Introducing your first Experience with 6-Star Champions: The Boss Rush Challenge! [UPDATED Oct 17]

1111214161720

Comments

  • SummonerB2 wrote: »
    If I am exactly level 40 can I still play it?

    Yep! Level 40 is the minimum level, so you will be fine.
  • ForumGuyForumGuy Posts: 285
    ForumGuy wrote: »
    Shrimkins wrote: »
    Why is everyone freaking out about the CR? You do realize it has almost no effect on your stats anyway right? Do the math and find out the impact for yourself before losing your mind's.

    I have to agree with this. We're talking about a 1-2.5% difference between a 4* Max and a 6* R1. Now, I'm sure the reaction stems from the fact that it's one step higher from the existing deviation, but there was nothing saying that it wouldn't change. Logically, there has to be a separation between 4*s and 6*s, whether significant or not. That's the whole point of having different Star Levels. I won't get into the idea of transparency because they've told us what is in store. I think the term is thrown around whenever something changes.
    The 1-2.5% isn’t the difference, that’s how much is taken away just by a 10 challenger rating difference. Not only does this not address the stat changes (Higher HP and attack for 6*), but this also doesn’t take in the boost given to the higher challenger rating.

    6* will already have higher hp and attack stats, an approximate 5% other stat difference at R1 from a 4* but 5* also have higher armor, 6* might have that and another stat heavily increased too.

    6*s will be top-level. We would expect a deviation between 4*s and 6*s. The same way we wouldn't take a team of Max 3*s into a 5* Quest and expect them to perform as well as 4*s. There is a point to having higher levels, and it's about adding a new level of challenge. It's one CR difference. Not a great difference. It still stands that in order to complete content, you need a sufficient Roster. That's no different with the addition of 6*s.

    A difference, yes. A deviation? No. There is no logical justification for having 6* be more powerful AND have an extra (that's EXTRA) CR bump. And based on the fact that I've been asking this same question for nearly a week, I am guessing Kabam has no logical justification for this either.

    Alright, I finally got word back on the Challenger Rating. The gist of it is that there was never a rule on how we tune the Challenge Rating of each Rank. Yes, the last were consistent, but this is based off of what we consider to be appropriate for the current state of the game.

    I know this isn't the answer you're looking for, but this is the case.

    Well, you told us the difference would be the same as the difference between 5* and 4*. Turns out, false. Add it to the list of bugs and glitches and lags and all the other stuff going on and, well, it's quite a list...

    The progression is a relative similarity, and you're basing it all off of one Stat. It's not necessarily a direct comparable.

    Actually, it's not. The progression from 1-2, 2-3, 3-4, and 4-5 is similar. There is a standard progression. In the case of 6*, the progression is inconsistent with the previous progression--and we were told directly to expect that the progression WOULD be the same.

    To claim otherwise is simply untrue.

    That's just looking at 1 single stat. We can ignore all of the other utility that every Rank and Rarity of every Champion has. You cannot judge the progression of 6-Stars solely on their Challenge Rating.

    Miike can you explain why the CR shouldn't be consistent for 6*s? Is it because of their health ability or something like cmon?

    @Kabam Miike hello?
  • MistsMists Posts: 19
    edited October 2017
    ForumGuy wrote: »
    ForumGuy wrote: »
    Shrimkins wrote: »
    Why is everyone freaking out about the CR? You do realize it has almost no effect on your stats anyway right? Do the math and find out the impact for yourself before losing your mind's.

    I have to agree with this. We're talking about a 1-2.5% difference between a 4* Max and a 6* R1. Now, I'm sure the reaction stems from the fact that it's one step higher from the existing deviation, but there was nothing saying that it wouldn't change. Logically, there has to be a separation between 4*s and 6*s, whether significant or not. That's the whole point of having different Star Levels. I won't get into the idea of transparency because they've told us what is in store. I think the term is thrown around whenever something changes.
    The 1-2.5% isn’t the difference, that’s how much is taken away just by a 10 challenger rating difference. Not only does this not address the stat changes (Higher HP and attack for 6*), but this also doesn’t take in the boost given to the higher challenger rating.

    6* will already have higher hp and attack stats, an approximate 5% other stat difference at R1 from a 4* but 5* also have higher armor, 6* might have that and another stat heavily increased too.

    6*s will be top-level. We would expect a deviation between 4*s and 6*s. The same way we wouldn't take a team of Max 3*s into a 5* Quest and expect them to perform as well as 4*s. There is a point to having higher levels, and it's about adding a new level of challenge. It's one CR difference. Not a great difference. It still stands that in order to complete content, you need a sufficient Roster. That's no different with the addition of 6*s.

    A difference, yes. A deviation? No. There is no logical justification for having 6* be more powerful AND have an extra (that's EXTRA) CR bump. And based on the fact that I've been asking this same question for nearly a week, I am guessing Kabam has no logical justification for this either.

    Alright, I finally got word back on the Challenger Rating. The gist of it is that there was never a rule on how we tune the Challenge Rating of each Rank. Yes, the last were consistent, but this is based off of what we consider to be appropriate for the current state of the game.

    I know this isn't the answer you're looking for, but this is the case.

    Well, you told us the difference would be the same as the difference between 5* and 4*. Turns out, false. Add it to the list of bugs and glitches and lags and all the other stuff going on and, well, it's quite a list...

    The progression is a relative similarity, and you're basing it all off of one Stat. It's not necessarily a direct comparable.

    Actually, it's not. The progression from 1-2, 2-3, 3-4, and 4-5 is similar. There is a standard progression. In the case of 6*, the progression is inconsistent with the previous progression--and we were told directly to expect that the progression WOULD be the same.

    To claim otherwise is simply untrue.

    That's just looking at 1 single stat. We can ignore all of the other utility that every Rank and Rarity of every Champion has. You cannot judge the progression of 6-Stars solely on their Challenge Rating.

    Miike can you explain why the CR shouldn't be consistent for 6*s? Is it because of their health ability or something like cmon?

    @Kabam Miike hello?

    He won't answer because he doesn't know what he's talking about. Just relaying what the dev team is telling him. (which is his job)
  • Shrimkins wrote: »
    Why is everyone freaking out about the CR? You do realize it has almost no effect on your stats anyway right? Do the math and find out the impact for yourself before losing your mind's.

    I have to agree with this. We're talking about a 1-2.5% difference between a 4* Max and a 6* R1. Now, I'm sure the reaction stems from the fact that it's one step higher from the existing deviation, but there was nothing saying that it wouldn't change. Logically, there has to be a separation between 4*s and 6*s, whether significant or not. That's the whole point of having different Star Levels. I won't get into the idea of transparency because they've told us what is in store. I think the term is thrown around whenever something changes.
    The 1-2.5% isn’t the difference, that’s how much is taken away just by a 10 challenger rating difference. Not only does this not address the stat changes (Higher HP and attack for 6*), but this also doesn’t take in the boost given to the higher challenger rating.

    6* will already have higher hp and attack stats, an approximate 5% other stat difference at R1 from a 4* but 5* also have higher armor, 6* might have that and another stat heavily increased too.

    6*s will be top-level. We would expect a deviation between 4*s and 6*s. The same way we wouldn't take a team of Max 3*s into a 5* Quest and expect them to perform as well as 4*s. There is a point to having higher levels, and it's about adding a new level of challenge. It's one CR difference. Not a great difference. It still stands that in order to complete content, you need a sufficient Roster. That's no different with the addition of 6*s.

    A difference, yes. A deviation? No. There is no logical justification for having 6* be more powerful AND have an extra (that's EXTRA) CR bump. And based on the fact that I've been asking this same question for nearly a week, I am guessing Kabam has no logical justification for this either.

    Alright, I finally got word back on the Challenger Rating. The gist of it is that there was never a rule on how we tune the Challenge Rating of each Rank. Yes, the last were consistent, but this is based off of what we consider to be appropriate for the current state of the game.

    I know this isn't the answer you're looking for, but this is the case.

    Well, you told us the difference would be the same as the difference between 5* and 4*. Turns out, false. Add it to the list of bugs and glitches and lags and all the other stuff going on and, well, it's quite a list...

    The progression is a relative similarity, and you're basing it all off of one Stat. It's not necessarily a direct comparable.

    Actually, it's not. The progression from 1-2, 2-3, 3-4, and 4-5 is similar. There is a standard progression. In the case of 6*, the progression is inconsistent with the previous progression--and we were told directly to expect that the progression WOULD be the same.

    To claim otherwise is simply untrue.

    That's actually not true. The progression from 1* to 2* and from 2* to 3* is actually end-to-end, meaning the overlap is that the lowest rank of the higher tier has the same challenge rating of the highest rank of the lower tier. Or to put it directly, 1* rank 2 has same CR as 2* rank 1, and 2* rank 3 has the same CR as 3* rank 1. The 3-4 and 4-5 progression is different from that and slightly from each other. 4* rank 1 has same CR as 3* rank 3 and that means they overlap two ranks. 5* rank 1 has same CR as 4* rank 3 which sounds the same as the previous progression but it means 4* and 5* overlap by three ranks (5* 1-2-3 has same CR as 4* 3-4-5). The most reasonable extrapolation of the current system, if 6* champions were going to extend the pattern, would be for 6* rank 1 to have the same CR as 5* rank 3. But the progression isn't identical across all tiers and ranks.

    Also, to be fair to @Kabam Miike we were not told to expect a consistent progression for challenge rating. The original OP states the CR for each rank of 6* champ. When asked why the CR values seemed high, @Kabam Miike responded to that question (incorrectly) that the values were consistent with previous CR values: "This aligns with the Challenger Rating progression throughout the entire system." He did not state that it was supposed to be that way, or promised that it would be that way. He only stated a rationale for why it was that way, which turned out to be incorrect.
  • Mists wrote: »
    Challenger Rating is not a "small aspect". It affects every fight.

    My rank 5 4* take 700+ dmg from blocked hits in 5.3. And that's with a substantially LOWER challenger rating.

    That's not due to challenge rating. That's primarily because you are fighting things with over 5000 attack and post 12.0 you're unlikely to have a block percentage value above 70% unless you have a literal perfect block ability. Just *light* attacks should be dealing well over 1000 points of raw damage, and it'll be hard to block that down far below about 300ish. Mediums and special attack ticks are going to hit you for between 500 and 1000 points of damage just from simple math before factoring in challenge rating. "Hit" as in "through your block" hit.

    This is mostly a consequence of DR, not CR.

    We can calculate (and many, many tests by different players have verified the math) the effects of CR on situations like this. Suppose you have a champion with about 4000 block percentage total with stat and mastery. This is on the high end of what you can achieve normally for most champions. If challenge rating didn't exist, then that would be about 72.7% block percentage. When facing off against a 5/50 with CR 100 your block percentage drops to about 66.7% That's the value you normally see, more or less. Against CR 110, equal to a 4/55, your block percentage drops to 66.1%. Against the worst case 6* with CR 150 block stat drops to 64%. And just for giggles, if you fought against the absolute worst case CR that has ever existed in the game, which was the 180 CR of the original 12.0 release for 4/55s, your block percentage would have been 62.5%.

    To approximate the Act 5.3 enemies lets consider a hypothetical opponent with attack rating 5000 (stat plus buffs, comparable to the 5.3.1 opponents). A medium attack would deal about 2000 damage intrinsically. If that opponent is a 4/55, a champion with 4000 block stat would have an intrinsic block percentage of about 66.1% and would receive (before resistances and armor) 678 damage. But if that champion was a rank 5 6* champion instead, with all other stats being equal (so we only look at the effects of CR) block percentage would be 64% and the damage would be 720.

    In other words, 6* challenge ratings will turn 680 damage into 720 damage, in the worst case scenario. Most of the increased threat is going to come from the fact that 6* champions will have higher stats, not because of challenge rating. And those higher stats are something we are already facing in higher end content, because absent a way to challenge us with higher stat opponents Kabam has just been buffing the 5* opponents they can use. Which is why we are facing 5000 attack rating things in 5.3. Those things don't exist natively.

    When it comes to high block situations, ten points of challenge rating is almost unnoticeable. It is approximately a 1% increase in net damage taken. The 40 points higher that the highest CR 6* will be would account for about a 6% increase in damage taken relative to a 5/50 with the same offense. That's not insignificant, but probably also difficult to notice when the rank 5 6* champion also has far higher stats. The Collector has a challenge rating, but no one notices that because his intrinsic abilities and buffs make it almost impossible to observe.
  • DNA3000 wrote: »
    Shrimkins wrote: »
    Why is everyone freaking out about the CR? You do realize it has almost no effect on your stats anyway right? Do the math and find out the impact for yourself before losing your mind's.

    I have to agree with this. We're talking about a 1-2.5% difference between a 4* Max and a 6* R1. Now, I'm sure the reaction stems from the fact that it's one step higher from the existing deviation, but there was nothing saying that it wouldn't change. Logically, there has to be a separation between 4*s and 6*s, whether significant or not. That's the whole point of having different Star Levels. I won't get into the idea of transparency because they've told us what is in store. I think the term is thrown around whenever something changes.
    The 1-2.5% isn’t the difference, that’s how much is taken away just by a 10 challenger rating difference. Not only does this not address the stat changes (Higher HP and attack for 6*), but this also doesn’t take in the boost given to the higher challenger rating.

    6* will already have higher hp and attack stats, an approximate 5% other stat difference at R1 from a 4* but 5* also have higher armor, 6* might have that and another stat heavily increased too.

    6*s will be top-level. We would expect a deviation between 4*s and 6*s. The same way we wouldn't take a team of Max 3*s into a 5* Quest and expect them to perform as well as 4*s. There is a point to having higher levels, and it's about adding a new level of challenge. It's one CR difference. Not a great difference. It still stands that in order to complete content, you need a sufficient Roster. That's no different with the addition of 6*s.

    A difference, yes. A deviation? No. There is no logical justification for having 6* be more powerful AND have an extra (that's EXTRA) CR bump. And based on the fact that I've been asking this same question for nearly a week, I am guessing Kabam has no logical justification for this either.

    Alright, I finally got word back on the Challenger Rating. The gist of it is that there was never a rule on how we tune the Challenge Rating of each Rank. Yes, the last were consistent, but this is based off of what we consider to be appropriate for the current state of the game.

    I know this isn't the answer you're looking for, but this is the case.

    Well, you told us the difference would be the same as the difference between 5* and 4*. Turns out, false. Add it to the list of bugs and glitches and lags and all the other stuff going on and, well, it's quite a list...

    The progression is a relative similarity, and you're basing it all off of one Stat. It's not necessarily a direct comparable.

    Actually, it's not. The progression from 1-2, 2-3, 3-4, and 4-5 is similar. There is a standard progression. In the case of 6*, the progression is inconsistent with the previous progression--and we were told directly to expect that the progression WOULD be the same.

    To claim otherwise is simply untrue.

    That's actually not true. The progression from 1* to 2* and from 2* to 3* is actually end-to-end, meaning the overlap is that the lowest rank of the higher tier has the same challenge rating of the highest rank of the lower tier. Or to put it directly, 1* rank 2 has same CR as 2* rank 1, and 2* rank 3 has the same CR as 3* rank 1. The 3-4 and 4-5 progression is different from that and slightly from each other. 4* rank 1 has same CR as 3* rank 3 and that means they overlap two ranks. 5* rank 1 has same CR as 4* rank 3 which sounds the same as the previous progression but it means 4* and 5* overlap by three ranks (5* 1-2-3 has same CR as 4* 3-4-5). The most reasonable extrapolation of the current system, if 6* champions were going to extend the pattern, would be for 6* rank 1 to have the same CR as 5* rank 3. But the progression isn't identical across all tiers and ranks.

    Also, to be fair to @Kabam Miike we were not told to expect a consistent progression for challenge rating. The original OP states the CR for each rank of 6* champ. When asked why the CR values seemed high, @Kabam Miike responded to that question (incorrectly) that the values were consistent with previous CR values: "This aligns with the Challenger Rating progression throughout the entire system." He did not state that it was supposed to be that way, or promised that it would be that way. He only stated a rationale for why it was that way, which turned out to be incorrect.

    Um, Ad0ra literally wrote that the increase between 6* from 5* would be the same as 4* to 5*. It is, in point of fact, not.

    I'm sorry, but unless you have a link to that, I do not believe @Ad0ra_ ever said that. She posted in the original 6* thread, in answer to a FAQ question:

    Q: How strong are 6-Stars compared to 5-Stars?
    A: We’re still actively tuning them, and are committed to getting them just right. Players can expect them to be a step up from 5-Stars in the same way that 5-Stars are a step up from 4-Stars.

    If you are interpreting that statement in that context as meaning that the challenge rating stat would exactly follow the same pattern as the 4* to 5* differential, I don't find that to be a reasonable interpretation of her statement. She is addressing strength generally, not making a mathematical statement about challenge rating specifically. If you have a link to a different statement where she addresses this in a more specific way, I would be interested to see it.
  • @vrto how are you in an 9.5 mill alliance with that low of rating?

    as well webslinger title, i feel that challenge was 2 hard for your current roster.



    Don’t judge a player for his roster!
  • Mists wrote: »
    You have until tomorrow to level up. Shouldn't be too hard :p

    I obviously know that, just wanted to know WHY...
  • DNA3000 wrote: »
    DNA3000 wrote: »
    Shrimkins wrote: »
    Why is everyone freaking out about the CR? You do realize it has almost no effect on your stats anyway right? Do the math and find out the impact for yourself before losing your mind's.

    I have to agree with this. We're talking about a 1-2.5% difference between a 4* Max and a 6* R1. Now, I'm sure the reaction stems from the fact that it's one step higher from the existing deviation, but there was nothing saying that it wouldn't change. Logically, there has to be a separation between 4*s and 6*s, whether significant or not. That's the whole point of having different Star Levels. I won't get into the idea of transparency because they've told us what is in store. I think the term is thrown around whenever something changes.
    The 1-2.5% isn’t the difference, that’s how much is taken away just by a 10 challenger rating difference. Not only does this not address the stat changes (Higher HP and attack for 6*), but this also doesn’t take in the boost given to the higher challenger rating.

    6* will already have higher hp and attack stats, an approximate 5% other stat difference at R1 from a 4* but 5* also have higher armor, 6* might have that and another stat heavily increased too.

    6*s will be top-level. We would expect a deviation between 4*s and 6*s. The same way we wouldn't take a team of Max 3*s into a 5* Quest and expect them to perform as well as 4*s. There is a point to having higher levels, and it's about adding a new level of challenge. It's one CR difference. Not a great difference. It still stands that in order to complete content, you need a sufficient Roster. That's no different with the addition of 6*s.

    A difference, yes. A deviation? No. There is no logical justification for having 6* be more powerful AND have an extra (that's EXTRA) CR bump. And based on the fact that I've been asking this same question for nearly a week, I am guessing Kabam has no logical justification for this either.

    Alright, I finally got word back on the Challenger Rating. The gist of it is that there was never a rule on how we tune the Challenge Rating of each Rank. Yes, the last were consistent, but this is based off of what we consider to be appropriate for the current state of the game.

    I know this isn't the answer you're looking for, but this is the case.

    Well, you told us the difference would be the same as the difference between 5* and 4*. Turns out, false. Add it to the list of bugs and glitches and lags and all the other stuff going on and, well, it's quite a list...

    The progression is a relative similarity, and you're basing it all off of one Stat. It's not necessarily a direct comparable.

    Actually, it's not. The progression from 1-2, 2-3, 3-4, and 4-5 is similar. There is a standard progression. In the case of 6*, the progression is inconsistent with the previous progression--and we were told directly to expect that the progression WOULD be the same.

    To claim otherwise is simply untrue.

    That's actually not true. The progression from 1* to 2* and from 2* to 3* is actually end-to-end, meaning the overlap is that the lowest rank of the higher tier has the same challenge rating of the highest rank of the lower tier. Or to put it directly, 1* rank 2 has same CR as 2* rank 1, and 2* rank 3 has the same CR as 3* rank 1. The 3-4 and 4-5 progression is different from that and slightly from each other. 4* rank 1 has same CR as 3* rank 3 and that means they overlap two ranks. 5* rank 1 has same CR as 4* rank 3 which sounds the same as the previous progression but it means 4* and 5* overlap by three ranks (5* 1-2-3 has same CR as 4* 3-4-5). The most reasonable extrapolation of the current system, if 6* champions were going to extend the pattern, would be for 6* rank 1 to have the same CR as 5* rank 3. But the progression isn't identical across all tiers and ranks.

    Also, to be fair to @Kabam Miike we were not told to expect a consistent progression for challenge rating. The original OP states the CR for each rank of 6* champ. When asked why the CR values seemed high, @Kabam Miike responded to that question (incorrectly) that the values were consistent with previous CR values: "This aligns with the Challenger Rating progression throughout the entire system." He did not state that it was supposed to be that way, or promised that it would be that way. He only stated a rationale for why it was that way, which turned out to be incorrect.

    Um, Ad0ra literally wrote that the increase between 6* from 5* would be the same as 4* to 5*. It is, in point of fact, not.

    I'm sorry, but unless you have a link to that, I do not believe @Ad0ra_ ever said that. She posted in the original 6* thread, in answer to a FAQ question:

    Q: How strong are 6-Stars compared to 5-Stars?
    A: We’re still actively tuning them, and are committed to getting them just right. Players can expect them to be a step up from 5-Stars in the same way that 5-Stars are a step up from 4-Stars.

    If you are interpreting that statement in that context as meaning that the challenge rating stat would exactly follow the same pattern as the 4* to 5* differential, I don't find that to be a reasonable interpretation of her statement. She is addressing strength generally, not making a mathematical statement about challenge rating specifically. If you have a link to a different statement where she addresses this in a more specific way, I would be interested to see it.

    Really? You don't think that the stat they introduced to counter what they called the "global buff" so that champions of different star levels are essentially stratified into different tiers isn't a reflection of general strength? That's like saying a student's GPA is only one number and doesn't reflect how well they did in all of their classes.

    IF challenge rating didn't have an overall impact on the strength of a champion, then WHY would they have needed it in the first place?

    Well, first of all Challenge rating doesn't "stratify champions into different tiers" and second, challenge rating isn't a reflection of general strength. Nor is it equivalent to GPA: GPA is an average of all your grades, but challenge rating is in large part arbitrary: it was set to certain values in 12.0, then changed in 12.0.1. So by definition it cannot be a reflection of the intrinsic strength of the champions, because it can be tuned to any value they want independent of the strength of the champions.

    Fact of the matter is, if your knowledge of challenge rating comes from the original 12.0 post on challenge rating, single ability rank, and other 12.0 mechanics changes, I spent months debunking nearly every statement in that post when 12.0 came out. Kabam Dorosh's post on challenge rating comes closer to the truth of what the conceptual idea behind challenge rating was, although even that post has some oddities to it. If you believe Kabam Dorosh's post in terms of what the approximate goal of CR was, then the "stratification" you believe CR is doing cannot possibly happen.

    And because the original 12.0 post was written before they completely changed CR values (and lowered most substantially) even if anything in that post made sense, which it doesn't, it cannot represent what CR is doing now, because CR values are completely different now.
  • LeNoirFaineantLeNoirFaineant Posts: 4,979 ★★★★★
    Shrimkins wrote: »
    Why is everyone freaking out about the CR? You do realize it has almost no effect on your stats anyway right? Do the math and find out the impact for yourself before losing your mind's.

    I have to agree with this. We're talking about a 1-2.5% difference between a 4* Max and a 6* R1. Now, I'm sure the reaction stems from the fact that it's one step higher from the existing deviation, but there was nothing saying that it wouldn't change. Logically, there has to be a separation between 4*s and 6*s, whether significant or not. That's the whole point of having different Star Levels. I won't get into the idea of transparency because they've told us what is in store. I think the term is thrown around whenever something changes.
    The 1-2.5% isn’t the difference, that’s how much is taken away just by a 10 challenger rating difference. Not only does this not address the stat changes (Higher HP and attack for 6*), but this also doesn’t take in the boost given to the higher challenger rating.

    6* will already have higher hp and attack stats, an approximate 5% other stat difference at R1 from a 4* but 5* also have higher armor, 6* might have that and another stat heavily increased too.

    6*s will be top-level. We would expect a deviation between 4*s and 6*s. The same way we wouldn't take a team of Max 3*s into a 5* Quest and expect them to perform as well as 4*s. There is a point to having higher levels, and it's about adding a new level of challenge. It's one CR difference. Not a great difference. It still stands that in order to complete content, you need a sufficient Roster. That's no different with the addition of 6*s.

    A difference, yes. A deviation? No. There is no logical justification for having 6* be more powerful AND have an extra (that's EXTRA) CR bump. And based on the fact that I've been asking this same question for nearly a week, I am guessing Kabam has no logical justification for this either.

    Alright, I finally got word back on the Challenger Rating. The gist of it is that there was never a rule on how we tune the Challenge Rating of each Rank. Yes, the last were consistent, but this is based off of what we consider to be appropriate for the current state of the game.

    I know this isn't the answer you're looking for, but this is the case.

    LMAO. It isn't the answer we are looking for because it isn't an answer. I'm 99% sure that the truth is someone screwed up but now they are committed to it.
  • AliabAliab Posts: 138
    The rewards are fair for such a short quest. But I do agree that the six stars introduced should have been champions that we faced more often before. You put all new champs that have barely been around a month. And for sure you need to nerf Mephistos aura damage because it’s a joke. You literally de-powered so many old school champs only to add even more overpowered champs that should not be that strong. Also the quest overall seems quite easy except for mephisto. Will we need to update the game or will the quest just show up? Cause on iOS with the game update now it’s about 1GB!
  • GamerGamer Posts: 4,438 ★★★★
    Arund 4 huers from now im Think
  • ForumGuyForumGuy Posts: 285

    So is that your suggestion? That we take what we get and like it?

    That's how it works, kabam rarely let's us have a say in it. We have to take it, can't stop it, only complain about it so much that they adjust it a little bit, but it doesn't go away, they just do minor things till we realize that we don't matter.
  • WayntosWayntos Posts: 283
    i dont see the boss rush is it in the event quest? only open to the uncollected? whats up?
  • GamerGamer Posts: 4,438 ★★★★
    Wayntos wrote: »
    i dont see the boss rush is it in the event quest? only open to the uncollected? whats up?
    It not oppen yet Becasse it has not stats
  • AliabAliab Posts: 138
    Wow Kabam Mike and Co outdo themselves with further useless remarks. What exactly is the state of the game? Oh you know we adjusted abilities and CR consistently before but we’ve figured out how to make more money from everyone by adding a new bug a day, making blocking as useful as taking a combo directly, threw everyone under the bus in terms of resources spent on masteries. Not to mention that you can’t even give us actual reasons for these changes? People asked for more content IE more quests, different challenges anything but the addition of another tier of heroes that you can’t upgrade unless you sell your kidneys or quit everything you’re doing in life to just play the game. Smart moves kabam.
  • BendyBendy Posts: 674 ★★
    The feedback on the 6 star challenge for me it was great experience the challenger rating didn't matter if using a 4 star the damage output was good on block defo the rewards since it wasn t hard mephisto easy to kill since only proced the aura when he had 1 bar everytime and that's it other than that experiencing them was a fun challenge hope u do more since this was a fun experience even unchallenged rating is off a little it doesn't matter it depends on how u play if u get hit or take lot of blocks
  • SolswerdSolswerd Posts: 1,439 ★★★
    @Roy34 in addition to the responses you have received thus far....and even if you choose to disregard their logic....you should be aware that both games are owned by the same company (Netmarble owns Kabam). Can't possibly steal what you already own.
  • Madman_marvinMadman_marvin Posts: 256 ★★
    Bendy wrote: »
    The feedback on the 6 star challenge for me it was great experience the challenger rating didn't matter if using a 4 star the damage output was good on block defo the rewards since it wasn t hard mephisto easy to kill since only proced the aura when he had 1 bar everytime and that's it other than that experiencing them was a fun challenge hope u do more since this was a fun experience even unchallenged rating is off a little it doesn't matter it depends on how u play if u get hit or take lot of blocks
    I agree. Bleed immune is not required but highly recommend for Blade and Morningstar. Mephisto can be tough with his incinerate. My team was 5* duped SL, 5/50 Gwenpool, 5/50 AA, 5/50 Hyperion, and 4/40 GR just for Morningstar.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 20,463 ★★★★★
    @DNA3000

    "Challenge Rating affects the following stats:
    Armor, Armor Penetration, Critical Hit Rating, Critical Damage Rating, Critical Resistance, Block Proficiency, Block Penetration"

    This is from Kabam Dorosh's post. You're telling me it's one factor, yet it affects 7 factors. That seems significant. And if it weren't significant, why would the pattern of increasing CR have changed?

    And don't you find the "it's appropriate given the state of the game" comment a bit of a cop out? What does that even mean? Has Kabam shown evidence of fully understanding the state of the game and/or the way their decisions will affect gameplay and player experiences? In my nearly 2 years playing, I have only seen a handful of quality changes, and a vast array of screw ups and misfires.

    I mean, we can wait and see how 6* work, but I'm betting once we see what they look like and how they perform and the impact they have on the effectiveness of other star level champs, we'll be rather disappointed. And by that time, we'll get some answer about how 6* have been introduced and won't be removed from the game, and people will just have to adjust around them, to the new reality they create. Kinda like what we're experiencing with Alliance War.

    So is that your suggestion? That we take what we get and like it?

    CR as a standalone is nothing. It affects how Champs interact with each other. While it affects the stats listed, it's a difference of 1-2.5% between a 4* and a 6*. There has to be a distinction between the two. Otherwise a Max 4* is the same as a 6*.
  • GbSarkarGbSarkar Posts: 1,075 ★★★
    Meh
  • edited October 2017
    so many discussion... CR is not hte main reason you lose agains strong enemies :-)
    just look at this:
    precision_en.jpg


    http://mbch.guide/en/mastery/ataka-tochnost/

    and as for comparsion:
    4-Star R5 Black Bolt will have
    20.98% Critical rate against 1-Star R1
    23.00% Critical rate against 4-Star R5
    22.15% Critical rate against 5-Star R5
    20.98% Critical rate against 6-Star R5
    way a big difference to create such a mess in this discussion :-)
  • RagamugginGunnerRagamugginGunner Posts: 1,972 ★★★★★
    Maph was annoying and 4* don't do any damage. Took about 15 min.
  • Indrick781Indrick781 Posts: 242 ★★★
    That was easy and the rewards still felt like ****.
Sign In or Register to comment.