Variable ascension material requirements

Ideas & Feature Requests
#1

Hiya, thanks for joining me here on the forum. A wonderful place to exchange ideas and hold each other against our bosoms within our minds.

Anywho, today’s request is to vary ascension requirements by hero.

First, what exactly do I mean? Currently all 5* heroes require four 3* unfarmable ascension mats to reach tier 3, and then those same mats plus six 4* unfarmable ascension materials for tier 4.

I’m not here to complain that there aren’t enough AM in the game. I actually like their rarity. BUT what I do think is flawed is that it costs the same AM to ascend Mok-Arr as let’s say Hel.

So first we have Mok-Arr, an extremely situational hero who is mostly despised within the game community. A hero who appears to be an overgrown fish who can maybe breathe air, but he still attempts to kill his own allies unless they’re flying the purple evil banner. He’s kinda cool, but unless he’s your only 5*, he simply is not going to be a practical choice for players to ascend.

Then you have Hel, a demon with huge style points who blasts the enemy team and stops their abilities in their tracks. Useful on offense and defense. Useful in raids and for completion of quests / events. Universally considered a top tier hero within the game community.

Both cost eight 3* and six 4* to take to final tier.

WHY!!!

I think there are a large number of heroes who kinda obviously slot into this middle ground where they’re good but not amazing. Keep those heriesnat 8/6. But maybe for the Mok-Arrs, Atomos, and probably at this point majority of the classic TC20 heroes let’s talk about moving them to 9/3, or 7/4.

What I’m saying is, make it easier for players to commit to upgrading heroes who are clearly not top tier.

And Hel - make her cost 8/8. 10/7. I think that’s fair. Heck. 12/8 even. Realistically if you’re getting one of the best heroes in the game, I think that’s a trade most players would be happy to make.

Discuss. Vote. Rest your head on my bosom and tell me about life.

#2

In the devs eyes everything goes smoothly in the game and the heroes are balanced. Of course, in your example, there is no comparison between Hel and that purple dude (I hate even his name). Hel is one of the best heroes in this game. But I guess the devs will see this “issue” like I do. Every single hero has his best utility at a specific moment. For the devs the only heroes should catch up are the classic ones and for this reason the costumes will be introduced in the near future. In rest, every hero could be better than many other heroes at some point. GP for example. Alone is a mediocre hero imo. But is better even than Hel or other any hero, when you running a purple mono. The same thing applies for that dude. The devs will not admit some heroes are too powerful and some are too weak. Every hero has his own place and utility in the game. It is about that we call synergy. And I would bet my both accounts… No matter how many votes this idea will get, never will be a different ascension requirement for the same hero rank. Never.

I for one, I have no preference regarding this idea. I am neutral.

2 Likes
#3

Actually, this is a great idea for the mentioned costumes. It is my understanding will need 16 epic AM for a fully leveled one. Let’t take Viv for example. 8 epic AM for the last ascension and again 8 for her costume. So 2 blades, 2 tomes and 12 darts. This is what I find ridiculous.

1 Like
#4

That… is insane. Completely insane.

Like I drank a bowl full of jellyfish and washed them down with a tall glass of wet cement kinda crazy.

All the WTFs in the world don’t adequately capture how insane that is.

Anyway.

Thanks for the responses.

Except the second one. Because that response was one of true insanity the likes of which this universe had yet to see.

Well. I guess thank you for that as well.

Kinda cool to have been a part of something as … unique … as that.

1 Like
#5

I could do a big long writeup here but for me it’s as simple as: no. I disagree. Respectfully, of course. I don’t think the MAYBE small advantage that hero X has over hero A in one situation makes them on even footing when Hero A excels by a wide margin in all other situations.

I like the idea that heroes will be “balanced” over time and that changes will be made. But I think long term you’re just going to have some under powered heroes by way of necessity. Having reduced AM costs makes them viable in their own way.

#6

That’s the way it is… Let’s take the December hotm for example. I consider him weaker than many classics. What to do with such a hero? Well, there are situations when actually Grimble will be the best hero on the field.