Saturday, June 13, 2015

Trading Tier Charts - What is a fair trade?

This post is significantly outdated. To see the March 2017 updated tier chart, click to see this post. If you're looking for a better understanding of the value of your monsters, try clicking to read this post instead.

Here are the trading tier charts. They show a method for determining what's generally considered to be a fair trade. Tier 1's are considered to be the best as their passive greatly enhances the active ability. e.g. Lethal increases Attack by 55% which will be an advantage for Attack actives like snipe/blast/etc.
The second table is for monsters that occasionally pop up with "old" actives and passives. The trade value of these is determined only by their passive.



4 comments:

  1. And for elementswap&swap and regen&team regen, which one should i chose?, thankyou :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Many people with single element (mono) teams choose to play with both swap and eSwap, but activate them on different turns. Swap will change all hearts to your element, eSwap will change another element to your element. If you're in a battle where you need to match hearts to heal then eSwap is better, otherwise there's little difference.

      I don't play with regens myself to answer your second question. Team regen+ heals all 5 monsters for 150% recovery, whereas regen+ heals 3 monsters for 225% recovery, and normal regen gives 200% on 3 monsters. From the numbers, it looks like team regen is best - 750% total, compared to 675% (regen+) or 600% (regen). The catch is that team regen+ takes an extra turn before it'll activate. (Source of info is https://bcrank.us/catalog/actives)

      As an aside, regen(+) may be the better choice in PvP where your monsters can be defeated individually as it will protect 3 of them better.

      Delete
  2. I am interested in the article. Thank so much. I hope to see more useful news from you.
    >>> https://mobileblooddrawservicesblog.blogspot.com/2023/03/blood-test-at-home-near-me.html

    ReplyDelete
  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete