You don’t need to prove something that is forever known to everyone
And you don’t need to reply in a thread you don’t like.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
Go harass someone else. But make sure you grow up first.
There was nothing particularly rude to @Kenji69666 's comment. I’m not sure why you had to be discourteous because he didn’t respond with what you wanted to hear.
Indeed, he sort of agreed with your point.
Your white knight comment is off topic.
Dont start … Really dont start …
Keep it civil its Saturday night and i like the way you move …
But, back on the topic. If you take Franz LB+20, his power is 833 and he is still 15 team power. He should be at least over 26, right?
Just trying to mind my own business, is it regular to get bombed immediately when starting a topic here?
Correct. You are making a parallel point. In a tournament or a 4* event that is a discrepancy.
What about really weak heroes, like Exeera? Her power is 967 at 4/85+20 but she is the weakest hero in the game
Again, there is no reason for you attack people simply because you don’t like what they say. A forum is a space for people to present their DIFFERENT thoughts. It’s not an echo chamber or choir, so you can’t expect people to simply agree with you or respond however you want.
It is generally expected that people are respectful though.
Unfortunately some times yes …
To all Folk reply in a nice constructive way if you agree or dont …
I never attacked anybody. I simply responded in kind. You are not a moderator. In fact, there is one here. Let him do his job and mind your own business.
Don’t condescend. I’ve been here a lot longer than you have. I know the forum rules.
TEAM COST could certainly do with a rethink.
It is being discussed recently here …
The big issue is that, along with team cost, hero power really doesn’t mean a whole lot. If they are to be more integral to the game they really need a complete rethink. Currently hero power is based only on stats (afaik) and does not take into account specials or passives. So – Salmon Loki 4/80 has 788 power level, which is higher than every S1 5* at 4/80. Heck, it’s higher than Costumed Master Lepus! But there are a multitude of 4* that would be first choice ahead of that hero – with power levels 100 or more less.
I mean…with LBx2 now in the game, I think that they’re forcing a big big rethink. Those top-tier passives are making it so that you cannot think of teams in the same way that you did before.
When they started releasing TONS of new heroes (like 2-3 new 5*s a week), I thought… “Well that’s actually not so bad, right? Then you have a lot of ‘top tier options.’ There’s no one MUST HAVE team composition; there will be many such possibilities.”
But now that some of your best tanks will start with taunt…nope, there’s going to be a BEST option for a team setup. If you hated GTV, this is worse.
So I think they’re ready for this rethink, don’t you?
So…how do they monetize without ruining the game?
My next thought is that you could expand the Building options (like I said before, incentivizing the extra builder, and thus the VIP subscription), but this is what the building does: You can “level up” an individual hero to have a BARELY reduced team cost.
So, not enough to shove them down a LOT, but…
If we were to go with TC calculations where a 4/80 5* was of value W, and Emblems were of value X, and LB1 was of value Y, and LB2 was of value Z…
A all-the-way-maxxed guy would have TC = W+X+Y+Z.
The amount of TC reduction would be like…almost half of X’s value.
So let’s make up some rando varaibles for Team Cost:
W = 200 (so we can easily imagine everything in half-percentage-points.)
X = 50 (one for each Emblem level, +5 for that capstone; would anyone modify this? I think a 5* hero at 4/80/20 is about 20% stronger than one at 4/80/0. So that’s why this would be TC+50)
Y = 80 (because let’s face it, those +5 levels are a massive increase, and nobody is going to LB without ALSO using the far-more-common Emblems. Would anyone change this?)
Z = 120 (same argument for Y’s value, pretty much, because that captsone power at LB2 is bananas.)
So a fully maxxed 5*, at 4/90/20 has a TC of 450, compared to a 4/80/0 at 200. Which feels about right to me. Would anyone better at math like to take a crack at this? Y’all seem pretty good with these calculations…!
But then, your Tower building would be able to reduce the TC for THAT ONE HERO by…at the very end…
A total of 25. (5 per ‘training’ in the tower.)
So not a TON, but…enough that people would do it.
What say you guys? Does this feel like a legitimate way for SG to make money, but also actually improve the game?
I think the team cost information is ridiculous since I’ve been playing for years and it’s useless. It is another thing that the developers must review and they do not pay any attention.
i don’t know if they can make team cost more integral because that involves holding some heroes back.
i would however agree with limiting heroes WITHOUT limiting the players. what i mean, is making it so all heroes will be max level (or different limited level) but with no LB and no emblems, but unfinished heroes won’t be pushed up to 80. this could make for some fun tournament modifiers, since heroes won’t have any talent skills, different emblem paths, and finding the heroes that work without embleming will require more thought.
fighting with lewena has made me realize just how often talent skills go off, and it could be pretty cool to just have fully basic heroes.