If fully ascended and unemblemed Galapago is stronger than fully emblemed Viselius, who again is stronger than fully emblemed and LBd Hatter, should we treat all of them as the same level heroes? Are heroes whose power differs by a full one level of ascension (or even - by two levels of ascension) still in the same category?
IMHO, if Hatter is a 5*, then Viselius should be 6* and Galapago 7*.
In case of Viselius and Galapago, the difference is the more meaning, as they are heroes of roughly the same age, so the difference cannot be explained by the age.
Hm… 
I do wonder whether some of the tiering aspects, and the customer reactions to certain heroes, would change if the system was more appropriate.
After all, Soul Exchange already presents us with defacto 5, 6 and 7* choices given the number of heroes we need to use to obtain the most expensive ones.
The gap will be bigger and bigger with every portal.
Another example of power creep:
The difference in stats is very small between 2LB +20 Sargasso and only maxed Farrah.
New 4* at 2LB are very close to 2LB s1 5* without costumes too.
1 Like
OK, I understand power creep, but Viselus and Galapago were presented only 4 months apart, and their power differs by a full one ascension level (113TP).
One is an event hero. The other is a HOTM. Event heroes usually get better stats.
3 Likes
We compare heroes of different release dates. 
The powercreep is a sprint nowadays:
You won’t change it, because it is getting the balance for SG right. So accept it and enjoy the game, while you can.
Happy gaming!
1 Like
In my hero list sorted by power my 2LB emblemed Treevil sits right beside my 4-80 Magni. Poor old Magni. Being the son of a Thunder God just ain’t what it used to be.
Treevil is not that new a hero.
1 Like
And this is about ok, that 3* on 6th ascension level is about equal to 5* on 4th ascension level, it was always like this (well, the 6th ascension level for 3* was not available, but if it was, it should be about this power).
5* at 2/60 was about equal to 4* on 3/60 about equal to emblemed 3* (that can be counted as 3* on 4th ascesion level). It means when number of stars + ascension level were the same, then also hero power was similar.
True, but I think what OP is saying is that new heroes are stronger than old heroes and thus should start at 6*. But it’s really apples to oranges. My 2LB emblemed Shrubbear sits well below those two, and my 4-55 Quintin sits well above them. All my 1-1 5* sit below my maxed 3* except for Torben, who’s right in the middle of the partially emblemed ones. It’s power creep. But calling them 6* is just semantics unless new ascending mechanisms are introduced. And that would open up a whole new can of worms that I dread thinking about.
1 Like
Well, I think the newest should start at 7* at least. If at 4th ascension level they are stronger than 5* on 6th ascension level (emblems+LB) so they should have two stars more to be consistent with the system.
1 Like
But there is no distinction in the game between them and the old S1 5* the way there is between 5* and 4* heroes. They just happen to be much stronger.
Do we call the new 4* 5* then? Does that mean needing 4* mats to ascend them? That is a rabbit hole I do not want to go down.