for all paths except 1 (that is tuned to 6* R2 level of difficulty), to ensure longevity of the difficulty level.
I remember when UC first came out, we had 5* R4 top champs and it was really pretty difficult. Even so, it lasted at most 2 years.
Moving forward, the only way a difficulty can sustain itself is to provide challenging encounters through niche encounters (such as diss track + buffet) or skill encounters (eg AoW + rage), whilst still maintaining a high enough health/attack on the defender that can punish misplays (eg 30-40% of your health in one full combo), but not cripple you (eg full health bar cleared by 2-3 hits).
Although exploring act 6 should give at least 1 R3 6* not everyone that has explored it has one due to the games reliance on RNG. So I would have to disagree to it to be tuned to the level of a rank 3
Like I mentioned before, Cav difficulty should be tuned to 6* R3 level of difficulty for all paths except 1 (that is tuned to 6* R2 level of difficulty), to ensure longevity of the difficulty level.
That's possible, if you're willing to wait another year or two for it to come out. The devs aren't going to make a monthly difficulty tier almost no one can do. Permanent content can be aspirational, where we all work towards eventually doing it like the Abyss, say. But monthly content must be doable by some minimum fraction of the players that exist at the time it is released, or the development effort to make it isn't worth it.
The number of players with R3 rosters that could reasonably attempt such a Cav difficulty is probably way too small to justify the effort. Most of that development effort, which has to be expended every single month, will be going to encounters almost no one will be fighting. There's no way to justify that expense.
Honestly, anyone concerned about longevity should be asking for rewards to be toned down. It is rewards that progress players out of the range of content. And actually if you ask the developers to increase the longevity of content, you will be asking them to tone down rewards because that's the first and last port of call for them. They aren't going to spend development time making something no one can do today, so that no one outlevels it too fast. They'll slow down your leveling instead.
Thanks for explaining why, as much as it feels good to have extra rewards, I tend to disagree with people who ask for more rewards without making the same content more difficult, or people who ask content to be nerfed to make it easier for them.
People don’t see that they can’t have it both ways. 🤷🏻♂️
Also, even if they made monthly content crazy hard, there will definitely be top tiered players exploring it.
Like I mentioned before, Cav difficulty should be tuned to 6* R3 level of difficulty for all paths except 1 (that is tuned to 6* R2 level of difficulty), to ensure longevity of the difficulty level.
I remember when UC first came out, we had 5* R4 top champs and it was really pretty difficult. Even so, it lasted at most 2 years.
Moving forward, the only way a difficulty can sustain itself is to provide challenging encounters through niche encounters (such as diss track + buffet) or skill encounters (eg AoW + rage), whilst still maintaining a high enough health/attack on the defender that can punish misplays (eg 30-40% of your health in one full combo), but not cripple you (eg full health bar cleared by 2-3 hits).
Although exploring act 6 should give at least 1 R3 6* not everyone that has explored it has one due to the games reliance on RNG. So I would have to disagree to it to be tuned to the level of a rank 3
Tuning it to 6* R2/5* R5 in an environment where 6* R3s are gradually becoming more available is just plain silly.
Uncollected was tuned for 5* R5s (people had a max ranked 5* R4 when it was introduced). It was hard, but still explorable with 5* R4s and some skills. As players gradually acquired more resources from monthly UC to rank their champs up to where it was tuned for, it became much much easier until the cakewalk it is today.
So if Kabam were to introduce Cav difficulty now, it should be tuned to, at least, 6* R3 level of difficulty.
Like I mentioned before, Cav difficulty should be tuned to 6* R3 level of difficulty for all paths except 1 (that is tuned to 6* R2 level of difficulty), to ensure longevity of the difficulty level.
I remember when UC first came out, we had 5* R4 top champs and it was really pretty difficult. Even so, it lasted at most 2 years.
Moving forward, the only way a difficulty can sustain itself is to provide challenging encounters through niche encounters (such as diss track + buffet) or skill encounters (eg AoW + rage), whilst still maintaining a high enough health/attack on the defender that can punish misplays (eg 30-40% of your health in one full combo), but not cripple you (eg full health bar cleared by 2-3 hits).
Although exploring act 6 should give at least 1 R3 6* not everyone that has explored it has one due to the games reliance on RNG. So I would have to disagree to it to be tuned to the level of a rank 3
Tuning it to 6* R2/5* R5 in an environment where 6* R3s are gradually becoming more available is just plain silly.
Uncollected was tuned for 5* R5s (people had a max ranked 5* R4 when it was introduced). It was hard, but still explorable with 5* R4s and some skills. As players gradually acquired more resources from monthly UC to rank their champs up to where it was tuned for, it became much much easier until the cakewalk it is today.
So if Kabam were to introduce Cav difficulty now, it should be tuned to, at least, 6* R3 level of difficulty.
UC EQ was not at all tuned for 5* r5 champs, it was always completely manageable with 4* champs maxed. It offers absolutely no challenge if you use r5 5*.
Like I mentioned before, Cav difficulty should be tuned to 6* R3 level of difficulty for all paths except 1 (that is tuned to 6* R2 level of difficulty), to ensure longevity of the difficulty level.
I remember when UC first came out, we had 5* R4 top champs and it was really pretty difficult. Even so, it lasted at most 2 years.
Moving forward, the only way a difficulty can sustain itself is to provide challenging encounters through niche encounters (such as diss track + buffet) or skill encounters (eg AoW + rage), whilst still maintaining a high enough health/attack on the defender that can punish misplays (eg 30-40% of your health in one full combo), but not cripple you (eg full health bar cleared by 2-3 hits).
Although exploring act 6 should give at least 1 R3 6* not everyone that has explored it has one due to the games reliance on RNG. So I would have to disagree to it to be tuned to the level of a rank 3
Tuning it to 6* R2/5* R5 in an environment where 6* R3s are gradually becoming more available is just plain silly.
Uncollected was tuned for 5* R5s (people had a max ranked 5* R4 when it was introduced). It was hard, but still explorable with 5* R4s and some skills. As players gradually acquired more resources from monthly UC to rank their champs up to where it was tuned for, it became much much easier until the cakewalk it is today.
So if Kabam were to introduce Cav difficulty now, it should be tuned to, at least, 6* R3 level of difficulty.
UC EQ was not at all tuned for 5* r5 champs, it was always completely manageable with 4* champs maxed. It offers absolutely no challenge if you use r5 5*.
That further proves my point that you need to tune a difficulty level, at the very least, 1 rank up higher than the max available rank when it was introduced.
If 4*R5s can manage UC EQ, and the highest achievable rank was 5* R4s for that period (and only a small amount of them were available at that time), then shouldn’t Cav difficulty make it so that it is “manageable” by 6* R3s and offer absolutely no challenge using 6* R4s?
I personally think the difficulty is fine as it is. If they want to make it harder go for it. I have the means to complete any content they dish out but don't make it "difficult" by simply raising the health. I don't want to have 300k fights per avg for a side quest. Go towards node combinations if you want to buff the difficulty but like I said I'm fine as it is for now.
Comments
However, I do have to ask... why can't they tune it as the player's grow? They have the data (presumably) on how many players complete a piece of content and how many items it requires. Why is tuning cavalier as players grow not an option? Players grow, the monthly event should as well. I guess what I'm saying is it doesn't necessarily have to be at the tippy top of difficulty to still have some longevity to it.
See, for D7, the number of incoming nodes increases as the room number increases, from a baseline of 2, to 3, to more.
What can be done is to have Cavalier difficulty tuned the same way. What I’m saying is, upon selection of Cavalier difficulty, there’ll be a scale of difficulty to choose from from 1-5, where the number of incoming/global nodes will increase (of course designed and not random) to make it encounters extremely extremely niche and tough, that even the top 0.0001% has a very slim chance of exploring (think Acid Wash Mysterio + Aspect of War).
Rewards wise, it can be scaled to A + x(B) where each additional difficulty chosen will scale the rewards by a certain amount, but also keep a baseline reward for new cavaliers.
However, the catch is that it is ONE quest, ie once you complete/explore it, it is deemed completed/explored so there will be no double dipping of rewards.
In this way, cavaliers can gradually grow into a certain difficulty, and difficulties 1-5 can scale as players progress, even tuning Cav Diff 5 to 6*R4/5s.
In the second week the health pools are at 100k approx and few above, I predict they will reach 200k on the last week i guess so, or atleast 150-180k.
The number of players with R3 rosters that could reasonably attempt such a Cav difficulty is probably way too small to justify the effort. Most of that development effort, which has to be expended every single month, will be going to encounters almost no one will be fighting. There's no way to justify that expense.
Honestly, anyone concerned about longevity should be asking for rewards to be toned down. It is rewards that progress players out of the range of content. And actually if you ask the developers to increase the longevity of content, you will be asking them to tone down rewards because that's the first and last port of call for them. They aren't going to spend development time making something no one can do today, so that no one outlevels it too fast. They'll slow down your leveling instead.
People don’t see that they can’t have it both ways. 🤷🏻♂️
Also, even if they made monthly content crazy hard, there will definitely be top tiered players exploring it.
Uncollected was tuned for 5* R5s (people had a max ranked 5* R4 when it was introduced). It was hard, but still explorable with 5* R4s and some skills. As players gradually acquired more resources from monthly UC to rank their champs up to where it was tuned for, it became much much easier until the cakewalk it is today.
So if Kabam were to introduce Cav difficulty now, it should be tuned to, at least, 6* R3 level of difficulty.
If 4*R5s can manage UC EQ, and the highest achievable rank was 5* R4s for that period (and only a small amount of them were available at that time), then shouldn’t Cav difficulty make it so that it is “manageable” by 6* R3s and offer absolutely no challenge using 6* R4s?