My juice tastes like water

Unknown

san-mpq wrote:

energythief wrote:

The main thing that's wrong is that the required node requires a character most transitioning players won't have yet, preventing them from scoring a token.

I've said this in a multitude of other threads, and I empathize with another poster who has done the same - this is NOT meant to give you NEW characters, it is meant to SUPPLEMENT your old ones.
I have 30 3* characters, and when we did the vote on how many characters you have under-covered (from 1-3 covers each) last month, my vote was right up there at 13 (see poll http://www.d3pforums.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=21197&start=20). This sort of event helps me get those multitude of characters from 3 covers to 4, or 9 to 10. It may not seem like much to you now, but for me, it's made a huge difference.

What you need to do at this point is hoard HP and use it ONLY on slots, like many of us others have. The characters you truly don't like, remove, rather than keep (for me this was Doc Ock and She Hulk, not because they suck, but because I don't like them). Then keep the rest and allow the covers to trickle in. You'll quickly be surprised how fast that can happen. Just keep at it. Most of my 1-3 cover characters from that poll are now at 4-7 covers each, so it DOES happen.

[EDIT] Since that poll, 4/21 of the said characters have become the regular mainstay of my force, all between 9-12 covers. I have also increased my roster slots to 48. The roster slots were bought with F2P achieved HP, and most of the covers were event wins or token draws (exception of 3 covers I admit to buying with regular money )

heh-heh, that was my survey. Just yesterday, I decided to check out my roster to see how many I still have with 3-4 covers or less.

Answer = 12 characters with 4 covers or less

What does this have to do with the topic? Nothing!

Thank you for your support

Unknown

There is some validity to one of the OP's points. I hoarded some Taco Tokens from the first set of DDQ (With Storm, BP, Luke etc.). When the new DDQ started (with Spidey and friends) I thought I'd use my tokens on this new set.

But I can't. The Taco Tokens are locked to the DDQ set of heroes you got them from. My hoarded tokens could only get me BP and friends, not Spidey and friends.
I don't actually mind that much, and now that I know I won't bother hoarding Tacos. But I can understand that this is annoying if you want to increase your odds of a particular set of characters.

Still, I love DDQ! Slowly building up my 3* roster, and even though I have only have 4/10 of the required characters so far, It's still a great way to play MPQ.

LXSandman

DaveR4470 wrote:

Yeah -- DDQ is for people who already have gotten at least one cover for the character in question, which is why there's the gate. Everybody else has to get that first cover the old fashioned way: by blind dumb luck with a token.

The question I have though is why is it this way? From a financial point of view wouldn't D3 prefer it if I got a single cover and had to buy more roster space?

I guess I just don't get why they are gated at all. If you can beat the node to get the cover then why not?

I love the event, I'm just not really sure why they gated it at all.

LXSandman

ShadowX1984

LXSandman wrote:

DaveR4470 wrote:

Yeah -- DDQ is for people who already have gotten at least one cover for the character in question, which is why there's the gate. Everybody else has to get that first cover the old fashioned way: by blind dumb luck with a token.

The question I have though is why is it this way? From a financial point of view wouldn't D3 prefer it if I got a single cover and had to buy more roster space?

I guess I just don't get why they are gated at all. If you can beat the node to get the cover then why not?

I love the event, I'm just not really sure why they gated it at all.

LXSandman

The other angle is that you have to have at least one cover of a color to buy more of that color. So if you have 4/2/0 in a character and you really want that third, you can't even buy it yet. From this perspective, it makes financial sense for D3 to rotate through the characters giving out one of each color over time. That way, players who really want to specialize in a character at least have the option to buy it up. I myself am not a huge fan of buying individual covers for HP, but I've done it once or twice and some people do it a lot.

As a transitional player, I have one of every 3* character, with an average of 3 covers in each. So the daily PVE is really helping me move forward. I proably am the exact target audience for it then, but I really don't see a downside.

Unknown

Put me in the camp that doesn't really get the 3* node lockout, for all of the reasons already enumerated above. You'd think they'd want people to get that first 3* cover, because boom --> roster slot purchase, as well as opening up the ability to buy more covers a la carte.

But I suppose that's weighed against the desperation pack purchases they get from people who want to compete in events when they're missing the essential character, which continues to be a really distasteful part of their business model. Forcing people to gamble $20 or more in the hopes of being competitive is just shady. At least when packs guaranteed a featured character there was some value to them if you were really up against it. Now you're better off buying a lottery ticket. They probably pay off at better odds anyway.

Pylgrim

Thugpatrol wrote:

Put me in the camp that doesn't really get the 3* node lockout, for all of the reasons already enumerated above. You'd think they'd want people to get that first 3* cover, because boom --> roster slot purchase, as well as opening up the ability to buy more covers a la carte.

But I suppose that's weighed against the desperation pack purchases they get from people who want to compete in events when they're missing the essential character, which continues to be a really distasteful part of their business model. Forcing people to gamble $20 or more in the hopes of being competitive is just shady. At least when packs guaranteed a featured character there was some value to them if you were really up against it. Now you're better off buying a lottery ticket. They probably pay off at better odds anyway.

What you all can't understand is that you can get that first cover in any PVP/PVE where it's awarded by placing top 150, which is laughably easy with even a mediocre 2* roster. You are so new that the DDQ event where a character is essential happens before any other event where it is rewarded? Well, too bad. You are new, you are supposed to little by little build up, not expect everything be given by you in a silver tray.

I'll say this again: if us, the veterans of today had to get there, slowly by playing the game for several months, why do you expect yourself to have an EVEN easier journey than it currently is for newer players?

Unknown

Pylgrim wrote:

Thugpatrol wrote:

Put me in the camp that doesn't really get the 3* node lockout, for all of the reasons already enumerated above. You'd think they'd want people to get that first 3* cover, because boom --> roster slot purchase, as well as opening up the ability to buy more covers a la carte.

But I suppose that's weighed against the desperation pack purchases they get from people who want to compete in events when they're missing the essential character, which continues to be a really distasteful part of their business model. Forcing people to gamble $20 or more in the hopes of being competitive is just shady. At least when packs guaranteed a featured character there was some value to them if you were really up against it. Now you're better off buying a lottery ticket. They probably pay off at better odds anyway.

What you all can't understand is that you can get that first cover in any PVP/PVE where it's awarded by placing top 150, which is laughably easy with even a mediocre 2* roster. You are so new that the DDQ event where a character is essential happens before any other event where it is rewarded? Well, too bad. You are new, you are supposed to little by little build up, not expect everything be given by you in a silver tray.

I'll say this again: if us, the veterans of today had to get there, slowly by playing the game for several months, why do you expect yourself to have an EVEN easier journey than it currently is for newer players?

Yes, boo hoo. You had to walk to school in the snow with no shoes, uphill, both ways. And you liked it.

I'm not sure how you read my post and decided to come back with "you kids today have it too easy" when my comments were specifically referring to their business model, not some kind of proposition for MPQ welfare which you seem intent on turning this into. But if you really want to go there, how is going from zero covers to one cover any different than going from one cover to two covers other than for the purpose of playing essential nodes? Or are you against the daily 3* cover entirely? Because it kinda sounds like you are. So you had to win all your 3*s "legit" back in the day? Well guess what, there weren't 30someodd 3* characters then either. It was easier to fully cover characters, there wasn't all this vaulting business, LRs gave guaranteed 3* covers for specific characters, etc. Can we stop pretending it's the same now as it was then?

I've been around. I have a full 3* roster. And I don't see how giving out a cover a day, most of which I haven't needed, is hurting me, you, anyone else, or the game, and I don't see how giving out one cover to someone who doesn't have that character at all would either. Might there be a money issue, roster spot revenue vs desperation pack buys for essential characters? Maybe, and maybe this is the best middle ground for them on that front. But that has nothing to do with your grumpy old man point that all these new players need to earn their rewards and pay their dues just like you did. So if you want to play the super-elitist vet card, go right ahead. It seems a little petty to me though.

Pylgrim

Thugpatrol wrote:

Pylgrim wrote:

Thugpatrol wrote:

Put me in the camp that doesn't really get the 3* node lockout, for all of the reasons already enumerated above. You'd think they'd want people to get that first 3* cover, because boom --> roster slot purchase, as well as opening up the ability to buy more covers a la carte.

But I suppose that's weighed against the desperation pack purchases they get from people who want to compete in events when they're missing the essential character, which continues to be a really distasteful part of their business model. Forcing people to gamble $20 or more in the hopes of being competitive is just shady. At least when packs guaranteed a featured character there was some value to them if you were really up against it. Now you're better off buying a lottery ticket. They probably pay off at better odds anyway.

What you all can't understand is that you can get that first cover in any PVP/PVE where it's awarded by placing top 150, which is laughably easy with even a mediocre 2* roster. You are so new that the DDQ event where a character is essential happens before any other event where it is rewarded? Well, too bad. You are new, you are supposed to little by little build up, not expect everything be given by you in a silver tray.

I'll say this again: if us, the veterans of today had to get there, slowly by playing the game for several months, why do you expect yourself to have an EVEN easier journey than it currently is for newer players?

Yes, boo hoo. You had to walk to school in the snow with no shoes, uphill, both ways. And you liked it.

I'm not sure how you read my post and decided to come back with "you kids today have it too easy" when my comments were specifically referring to their business model, not some kind of proposition for MPQ welfare which you seem intent on turning this into. But if you really want to go there, how is going from zero covers to one cover any different than going from one cover to two covers other than for the purpose of playing essential nodes? Or are you against the daily 3* cover entirely? Because it kinda sounds like you are. So you had to win all your 3*s "legit" back in the day? Well guess what, there weren't 30someodd 3* characters then either. It was easier to fully cover characters, there wasn't all this vaulting business, LRs gave guaranteed 3* covers for specific characters, etc. Can we stop pretending it's the same now as it was then?

I've been around. I have a full 3* roster. And I don't see how giving out a cover a day, most of which I haven't needed, is hurting me, you, anyone else, or the game, and I don't see how giving out one cover to someone who doesn't have that character at all would either. Might there be a money issue, roster spot revenue vs desperation pack buys for essential characters? Maybe, and maybe this is the best middle ground for them on that front. But that has nothing to do with your grumpy old man point that all these new players need to earn their rewards and pay their dues just like you did. So if you want to play the super-elitist vet card, go right ahead. It seems a little petty to me though.

You misunderstand me (and I misunderstood you a little, too.) I'm not against DDQ nor I'm salty about noobies having an easier time transitioning. What really pulls the curmudgeon out of me is seeing people getting all these new benefits AND then complaining because they want even more, which I've seen of waaaay too many during the last week. I thought that was what you were doing when you said "You'd think they'd want people to get that first 3* cover": complaining about not being able to get the cover the days when you don't have the essential. Now I see better what you mean, I have to say that my point still stands as an answer: they want their main attractions (PVP and PVE) be the main and first source of covers for players. DDQ, Gauntlet and anything else is meant to supplement that, not replace it.

Unknown

san-mpq wrote:

Thugpatrol wrote:

Put me in the camp that doesn't really get the 3* node lockout, for all of the reasons already enumerated above. You'd think they'd want people to get that first 3* cover, because boom --> roster slot purchase, as well as opening up the ability to buy more covers a la carte.

But I suppose that's weighed against the desperation pack purchases they get from people who want to compete in events when they're missing the essential character, which continues to be a really distasteful part of their business model. Forcing people to gamble $20 or more in the hopes of being competitive is just shady. At least when packs guaranteed a featured character there was some value to them if you were really up against it. Now you're better off buying a lottery ticket. They probably pay off at better odds anyway.

no one is FORCING you. you play this game because you enjoy it. if you don't think it's worth the money, don't spend. simple.

I pulled this quote out of the comment you left while down-voting my post because you seem to have missed my point entirely. You seem to take exception to my use of the word "forcing". Taken literally, no, nobody is being forced to do anything. You can always delete the game or throw your phone under a bus or whatever floats your boat. Free will is wonderful. But let's say you don't have the essential character for an event, and you really want the covers that event is rewarding. What do you do?

You can try playing the event without the required character, but that's really swimming upstream. You are at a massive disadvantage being locked out of nodes that are generally easier and give out more points. Your only other recourse is to buy packs and hope to land that featured character. So if you want to be competitive your choices are gamble on packs and hope to get a lucky drop or...nothing. Without the featured character you're likely to miss the 3* rewards, and if it's a new character, or one you didn't have previously, then you're right back in the same predicament for the next event.

Smashing people up against the paywall for roster spots is one thing. At least you get what you pay for there. But this practice of baiting people into buying a chance at a featured character I find distasteful, particularly when that featured character used to be guaranteed in packs AND those packs gave much better odds.

Lidolas

The required characters in PvE always will have a PvP event in the middle. If you keep hitting PvE as best you can, and you are half-decent at PvP, you can get the character at some point. If you've played well enough, you should do fine in the overall PvE event.

Unknown

Lidolas wrote:

The required characters in PvE always will have a PvP event in the middle. If you keep hitting PvE as best you can, and you are half-decent at PvP, you can get the character at some point. If you've played well enough, you should do fine in the overall PvE event.

While that is very often the case, only the top 10% can win those PvP covers. Your solution omits the other 90% of players.

Unknown

Top 100 in a 500 person bracket is 20%. What threshold would you set it at and why?

Unknown

Cryptobrancus wrote:

Top 100 in a 500 person bracket is 20%. What threshold would you set it at and why?

I was under the impression that PvP brackets were 1000 people. If they're 500 and it's 20%, doesn't really change anything. It's still a solution that omits the vast majority of the people playing the game.

In any case, this is all getting further and further away from what I was failing to understand in all this, which is what exactly the purpose of locking people out of the 3* reward via the use of an essential node for that character. There's no functional difference between letting a player go from one cover to two covers vs zero covers to one cover, since a two cover hero is approximately as useless as a one cover hero, except in allowing access to essential nodes in other events. So from their standpoint the only equation I can see that makes any sense is the instant glut of HP spent on roster spots that would be gained by giving people characters they don't have vs the HP spent in desperation on packs down the line for that character when it's featured as essential.

I'll grant that it also adds some juice to events where that character is rewarded, but are people with one cover in a character they've already invested a roster spot on really that much less motivated to compete than people who have zero covers? Do they really make that much money off pack sales related to highly desirable event rewards? I don't know. But considering how many people don't have some of these characters, and they're giving out a cover a day, that's a lot of roster spots being bought. And to leverage that against a practice, pushing people to gamble out of desire to compete, which I think is pretty shady to begin with, just seems there's more to gain by letting people get that first cover from the daily and moving on.

Lidolas

Thugpatrol wrote:

Lidolas wrote:

The required characters in PvE always will have a PvP event in the middle. If you keep hitting PvE as best you can, and you are half-decent at PvP, you can get the character at some point. If you've played well enough, you should do fine in the overall PvE event.

While that is very often the case, only the top 10% can win those PvP covers. Your solution omits the other 90% of players.

That's true. But if a person can't get in the top in PvE or PvP, maybe that person doesn't really need/deserve/ the essential character. I know it sounds harsh, it isn't meant to be, but this is a rewards driven game.

rednailz

Thugpatrol wrote:

Lidolas wrote:

The required characters in PvE always will have a PvP event in the middle. If you keep hitting PvE as best you can, and you are half-decent at PvP, you can get the character at some point. If you've played well enough, you should do fine in the overall PvE event.

While that is very often the case, only the top 10% can win those PvP covers. Your solution omits the other 90% of players.

That's why it's a competitive game, and helps drive the compitition. I'm on board with the 2 - 3 transition being too long and needing work, but I don't jive with compaining that you have to compete for your covers, it's sort of the point.

if you miss essentials becuase you didn't get covers from previous pve or pvp in the middle, or didn't have them previously and can't pull them for a token, well....that's sort of the fun and the point of a game sometimes isn't it? I'm not doing the "you kids have it easy" speach, but that issue has always been there without the standard pvp in teh middle giving the cover, and the rotation for pvp was much different or just didn't exist for some covers. The game has come a long way, but it's still a competitive one. You can still place well without essentials, we've all had to do it, you just have to pick up your socks.

I've personally always loved essentials and the idea behind them, even when I didn't have the required cover to play one. Especially when I was starting out. I was all like "cool, wish I had a Punisher so I could do that" and went to "cool I have Punisher, but my level is so low having Punisher is a hinderance on my team, this is going to be hard" to "wow, my punisher kicks but, he's boosted, this is going to be fun"

I never understood why people griped about essentials being not fair.

Unknown

Lidolas wrote:

Thugpatrol wrote:

Lidolas wrote:

The required characters in PvE always will have a PvP event in the middle. If you keep hitting PvE as best you can, and you are half-decent at PvP, you can get the character at some point. If you've played well enough, you should do fine in the overall PvE event.

While that is very often the case, only the top 10% can win those PvP covers. Your solution omits the other 90% of players.

That's true. But if a person can't get in the top in PvE or PvP, maybe that person doesn't really need/deserve/ the essential character. I know it sounds harsh, it isn't meant to be, but this is a rewards driven game.

You're confusing the issue here. They've already copped to the fact that there need to be more 3* rewards that are readily available by even having a daily 3* reward in the first place. My question is why limit it to people who have one cover for that character rather than allowing people to get a first cover this way, and I've already gone through my thoughts on that subject. It's not about needing or deserving, it's about the intent of locking anyone out in the first place.

Unknown

Thugpatrol wrote:

Cryptobrancus wrote:

Top 100 in a 500 person bracket is 20%. What threshold would you set it at and why?

I was under the impression that PvP brackets were 1000 people. If they're 500 and it's 20%, doesn't really change anything. It's still a solution that omits the vast majority of the people playing the game.

In any case, this is all getting further and further away from what I was failing to understand in all this, which is what exactly the purpose of locking people out of the 3* reward via the use of an essential node for that character. There's no functional difference between letting a player go from one cover to two covers vs zero covers to one cover, since a two cover hero is approximately as useless as a one cover hero, except in allowing access to essential nodes in other events. So from their standpoint the only equation I can see that makes any sense is the instant glut of HP spent on roster spots that would be gained by giving people characters they don't have vs the HP spent in desperation on packs down the line for that character when it's featured as essential.

I'll grant that it also adds some juice to events where that character is rewarded, but are people with one cover in a character they've already invested a roster spot on really that much less motivated to compete than people who have zero covers? Do they really make that much money off pack sales related to highly desirable event rewards? I don't know. But considering how many people don't have some of these characters, and they're giving out a cover a day, that's a lot of roster spots being bought. And to leverage that against a practice, pushing people to gamble out of desire to compete, which I think is pretty shady to begin with, just seems there's more to gain by letting people get that first cover from the daily and moving on.

The way I understand it is that this is intended to supplement transition, not replace other things. In that respect, they want a player committed to the character first. I think it is a reasonable choice for D3. It is encouraging roster diversity and encouraging hp spend on roster slots. There was a whole whiny thread last week from someone who had just sold a Panther from Daily reward and was upset that they couldn't play to earn another cover to sell. D3 wants that player to put the HP in to play for the cover - the proverbial skin in the game and I think it makes sense. It is definitely a much more player friendly business model than cover packs.

rednailz

Thugpatrol wrote:

Lidolas wrote:

Thugpatrol wrote:

Lidolas wrote:

The required characters in PvE always will have a PvP event in the middle. If you keep hitting PvE as best you can, and you are half-decent at PvP, you can get the character at some point. If you've played well enough, you should do fine in the overall PvE event.

While that is very often the case, only the top 10% can win those PvP covers. Your solution omits the other 90% of players.

That's true. But if a person can't get in the top in PvE or PvP, maybe that person doesn't really need/deserve/ the essential character. I know it sounds harsh, it isn't meant to be, but this is a rewards driven game.

You're confusing the issue here. They've already copped to the fact that there need to be more 3* rewards that are readily available by even having a daily 3* reward in the first place. My question is why limit it to people who have one cover for that character rather than allowing people to get a first cover this way, and I've already gone through my thoughts on that subject. It's not about needing or deserving, it's about the intent of locking anyone out in the first place.

To continue the circular arguement, because it's a competitive game. Why not just hand out random xforces and be done with it then?

Unknown

rednailz wrote:

Thugpatrol wrote:

Lidolas wrote:

The required characters in PvE always will have a PvP event in the middle. If you keep hitting PvE as best you can, and you are half-decent at PvP, you can get the character at some point. If you've played well enough, you should do fine in the overall PvE event.

While that is very often the case, only the top 10% can win those PvP covers. Your solution omits the other 90% of players.

That's why it's a competitive game, and helps drive the compitition. I'm on board with the 2 - 3 transition being too long and needing work, but I don't jive with compaining that you have to compete for your covers, it's sort of the point.
...
I never understood why people griped about essentials being not fair.

I'm not complaining about competing for covers. My response was in the context of questioning the need for locking people out of the daily 3* who don't have that first cover. As for essentials being fair or unfair in the context of normal PvE, that has nothing to do with this issue. Essentials in PvE serve a purpose from a business standpoint, in that they encourage people to keep a lot of characters rather than just the most powerful ones and therefor continue to buy roster spots. In this case though they're using an essential node specifically for the purpose of keeping people from getting a first cover for a character, which strikes me as contrary to the whole point of the daily 3* enterprise, not to mention not necessarily sound business-wise.

Unknown

I think what they are trying to avoid is hitting the transitioning player with more covers than they think they can get slots for. People want to keep everything they earn and if you were hit with 7 brand new characters you had to try to find roster slots for in one week that would be overwhelming. They deliberately said this was meant to help the transitioning player, which to me means it is designed to help people FINISH characters they have already been working on. Because if you want to rely on DDQ for your first cover of someone that would be nice but wouldn't actually help you get anywhere closer to a working 3* team, as it will be a long time till you get that brand new character off the ground if you are relying on DDQ to earn stuff. The way they have it set up the message is clear. Concentrate on finishing the projects you are working on and that will help you out long term, don't get bogged down in the OOH free covers gotta collect em all mentality unless you can also earn more of those covers from other sources, (by which I mean, have already earned at least one from other sources.)

No there is only a minuscule difference between the power level of a single cover and none at all but there should logically have been a cutoff somewhere, and to set it at something like 5 or more covers honestly would take more programming than they likely wanted to put into this. The Yes/No dichotomy of required character nodes was already within the architecture of the game and made it an easy place to draw the line.