Devs, please fix the way damage is calculated for un-evolved monsters.

As an example Counter Strike did this much damage to an unevolved Scarleguard:


But when I use Counter Strike on a fully evolved Scarleguard it vaporizes him 100% of the time.
I’m only using Scarleguard as an example, this problem is wide spread. It’s not because of RNG battle damage.

This is plain wrong and should never happen. Does not make any sense. Please consider fixing this @Dev_BRD @Dev_VKC

6 Likes

Killerdog explained how this worked somewhere…

1 Like

I remember he mentioned it. It needs to be fixed.

Ya they for some reason give lower star monsters higher defense against legends.

He explained it in a hordes thread when someone complained the hordes epics were buffed.

Just so there is no confusion. The purpose of this thread is not to talk about why it happens but to point out it shouldn’t be happening and it needs to be fixed.

I feel fine with it. It’s not a huge advantage or anything. Are you struggling against players with unevolved legendaries? Whats the big deal?

Neo logic doesn’t always share the same rules as Earth logic. It’s fictional.

1 Like

Yeah, all my losses have been against unevolved monsters. They beat me 100% of the time. It’s a big deal. I’m trying to “get gud” but it’s hard man.
When I see an unevolved monster facing me I surrender instantly. That screenshot was the exception. Frightening stuff! :sob:

Having said that this is besides the point. When something is wrong in a game it should be fixed.
If the devs can adjust this to make sense, why not?

Why does it need to be fixed though?? Other than being ”wrong” and “doesn’t make sense”?

Aside from being a slight inconvenience to you, it probably serves to help new players in their games against AI.

2 Likes

Killing a monster with one shot as opposed to two shots can mean the difference between winning and losing in some situations. Very important, in particular when it comes to charging up blood moves. Can mean the difference with getting two extra kills or more in the case of Draco. That is not a slight inconvenience.

Most importantly it’s wrong and doesn’t make sense😋

What other reason do you have to keep it besides “it probably helps to serve new players in their games against the AI”?

Edit: Which honestly I don’t think it does a great deal in that department. On the contrary it could be training them to be sloppy:)

Wait!! Could you please explain to me how blood moves work? I’m just a sweet lil lady, I guess I don’t quite understand how to get a monster charged up :tipping_hand_woman:t2:

I dunno bro, I just adjust my strategy to what the devs decide to do, I’m not that interested in telling them what their logic should be. And if a newer player gets an extra chance or two against me or the AI, good on them.

1 Like

See that’s what happens you rely on unevolved monster to battle the AI. You get sloppy. I’ll teach you another day lil lady.

You’re telling fibs you naughty person.

It’s a very big deal! There are particular cases where it really unbalances stuff. Counter strike there in the screenshot at the start of the this is a nice example. Leogeist unevolved is another great example, it is very hard to kill with chrono killer and is an 8-cost stun counter.

The worst case I saw was 1st form Zephyrin. To quote a message I sent to Dev_VKC about it…

  • " No sorry I did mean Zephyrin. Qilin the 1st form to be exact. I met GMagic again and this time hit it with a charged double survivor from Stratustrike which did the same… 2/3 - 3/4 of its health. Totally ridiculous haha!"

Since then I believe the Devs have fixed issues with untrained monsters, which affected Game of Hordes very badly and PvP if you took untrained monsters in there. However, we still have the issue with unevolved monsters taking less damage than they should.

I’ve spoken with the Devs about it on multiple occasions but got nowhere. Either I’m not explaining the issue to them properly or they don’t believe me. I’m amazed that it doesn’t concern them. If anyone can get the Devs attention on the issue then please do!

2 Likes

I know that Lineup and as fast as i know he play it with cani and its ss… Like this they have that 200% boost :smiley: i think this is the reason

I considered if it was cani, but he wasn’t in that team.

1 Like

To explain my theory about unevolved monster defence again here (as simply as I can)…

Defence of monsters is done so that two monsters of different qualities, say SE and leg, but with the same arrangement of attack and defence will take the same amount of damage from an attack. E.g. Grovodeus is full defence (~5850 on leg) and Mossgoliath is full defence (~4550 on SE) but both will take the same damage from attacks.

The theory bit: The way it makes these monsters take equal damage is it looks at the difference in stars between the monster attacking and the monster being hit then multiplies the defence to make it equivalent to if it was the same stars as the attacker. E.g. when Mossgoliath is attacked by a legendary it gets its defence multiplied by roughly 1.29x to be ~5850 and take damage like Grovodeus.

Where this gets funky: An unevolved monster works as being a star below. What I believe happens here is the multiplier to defence is triggering twice somewhere, resulting in the monster taking significantly less damage from monsters at a higher rarity (maybe taking more from monsters at lower rarity?). It does this enough to not only offset the lower health it has by not being evolved but to actually make a monster tougher than if it was evolved. If I remember correctly I worked out an unevolved SE is roughly 10% tankier than the same SE fully evolved when being attacked by a legendary. E.g. assuming this 10% is correct then an unevolved Mossgoliath gets a buff of 1.88x to defence, giving it the equivalent of 7589, when attacked by a legendary. What you’d expect on a 4* monster being attacked by 6* is a buff of 1.57x so it’s being increased by an extra ~50% of buff.

This is clearly not intuitive and most likely not the intention of the original designers which coded this. The Devs have been very clear to me and others how the game is designed to have all monsters in the battles fully evolved, so I believe it was probably an oversight by the coders.

I think the intention was to simply have (fully trained) defence set at 5 different values which are the same across all rarities of monsters. Then, what determines the increased tanky-ness of the higher rarities is their improved health. It makes sense because otherwise a monster like Grovodeus with 4081HP and 5825Def would be 2.5x as tanky than Sandalot with 2550HP and 3680Def, even though that’s one of the best tanks epics have to offer. Instead with the design of defence Grovodeus is just 1.6x as tanky, far more reasonable.

Unfortunately with the weird stuff that’s happening with the defence scaling there are some monsters which are simply stronger / equally as strong unevolved where they have lower cost. This is clearly unbalanced and bad for the game.

I rest my case, hope it gets recognised and fixed!

P.S. @Dev_BRD @Dev_VKC To be clear, there were two separate issues with defence scaling. One was related to untrained monsters (the one you fixed when it was brought up in Game of Hordes and PvP). This other one is with unevolved monsters, as I have detailed in this post, and it’s what I haven’t been able to convince you on yet but people notice it from time to time.

1 Like

I have seen this. Randomly monsters get tanky on pvp especially that unevolved excessive force SE.

1 Like

Passive: excessive defense :joy: