pack drop rates drop from 20% to 6%!!! ****!!!

Unknown

I smell idiocy on this kind business model rather then greed.

Just one case, some new players spent $100 to gamble on let's say 3 "Luke Cage" 10 pack or 30 pulls. Depends on his "karma" the result is :
1. "well, not bad" pull 1 per pack, he got 3
2. "damn!" just 2 out of 30
3. "wadda???" just 1 out of 30
4. "fffffff.......kkkk!!!" 0 out of 30!!! (ragequit)

But he wanted "Luke Cage" so bad,so he decide to spent another $100, and repeat the chances above.
So finally, he'll get from 0 to 6 cover of luke (ragequit!!!)
Just a story will, but $200 for 6 covers on a marvel candy crush game? eventually he will ragequit on shame and regret, coz he finally found out that "Luke Cage" is useless (along with 90% of 3*).

My suggestion that demi won't even bother is : For a 3*, sell 1 cover (color : random) for 10$. Put it on every featured char on pvp.
That way players (vet/new) get a guaranteed cover (well still random in color) and i guarantee u'll get more revenue.

Unknown

Why play the game when you can just buy everything?

What's this 20% to 6% stuff?

Unknown

LoreNYC wrote:

Why play the game when you can just buy everything?

What's this 20% to 6% stuff?

Let's say "luke cage" is my sample of covers u really wanted so bad, so u decide to spent money on him/her. So it's not everything.
On my case, i "prolly" want to spent $ on colossus ( squirell girl on ur case, perhaps).
But i won't spent it because it's gambling (20% to 6% stuff).

NorthernPolarity

1. Cage is one of the best 3*s we've seen in recent history. If you're going to talk about "useless 3*s", pick something like Beast or Doc Ock, saying Cage is bad just makes you lose credibility.
2. The odds are right there on the question mark for the cover page: the blame should be placed on the guy who bought packs in the first place since he has all the information needed to make an informed decision.
3. Demiurge originally had it so that a 10 pack guaranteed you a cover of the featured hero. Then they decided to switch it to the way it currently is, and have been making far more money as a result. Blame the guys buying more packs, not them. If people stopped buying packs, theyd increase the odds again, but the forum people aren't really the ones buying packs so good luck getting that to happen.

Unknown

What others have said. If people weren't buying the packs like skittles, they would change the packs. You'll have to excuse me, I need to go buy me a token, I've been missing me some Ares in my life

Unknown

In most games with a similar structure for the gamble pack they don't even tell you what the odds are and obviously those games work too, so I'm thinking most people don't even look at the odds anyway.

lukewin

If he is spending $100 on 3 10 packs, he is getting ripped off. And then spending another $100 on 3 10 packs, then he is an idiot. A Stark Salary is 20,000 HP and a 10 pack is 3800 HP. He should be getting 5 10 packs for $100. So if you want to just keep throwing random numbers out there, you are doing a great job of weakening your argument. If I was going to try to make a post like yours, I probably wouldn't exaggerate to make my point, especially when it is easy to debunk the random numbers you threw out there. At least you got 6% right. Not sure where you pulled 20% from, but you should put it back, along with your ridiculous argument.

Unknown

NorthernPolarity wrote:

1. Cage is one of the best 3*s we've seen in recent history. If you're going to talk about "useless 3*s", pick something like Beast or Doc Ock, saying Cage is bad just makes you lose credibility.

U rite in theory, useless in terms of not playable on hi level pvp, which is i bet u know that's XF/Thoress, so 90% of 3* is useless is true. The 10% refers to XF/Thoress support char (to climb) which is :
-for XF : rags/doom/laken/dd/dp/cmags
-for Thoress : bp/no other (i save her for final action)
-for both : hood/laken
Lose Credibility? where? forum? who cares, even with the new shield cooldown system i manage to get top 10 w/o single shield on shard 3 .

NorthernPolarity wrote:

2. The odds are right there on the question mark for the cover page: the blame should be placed on the guy who bought packs in the first place since he has all the information needed to make an informed decision.

I should blame other players like you and me for trying to be a P2W on a freemium game? Even if they try to, they failed cause the system is fraud.
And no matter how suck it is, users can't change the system (bait),and they desperately need it to keep em on track.
Fish aim that bait,so blame the fisherman not the fish.

NorthernPolarity wrote:

3. Demiurge originally had it so that a 10 pack guaranteed you a cover of the featured hero. Then they decided to switch it to the way it currently is, and have been making far more money as a result. Blame the guys buying more packs, not them. If people stopped buying packs, theyd increase the odds again, but the forum people aren't really the ones buying packs so good luck getting that to happen.

U repeat no.2, and i catch your "desperation", u love the game but some system sucks, u've tried ur best to give suggestion and solutions but they don't give a F "they can't hear youu", but u still love the game and have good credibility on forum so u gotta point your fingers to others.. which is other players who buy the packs, failed.

GothicKratos

Unknown

Am I drunk?

mohio

I think the 20% to 6% refers to when they originally had the tokens weren't the featured 3* the only one you could get? So odds were like 17 or 18% (not quite 20 but not gonna knock him for that). Then when they got rid of the guaranteed cover in 10-packs they started dropping the percentages, it was 13, then something else a little lower, before finally settling on where it is now at 6%. It's why people would let their tokens expire and turn into heroics, have maxed punisher and some army of one tokens? Turn them into heroics for at least a decent shot at something useful. At least when they took that option away the featured PvP tokens were barely different from heroics anyway.

Arondite

GothicKratos wrote:

I'd love to join in, but I still haven't even figured out what he's trying to say.

lukewin

mohio wrote:

I think the 20% to 6% refers to when they originally had the tokens weren't the featured 3* the only one you could get? So odds were like 17 or 18% (not quite 20 but not gonna knock him for that). Then when they got rid of the guaranteed cover in 10-packs they started dropping the percentages, it was 13, then something else a little lower, before finally settling on where it is now at 6%. It's why people would let their tokens expire and turn into heroics, have maxed punisher and some army of one tokens? Turn them into heroics for at least a decent shot at something useful. At least when they took that option away the featured PvP tokens were barely different from heroics anyway.

That makes more sense. To post it now though, makes it seem like a recent change. I'm on day 245, and may have been around for the high drop rates, but never paid attention to it. Thanks for the clear up, but the title is real misleading, if you don't specify when it was 20%.

Unknown

People spend hundreds of dollars on this stuff, and it's not up to me to decide whether that's worth it or not. That said, I'm always bothered by how other games can get away with not even telling you the odds. I was playing Summoner Wars and I was thinking 'well if the chance of getting X is at least 3% then this $50 special is a good deal' after having worked out all the math, and then I realized I don't know the actual % so I looked online and found out that someone spent $1000 on the game to verify the odds are more like 0.05% for getting X. I remember seeing packs in game that'd read like "DOUBLE THE ODDS OF RARE DRAW" or better yet "INCREASED DRAW RATE". I remember seeing games are like "GUARANTEED ULTRA RARE" even though ultra rare in that game is probably a 2* because that's just how they name their system (1* = rare, 2* = ultra rare, 3* = super rare, 4* = ultimate rare, or something). That kind of stuff should be outright fraud.

Square

SirPhobos wrote:

Am I drunk?

I think that's a side effect of trying to decipher this kid's Inguish.

*English

Pylgrim

tobi69 wrote:

I smell idiocy on this kind business model rather then greed.

Just one case, some new players spent $100 to gamble on let's say 3 "Luke Cage" 10 pack or 30 pulls. Depends on his "karma" the result is :
1. "well, not bad" pull 1 per pack, he got 3
2. "damn!" just 2 out of 30
3. "wadda???" just 1 out of 30
4. "fffffff.......kkkk!!!" 0 out of 30!!! (ragequit)

But he wanted "Luke Cage" so bad,so he decide to spent another $100, and repeat the chances above.
So finally, he'll get from 0 to 6 cover of luke (ragequit!!!)
Just a story will, but $200 for 6 covers on a marvel candy crush game? eventually he will ragequit on shame and regret, coz he finally found out that "Luke Cage" is useless (along with 90% of 3*).

My suggestion that demi won't even bother is : For a 3*, sell 1 cover (color : random) for 10$. Put it on every featured char on pvp.
That way players (vet/new) get a guaranteed cover (well still random in color) and i guarantee u'll get more revenue.

Wait, you yourself use the word "gamble" and complain when the results (as in completely uncontrollable chance outcome) are not in your favour? You don't even seem to know how "gambling" works if you cannot understand that % is per pull, not aggregated. i.e. 10 pulls at 10% chance doesn't mean 100% chance. It means trying to get 1 out of 10 ten times. You don't get exactly 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 when you roll 6 dice, do you? People who are dumb enough to play the lottery at least have the sense not to complain when they almost inevitably lose. You seem to be a notch below.

It is precisely people like you who convinced Demiurge that not giving a guaranteed 3* star per pack was a more profitable venture.

Unknown

Pylgrim wrote:

It is precisely people like you who convinced Demiurge that not giving a guaranteed 3* star per pack was a more profitable venture.

I'll go grab the Aloe Vera and Solarcaine

GothicKratos

3uphoria wrote:

Pylgrim wrote:

It is precisely people like you who convinced Demiurge that not giving a guaranteed 3* star per pack was a more profitable venture.

I'll go grab the Aloe Vera and Solarcaine

atomzed

Phantron wrote:

I was playing Summoner Wars and I was thinking 'well if the chance of getting X is at least 3% then this $50 special is a good deal' after having worked out all the math, and then I realized I don't know the actual % so I looked online and found out that someone spent $1000 on the game to verify the odds are more like 0.05% for getting X.... That kind of stuff should be outright fraud.

^ this. Mpq is the first freemium game I have seen that actually post the odds. With the odds, it's clear as day of the likelihood of getting the covers you want.

Does anyone know of any other freemium games that post the odds of the draw? Do share so that we can do some comparison.

Unknown

tobi69 wrote:

NorthernPolarity wrote:

1. Cage is one of the best 3*s we've seen in recent history. If you're going to talk about "useless 3*s", pick something like Beast or Doc Ock, saying Cage is bad just makes you lose credibility.

U rite in theory, useless in terms of not playable on hi level pvp, which is i bet u know that's XF/Thoress, so 90% of 3* is useless is true. The 10% refers to XF/Thoress support char (to climb) which is :
-for XF : rags/doom/laken/dd/dp/cmags
-for Thoress : bp/no other (i save her for final action)
-for both : hood/laken
Lose Credibility? where? forum? who cares, even with the new shield cooldown system i manage to get top 10 w/o single shield on shard 3 .

NorthernPolarity wrote:

2. The odds are right there on the question mark for the cover page: the blame should be placed on the guy who bought packs in the first place since he has all the information needed to make an informed decision.

I should blame other players like you and me for trying to be a P2W on a freemium game? Even if they try to, they failed cause the system is fraud.
And no matter how suck it is, users can't change the system (bait),and they desperately need it to keep em on track.
Fish aim that bait,so blame the fisherman not the fish.

NorthernPolarity wrote:

3. Demiurge originally had it so that a 10 pack guaranteed you a cover of the featured hero. Then they decided to switch it to the way it currently is, and have been making far more money as a result. Blame the guys buying more packs, not them. If people stopped buying packs, theyd increase the odds again, but the forum people aren't really the ones buying packs so good luck getting that to happen.

U repeat no.2, and i catch your "desperation", u love the game but some system sucks, u've tried ur best to give suggestion and solutions but they don't give a F "they can't hear youu", but u still love the game and have good credibility on forum so u gotta point your fingers to others.. which is other players who buy the packs, failed.

Np gave you a serious and well thought, genuine reply to your post. It is not necessary to respond to him/her in the fashion you did. It comes across as being disrespectful. If you want to treat someone like that, you should save it for people like me or the people who don't take you serious and/or were disrespectful in their replies.

When people don't take their time to try and answer you in good faith in the future, you really have no one else to blame.

Have a nice day.

Baddkitty

$$$$ makes the world turn. D3 is in this for the money. Why GIVE player more of what they want, if you can make them pay for it?