6 star rank 3 stats increase

Nemesio

Why is it that from rank 1 to rank 2 the increase in attack and hp is 38% and from rank 2 to rank 3 the increase is only 19%?
For example corvus r1 has 23000 hp and then in rank 2 he has 32000, that is a 39% increase. But from rank 2 to rank 3 he gets to 38000 which would be a 19% increase, in other words half the increase than from r1 to r2.


5 star and 4 star always had a 36% increase from one rank to the next.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Nojokejaym

Idk maybe kabam will respond to you, maybe they won’t.

Nemesio

My point being, if the increase is half of what it should be, why aren't the resources needed half too?

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Nemesio

UmbertoDelRio said:

Nemesio said:

My point being, if the increase is half of what it should be, why aren't the resources needed half too?

Because that would fail the baseline purpose of this, which, again, is a mere assumption of mine.

Following the recent growth of champions a 6* r3 champ would most likely simply be too powerful compared to 2/35 and 5/65 champs and consequently making a lot of content too easy, or too hard for other players depending on who they tune it towards.

But since they're still the highest available tier of champion in this game their ressource requirement needs to reflect their exclusivity.

They need to consider both those things, meaning that essentially since 6* champs became a thing it was probably clear that a 6* r3 champ will nessecarily be underwhelming in growth and overwhelming in cost.

That would hold true if 4 star didn't exist. But when 5 star rank 5 start to appear you did not see kabam halving the stats increase did you?

Unknown

This content has been removed.

TyEdge

It’s also exponential, not linear. 39% would produce a 12,500hp increase, roughly. I have mixed feelings about it being less than linear even though costs increase massively.

Nemesio

TyEdge said:

It’s also exponential, not linear. 39% would produce a 12,500hp increase, roughly. I have mixed feelings about it being less than linear even though costs increase massively.

That's what i see as a problem, halves in stat increase but, the same huge increase in resource needed to rank up.

Nemesio

UmbertoDelRio said:

Nemesio said:

UmbertoDelRio said:

Nemesio said:

My point being, if the increase is half of what it should be, why aren't the resources needed half too?

Because that would fail the baseline purpose of this, which, again, is a mere assumption of mine.

Following the recent growth of champions a 6* r3 champ would most likely simply be too powerful compared to 2/35 and 5/65 champs and consequently making a lot of content too easy, or too hard for other players depending on who they tune it towards.

But since they're still the highest available tier of champion in this game their ressource requirement needs to reflect their exclusivity.

They need to consider both those things, meaning that essentially since 6* champs became a thing it was probably clear that a 6* r3 champ will nessecarily be underwhelming in growth and overwhelming in cost.

That would hold true if 4 star didn't exist. But when 5 star rank 5 start to appear you did not see kabam halving the stats increase did you?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but getting any 5* to 5/65 was much more accessible back when they got introduced than getting a 6* to r3 is now, no?

I just don't see a reason other than bandaid balancing tbh.

It's a new tier of champions that is still pretty exclusive, but it doesn't break the game too much in the process.

You had to complete act 5 in order to get 1 rank 5 five star

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

danielmath

BENJI830 said:

Yeah - this is 100% out-of-balance resource for reward wise. It’s HARD AS HELL to R3 a 6*. The ‘juice’ is not worth the ‘squeeze.’ It’s a KABAM progression gate/governor. According to all 29 roadmaps, I’m optimistic things will start moving here in 36 mos or so. (SARCASM!)

Have you used rank 3 6*? They are absolutely worth the squeeze....

Worknprogress

danielmath said:

BENJI830 said:

Yeah - this is 100% out-of-balance resource for reward wise. It’s HARD AS HELL to R3 a 6*. The ‘juice’ is not worth the ‘squeeze.’ It’s a KABAM progression gate/governor. According to all 29 roadmaps, I’m optimistic things will start moving here in 36 mos or so. (SARCASM!)

Have you used rank 3 6*? They are absolutely worth the squeeze....

Certain champs benefit from it far more than others though. Champs like Corvus and Nick that get quite large benefits from base stat upgrades through crit damage or bleed will feel like far more of an upgrade than some others. Outside of having more health, the difference between my R3 Namor and R5 Namor (before I sold him) seemed pretty minimal honestly.

The jump from R2 to R3 is minimal compared to past level increases. That's far from a bad thing though as it means that 5* champs are relevant for things like story and war even longer. Anyone complaining that the jump wasn't enough is pretty short-sighted as far as I'm concerned

Aleor

Nemesio said:

My point being, if the increase is half of what it should be, why aren't the resources needed half too?

Well, maybe it would've be 2t5cc with 39%? Or they increased availability of those 2 times. It doesn't really matter

GAMEOVERJames

This phenomenon seems to be the trend of game future. Kabam is trying to control the inflation of overall rating of 6star champions in case all the “high values/numbers” in the game become meaningless

K00shMaan

First and foremost, the fact that the increase is lower is a good thing. The hardest content will always be scaled towards the best champions you can have (right now, that's R3 6 stars). By decreasing the gap between R3 6 stars and 5/65 and R2 stars, it increases their shelf life and will allow them to be viable for endgame content for a longer period of time. This was a huge concern when 5 stars were introduced. People realized that they would need to start getting the champs all over again as 5 stars version would be so much more powerful. By lowering this gap with 6 stars, it will delay that feeling that you need every champ as a 6 star to compete. Unfortunately they couldn't do that between R1 and R2 because they already had a precedent of in place (i.e. 4/55=R1 and 5/65=R2). With R3's, they get a chance to rebalance the progression curve.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Nemesio

K00shMaan said:

By decreasing the gap between R3 6 stars and 5/65 and R2 stars, it increases their shelf life and will allow them to be viable for endgame content for a longer period of time.

That is a good explanation i guess.

GOTG

I wonder what will rank 5 6* Corvus look like ...

Erosenseiog

Nemesio said:

Why is it that from rank 1 to rank 2 the increase in attack and hp is 38% and from rank 2 to rank 3 the increase is only 19%?
For example corvus r1 has 23000 hp and then in rank 2 he has 32000, that is a 39% increase. But from rank 2 to rank 3 he gets to 38000 which would be a 19% increase, in other words half the increase than from r1 to r2.


5 star and 4 star always had a 36% increase from one rank to the next.

Think of it as a wealth tax for overall balance and longevity of the game. The more you earn, the more you pay in taxes as a percentage of your income. Similarly if you are in a position of taking 6* to r3, you are one top 5% at least. So paying more for less makes sense.

KDoggg2017

Nemesio said:

My point being, if the increase is half of what it should be, why aren't the resources needed half too?

We can only guess why Kabam did this (my guess is to slow down introducing 7*s too early)... but we do know it's intentional. The resources are exactly the way they want it.

KDoggg2017

Erosenseiog said:

Nemesio said:

Why is it that from rank 1 to rank 2 the increase in attack and hp is 38% and from rank 2 to rank 3 the increase is only 19%?
For example corvus r1 has 23000 hp and then in rank 2 he has 32000, that is a 39% increase. But from rank 2 to rank 3 he gets to 38000 which would be a 19% increase, in other words half the increase than from r1 to r2.


5 star and 4 star always had a 36% increase from one rank to the next.

Think of it as a wealth tax for overall balance and longevity of the game. The more you earn, the more you pay in taxes as a percentage of your income. Similarly if you are in a position of taking 6* to r3, you are one top 5% at least. So paying more for less makes sense.

Paying more for less NEVER makes sense.

Worknprogress

KDoggg2017 said:

Nemesio said:

My point being, if the increase is half of what it should be, why aren't the resources needed half too?

We can only guess why Kabam did this (my guess is to slow down introducing 7*s too early)... but we do know it's intentional. The resources are exactly the way they want it.

And you're incredibly short sighted if you think it's a bad thing

KDoggg2017

Worknprogress said:

KDoggg2017 said:

Nemesio said:

My point being, if the increase is half of what it should be, why aren't the resources needed half too?

We can only guess why Kabam did this (my guess is to slow down introducing 7*s too early)... but we do know it's intentional. The resources are exactly the way they want it.

And you're incredibly short sighted if you think it's a bad thing

Cute. I never said it was a bad thing. My point was the resources would not be halved.

Worknprogress

KDoggg2017 said:

Worknprogress said:

KDoggg2017 said:

Nemesio said:

My point being, if the increase is half of what it should be, why aren't the resources needed half too?

We can only guess why Kabam did this (my guess is to slow down introducing 7*s too early)... but we do know it's intentional. The resources are exactly the way they want it.

And you're incredibly short sighted if you think it's a bad thing

Cute. I never said it was a bad thing. My point was the resources would not be halved.

Why would they be? The resource requirements for rank ups are arbitrary amounts set by the dev team. Resource acquisition is then balanced against those requirements to achieve whatever accumulation rate they've decided on. There's no reason requirements would have to be adjusted as accumulation rate just gets increased or decreased to achieve whatever progression time table they've decided on.

You said paying more for less doesn't make sense but you're not paying for less of anything. You're paying to get to whatever the next decided upon power level is. Nothing says the increase has to be linear. It's just whatever level was decided on.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

KDoggg2017

Worknprogress said:

KDoggg2017 said:

Worknprogress said:

KDoggg2017 said:

Nemesio said:

My point being, if the increase is half of what it should be, why aren't the resources needed half too?

We can only guess why Kabam did this (my guess is to slow down introducing 7*s too early)... but we do know it's intentional. The resources are exactly the way they want it.

And you're incredibly short sighted if you think it's a bad thing

Cute. I never said it was a bad thing. My point was the resources would not be halved.

Why would they be? The resource requirements for rank ups are arbitrary amounts set by the dev team. Resource acquisition is then balanced against those requirements to achieve whatever accumulation rate they've decided on. There's no reason requirements would have to be adjusted as accumulation rate just gets increased or decreased to achieve whatever progression time table they've decided on.

You said paying more for less doesn't make sense but you're not paying for less of anything. You're paying to get to whatever the next decided upon power level is. Nothing says the increase has to be linear. It's just whatever level was decided on.

So you are agreeing with what I said and don't even realize it. Cool. I'll let you debate yourself from here on in. 😏👍

Unknown

This content has been removed.