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.