Hero grades by mono users

So after reviewing some hero grades and seeing people using low grades heroes to excel in my alliance when paired with certain heroes I began wondering can really trust the judgement of players who almost always run mono on their streams?

I have watched many a player video,and the one thing I find odd, is the amount of high level spenders that run mono only teams.

i have gotten into serious debates with players as high up as Anchor from 7dd and a few from crystal palace.

Agree or disagree, my personal opnion is I just can’t fully take advice from players who only run mono teams. leaving your whole team dependant on the board is just rediculous to me, and I have only ran mono on a titan, never anywhere else in the game. Nothing against people who do, but the amount of synergies from heroes being not used together makes it hard for me to take these peoples ratings seriously.

I have gotten as high as #3 globally and probably could have gotten one if willing to buy the raid resets but felt good with that accomplishment without using refills and definitely without running mono.

An Example of a current debate is that Sargasso has a crap rating but when i pair him with onatel I get insane results and have over 85% win percentage against teams i pair them against.

I dont think that the amount of work put into skills and classes would be necessary if SG just wanted people to run mono.

I come in top 5 of every war I am in top 10 of titans and constantly stay around 2600 cups as a c2p. I have never run mono other than to test how boring the game is when playing that way.

Do you think players who refuse to run anything but mono teams should be the ones giving grades is my question to the members here?


I’ve always took the grades as a good starting point - but with a grain of salt. It seems as if they are assigned an “in a vacuum” grade.

Team synergy, as you noted with your Sargasso/Onatel combo, is one of the most important, fun, and satisfying things about this game, imo. So I always grade on a curve, haha, taking into consideration what heroes that I currently have and how I can use them.

So, grades - good starting point… but can be free floating and situational.


So do you think mono users gave Sargasso a low rating because he wont fare well in a mono stack or are you arguing that he should be rated higher due to his synergy with Onatel (which mono users would overlook)? Keep in mind that most people dont have Onatel to pair with him (or even him for that matter).

I think the hero grades ignore both synergy and mono stacks equally. Another good example is Mok-arr. He seems to be a universally hated hero but those who defend him always say that he works great in mono purple stacks. He’s great in mono but he’s still got a C grade. Sargasso and the shark are both decent heroes with proper synergy or mono but are both still rated poorly.

It would just get far too complicated to go through each hero and add an asterisk explaining that their grade would be better if paired with whatever hero or stack. I dont think the fact (or assumption maybe?) that mono users issued the hero grades led to any heroes receiving an unfair grade.

The grades alone, without context, aren’t very useful anyway. They just let you know which heroes can be great without much assistance.

If anything there should be a single asterisk at the top warning players that some of these heroes could actually be great in the right situation so they shouldn’t completely discount any hero due to a low grade.


I’m not a big fan of all the hero grading at all. Sure it is helpful for new players or the ones who don’t care enough to understand how the game works. But that’s it. They help players being lazy. Instead of thinking themselves they simply look up the hero grades frlm others.
I stopped carrying about them a long time ago. Putting a team together that has amazing synergy is far more important than only stacking well rated heroes.

Also please keep in mind: most heroes have their strength. The community fairly often just dooms a hero saying he is useless or worthless. This may be true to someone with lots of heroes but any 5 star can be useful.


What‘s the synergy between Ona/Sargasso? I dont get it

I’ve only been playing since April of this year. Finding things like Coppersky’s Compendium, and the 7DD page, and Hero Grades were a Gold Mine to me a scant few months ago. I don’t lean on them as much now, but I still check the grades from time to time and the Anchor comparison chart is still invaluable. There is a Steep learning curve when getting started in this game. It’s tough to gather statistics when you’re short on data. If you’ve had time to gather your own substantive data, Great! Good for you. You now have the capacity to formulate your own opinions. Until newcomers can do so, they can benefit Greatly from the insights gathered by more experienced players. The grain of salt they need to take that with is a recognition that their roster won’t have the same depth or strength as the big dogs, and they’ll learn to work well with what they’ve got.


Conventional wisdom is that mono is foolish. 4-1 at most, 3-2 is ideal (if you have the team). Now that doesn’t mean I don’t run mono, nor do I tell people not to run mono as it lets lower players punch above their weight class.

That being said, I will say that grades are singular in nature and do not take into account synergy. Hero synergy is often overlooked when people focus on grades.

Do I feel the grades are given too much weight? Absolutely. I feel the grades are for beginners who don’t know what they are doing. Anyone who has half a clue and has been playing for more than 6 months can figure out what works for themselves.

It was an honorable effort and commendable job for Anchor, et al. to spend their free time to generate such a resource. However, I feel people take it too seriously and fight them when there is no need for a fight.

I’m also not 100% convinced that 7DD always run mono but I will say this: the times I run mono are when my team is so powerful that it can withstand even a terrible board. I also don’t create a rating system or get in heated debates about the worth of heroes :wink:

If they’re listening, I’d love to hear their opinions. Sorry if I don’t know all the tags. @Xero786 @Anchor


The main issue for many players probably is/was that Anchor et al. were mostly behind this (i.e. a very specific group of playstyles). That’s fine, but personally I think that this community is filled with very knowledgeable players.

If the aim is to create a better grading sheet / tier list, then the grading project should include more players, extending beyond a specific family of alliances.

I speak from experience here as I have watched tier lists from fighting games grow and evolve by including various players, beyond a specific group of crews/sponsors. Of course it’s not going to ever be perfect, and at the end of the day it’s up to the player to make their own decisions, but final opinion will usually weigh out to be more accurate.

Just my opinion here.


totally well thought out responses guys, maybe an idea would be hero would be some separate rating systems on synergies people have found to work well combining certain skills together. myself, I can’t learn anything watching a mono raid of a guy just looking for one color gem, that teaches me nothing anyone can do that, however finding synergies is different and thinking there is no way to make a hero usable without it having the backing off a p2w player can lead people to not using there avaiable rosters as well in wars, raids, and events.

I remember when Mok-arr came out he was universally hated then a guy linked him with wilbur and a few other heroes non mono to show his usefulness and it was very interesting to watch someone go against the grain in that manner for some epic wins.

watching a video like that can get people experimenting with a lot more heroes and combinations leading to higher raid scores and pull off complicated cleanups without sweating so much during wars.


Well, if it originated with their team, I have no issue letting them keep it.

@Razor, on the other hand, has done a stupendous job trying to make a more crowd-sourced rating scale, along with actual data mining for balance.

I won’t say that any system is perfect, because crowd-sourced hero ratings can come from happy-bunnyland 7-year-olds who think in emojis

:heart::heart_decoration::heart::heart_decoration:COLEN IS LUV :heart::heart_decoration::heart::heart_decoration: OMG A++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

and basement moles who think differently

Colen is not worth the trouble. I’d run 5 Kelile before Colen saw the light of day. Buff him or eat him.:roll_eyes:

so if 1 is A and 2 is F… and it averages a C, is Colen a C hero? no. My personal opinion is that he is an A hero early in the game, B hero later in the game and a B- hero for a 4* (but A+ in 4* rush attack tournaments).

So it’s never simple.


onatel can make up to three heroes mana speed basically slow coupled with a hero who reduces healing by 85% on three for 4 turns try it yourself. works great in field aid wars


I have tried so hard for Sargasso on multiple occasions. As the forum should know, I’m hard up for purple anything. but… I also see his value. More fun than Kage, imho.


I recently got him in the last event and having used gafar in a few field aid and war teams immediately saw where combining him with mana controllers can cause major headaches fast. he is still being leveled but when I have been able to use him I have been nothing but impressed at his usefulness.

1 Like

Haha crowd sourced to an extent is what I was suggesting.

Believe me I’ve heard some ridiculous opinions from players before in those fighting games too.

Suffice to say that those players are not included :stuck_out_tongue: This is the hardest part for a collaborative effort; picking knowledgeable people who are willing to discuss and debate (and not argue in circles).

BTW I’ll tag @Aquaginera_7DD to hear opinions, since you were interested Peachy.


Truthfully, if I were a brand-new player… (and I was, at one time)

I would just think that coming to the forums and reading the already-posted debates would be enough to assess and then compare to my own experience for a decision.
If I had a question, I’d post.

If someone were REALLY bored, they could ascribe a number to each unique person’s perspective on some of these threads and build a rating system from that. That, I think, would be extremely telling and fairly accurate.


Well your first mistake was putting much stock into Anchor’s grades…


If i get you correctly I would not call it synergy…

Because u could change Onatels part with f.e. Lil John. Slow Mana Gain …

I can’t say it enough: Even though Anchor would’ve preferred some compensation, he did it all for free and endured a lot of abuse. Some of the stigma/infamy of the 7 Days name is attached to it, and voila, we’ve got grumpy people everywhere stating that the ratings are garbage.

I prefer the measured approach and think that all of the grades are a good starting point but no replacement for experience and research.


I cannot say that this would make any sense.
Little John’s slow mana is not quite the same as the fact that Onatel not only slows the mana but gains it herself (to cast again).

Onatel outpaces many heroes with her skill, but her proportional tank stats absolutely set her apart from a vanilla 4*. Little John is great in rush tournaments and when you begin the game (he was my first 4*) but late in the game, no replacement for Onatel or synergy with Sargasso.

:heart::heart_decoration::heart::heart_decoration::heart::heart_decoration:ONATEL IS LUV :heart::heart_decoration: :heart::heart_decoration::heart::heart_decoration:

Also, Onatel is Average mana and Little John is Slow mana.


Sorry, I’m out of context. What exactly is the question you want to hear my opinion to? :slight_smile: