Is the Vault Working for You? Vault Efficiency

Azoic

I just hate that there are still duplicates in the Vault. So you can still pull red moonstone 3 times in a row. Remove the dupes, and make it a 100-size vault.

atomzed

Dauthi wrote:

Do you believe a .1% increase in drops is significant? From a statistical standpoint, a drop going from 1% to 1.1% has virtually no sway in your drop rate. That is what you get if you wait 2 months. The point we are both trying to get through is that if a system has a ridiculously low effect rate, .1% in that case, why should it be there at all?

At the individual level, the increase in 1% for 4* is not meaningfully significant... For me to cover my 4* in 6 months.

But at the population level, an increase of 1% can be huge. We are talking about tens of thousands of cover being given away, assuming a population of 1 million. That is a lot of covers that they are giving away, and potential hp revenue loss.

While I am disappointed that the odds are not much better (in my previous thread), I am also cognizant that D3 just gave away a lot of 4* covers with this change. It is not trivial. It may not impact one player specifically but it affects the whole population.

It was a great idea that they pitched to us, and it's perfectly fine to complain when you are advertised something and not get it.

I am ok with you complaining about the poor rates, but I think that due credit must be given to d3 too, for them to give the players access to 4* covers in DDQ.

GurlBYE

You don't give credit be defending against criticisms in the only space given for developer and player dialogue. That's their job.
You give credit through dollars.
They don't need anyone's defense. Pleasing as many players as possible is the goal, not just trying to shift the opinions of those on the forum.

If you like, toss money at it, the poster disagrees and has put it as simply as possible "it's an improvement statistically, but as someone playing the game and not tracking statistics, there is a minuscule difference here at best and this hasn't changed much at all especially when it was touted as a big change"

it seems to explicitly benefit those who either wait for a lot to up their chances at what they want by either stacking up draws from the limited pool in a selected week, or paying money to get those rolls in advanced.

atomzed

GurlBYE wrote:

You don't give credit be defending against criticisms in the only space given for developer and player dialogue. That's their job.
You give credit through dollars.
They don't need anyone's defense. Pleasing as many players as possible is the goal, not just trying to shift the opinions of those on the forum.

If you like, toss money at it, the poster disagrees and has put it as simply as possible "it's an improvement statistically, but as someone playing the game and not tracking statistics, there is a minuscule difference here at best and this hasn't changed much at all especially when it was touted as a big change"

it seems to explicitly benefit those who either wait for a lot to up their chances at what they want by either stacking up draws from the limited pool in a selected week, or paying money to get those rolls in advanced.

Do you know why people like me, El stanno, Ducky, dr tinykitty love are correcting the false accusations? I am speaking only for myself, but I think it's the same reasons for the others.

The reason is that if we do not postively reinforce the developer good actions (eg time slices, DDQ, shield cooldown), then all the dev will hear are that "this change sucks, why are you changing things?"

Then the signal we are sending to the dev is to.keep things at status quo. Don't change anything.

I personally think that will be bad for the health of the game.

Look, I think the stats increment are low at the individual level, and it probably won't make a meaningful impact for me. But I want to thank the dev for making this positive change, and nudge them to change even more... Instead of slamming them for this small positive change, giving them disincentive to make more changes.

Dauthi

atomzed wrote:

Do you know why people like me, El stanno, Ducky, dr tinykitty love are correcting the false accusations? I am speaking only for myself, but I think it's the same reasons for the others.

I have yet to hear which of my accusations are false. I would love to debate them if you would tell me.

The reason is that if we do not postively reinforce the developer good actions (eg time slices, DDQ, shield cooldown), then all the dev will hear are that "this change sucks, why are you changing things?"

Then the signal we are sending to the dev is to.keep things at status quo. Don't change anything.

I personally think that will be bad for the health of the game.

Look, I think the stats increment are low at the individual level, and it probably won't make a meaningful impact for me. But I want to thank the dev for making this positive change, and nudge them to change even more... Instead of slamming them for this small positive change, giving them disincentive to make more changes.

Inversely, if you don't call them on things that don't make sense or are not right, you have no chance at effecting it. I would like to think I pioneered a lot of movements, specifically to change alliance rewards from top 50 to top 100 for 4*s here.

If you disagree, you should say something regardless of other recent positive changes. Looking at the numbers, this system can really shine and pull more players in, and keep them there if they make some adjustments. We want the same thing, to make the game better. There is a difference between positive critiquing to help growth, and insulting. If you tell someone what they are doing is good when it's not, you are not helping.

Let me emphasize, we are talking about the Vault system and how it doesn't work, not the positive changes added (4*s to DDQs etc). These are two completely separate things as I mentioned earlier:

Dauthi wrote:

They could have added 4*s and improved 3* pull rates in the original DDQs, and we would have exactly what we have now.

atomzed

Dauthi wrote:

Inversely, if you don't call them on things that don't make sense or are not right, you have no chance at effecting it. I would like to think I pioneered a lot of movements, specifically to change alliance rewards from top 50 to top 100 for 4*s here.

If something is not right, you should call them on it regardless of other recent positive changes. Looking at the numbers, this system can really shine and pull more players in, and keep them there. We want the same thing, to make the game better. There is a difference between positive critiquing to help growth, and insulting. If you tell someone what they are doing is good when it's not, you are not helping.

Let me emphasize, we are talking about the system and how it doesn't work, not the positive changes added (4*s to DDQs etc). These are two completely separate things as I mentioned earlier.

Exactly dauthi, both "camps" want the betterment of the game. The desired outcome is the same. Only we are going about different ways. It requires a fine balance, we need people to critique and we also need people to compliment.

I think the vault change is "not enough", but the direction is in the right direction.

Several people (not you, in fact your tone is the most civil) have slammed the vault, saying that they rather have the old tokens. That is quite baffling.

Put it another way, if the main dissent is that the vault system is not doing enough to address the 4* situation, I wouldn't have speak up. But the main dissent is that the system sucks, and people added they want their old tacos back... Which would only be a step backward. I don't think that is a good situation and hence I spoke up.

I have made all my points already so I won't post any more on this. I am sure there are people will accuse me of "white knights" or other terms, but whatever.

Dauthi

atomzed wrote:

Dauthi wrote:

Inversely, if you don't call them on things that don't make sense or are not right, you have no chance at effecting it. I would like to think I pioneered a lot of movements, specifically to change alliance rewards from top 50 to top 100 for 4*s here.

If something is not right, you should call them on it regardless of other recent positive changes. Looking at the numbers, this system can really shine and pull more players in, and keep them there. We want the same thing, to make the game better. There is a difference between positive critiquing to help growth, and insulting. If you tell someone what they are doing is good when it's not, you are not helping.

Let me emphasize, we are talking about the system and how it doesn't work, not the positive changes added (4*s to DDQs etc). These are two completely separate things as I mentioned earlier.

Exactly dauthi, both "camps" want the betterment of the game. The desired outcome is the same. Only we are going about different ways. It requires a fine balance, we need people to critique and we also need people to compliment.

Yes, and I complimented that they added 4*s and better rates to DDQs in my opening. I am opting for the best of both, to thank them for the positive movement and help them with a system that isn't functioning as well as it could be.

I think the vault change is "not enough", but the direction is in the right direction.

No, it isn't that it's not enough. It's that it doesn't work like it's supposed to: gain better pull values as you draw rewards. Because there are 300 rewards and tokens are split two ways, it makes gains virtually pointless. The system itself doesn't work, and just needs some adjustments to make it work. The main argument I am defending here is that .0X% gains are meaningless, and if you think otherwise I don't know what to say. That is 1 in 10,000's.

Maybe it is because I am OCD about system efficiency, but I would rather they scrap the whole system and simply give improved drop rates that match what we have now (1% to 4*, 1% to 3*, and throw in more ISO), than have a system that says it's doing something when it is virtually doing nothing.

dr tinykittylove

atomzed wrote:

Dauthi wrote:

Inversely, if you don't call them on things that don't make sense or are not right, you have no chance at effecting it. I would like to think I pioneered a lot of movements, specifically to change alliance rewards from top 50 to top 100 for 4*s here.

If something is not right, you should call them on it regardless of other recent positive changes. Looking at the numbers, this system can really shine and pull more players in, and keep them there. We want the same thing, to make the game better. There is a difference between positive critiquing to help growth, and insulting. If you tell someone what they are doing is good when it's not, you are not helping.

Let me emphasize, we are talking about the system and how it doesn't work, not the positive changes added (4*s to DDQs etc). These are two completely separate things as I mentioned earlier.

Exactly dauthi, both "camps" want the betterment of the game. The desired outcome is the same. Only we are going about different ways. It requires a fine balance, we need people to critique and we also need people to compliment.

I think the vault change is "not enough", but the direction is in the right direction.

Several people (not you, in fact your tone is the most civil) have slammed the vault, saying that they rather have the old tokens. That is quite baffling.

Put it another way, if the main dissent is that the vault system is not doing enough to address the 4* situation, I wouldn't have speak up. But the main dissent is that the system sucks, and people added they want their old tacos back... Which would only be a step backward. I don't think that is a good situation and hence I spoke up.

I have made all my points already so I won't post any more on this. I am sure there are people will accuse me of "white knights" or other terms, but whatever.

Yes.... when ddq started, everyone was saying how it was the best thing in mpq and saved tokens to try for the characters they wanted.

Now they have taken this best thing and made it better, and people are crying foul. Ddq isn't supposed to a 4* atm! The chances to get 4*s and stuff are a nice bonus on top of the 3*s we were hoping to get from it anyway. Guaranteed covers are only in pvp/pve, and both of thoe have seen improvements. In the general overview, as far as I'm concerned, I'm satisfied with the changes.

(Now please stop giving me health packs. )

El Satanno

Dauthi wrote:

If my logic is erroneous and I am lying, please explain how. I would love to be able to refute it, but I can't refute claims by themselves.

Wall of text hidden below:

Okay. First there was the original post, which implies that there is no benefit at all from pulling without a stock of at least 100 tokens. It's a very specific set of circumstances that you've defined as being “acceptable,” which ignores the incremental improvement in odds you get from simply using tokens as you get them. Specifically this:

Dauthi wrote:

You start getting a benefit from the Vault system at around 100 tokens, at which point your benefit grows rapidly, leaving little reason not to wait another 10 tokens, then another.

You may not find it satisfying, but that doesn't justify simply ignoring the actual benefit. You doubled-down on this line of reasoning at the end of the post:

Dauthi wrote:

So if you want to use the system, you will be waiting (600/365*2) .821 years, so about 10 months.

And then again in a later post:

Dauthi wrote:

What it isn't: The Vault (unless you wait 10 months or pay money)

I think it's fair to complain when you only get what was announced 10 months after it opens. That is over half the amount of time I have played this game.

That first bit doesn't even make any sense. The second bit is making a rather large assumption about the time frame in which you will pull a guaranteed reward. It's rather significant because nothing coming out of a token, or meta-token as the Vault is, more or less, has ever been guaranteed. On what grounds did you assume that this reward would be coming in a time frame that you find palatable?

But you aren't done yet. Still another post dropped this out-and-out fallacy that really got me going (emphasis mine):

Dauthi wrote:

They made a feature (The Vault), and made it inaccessible for 10 months.

Inaccessible? Really? So those threads on the front page where everyone is talking about what they pulled from the Vault are all fabrications? Or are you somehow prohibited from using your own tokens? It's a really poor choice of words at best. My problem really stems from this language because there are already plenty of regulars here who are more than willing to bang on endlessly about baseless claims like these. The Vault is not inaccessible to anyone that I am aware of.

Dauthi wrote:

Do you believe a .1% increase in drops is significant? From a statistical standpoint, a drop going from 1% to 1.1% has virtually no sway in your drop rate. That is what you get if you wait 2 months. That is a 1/1000 bonus chance to pull the desired cover, meaning if you had 1000 tokens, you are likely to get it (I am not sure how else to explain this). The point we are both trying to get through is that if a system has a ridiculously low effect rate, .1% in that case, why should it be there at all?

Well that depends on what your expectations are. Judging from your prior posts, I'm willing to say that yours are completely unrealistic given the history of the game. Your break point for what constitutes “acceptable” seems to be 30%. That's just laughable.

Honestly, I think what really bugs me about this whole conversation is that it simply reeks of looking a gift horse in the mouth. Up until this Vault, we've been lamenting the abysmal pull rates from tokens. Incidentally, those have also gone up and I personally have remarked on this on several occasions. Everyone loved taco tokens initially, but then the complaints started rolling in that there still weren't enough decent pulls, ie: 3* covers or HP.

Now we have the Vault, which slowly but certainly increases your odds of pulling those types of rewards. This is completely unprecedented in this game. And it's not good enough for you! No, it isn't perfect, but to write it off completely is behavior somewhere between greedy, impatient and ungrateful.

Dauthi

Let me start by saying when I created the graph I realized the system was created to improve your pulls every time you draw, so that would be it's focus. That, after all, is what was hyped and is what we can expect was intended with the system.

El Satanno wrote:

Dauthi wrote:

If my logic is erroneous and I am lying, please explain how. I would love to be able to refute it, but I can't refute claims by themselves.

Okay. First there was the original post, which implies that there is no benefit at all from pulling without a stock of at least 100 tokens. It's a very specific set of circumstances that you've defined as being “acceptable,” which ignores the incremental improvement in odds you get from simply using tokens as you get them. Specifically this:

Dauthi wrote:

You start getting a benefit from the Vault system at around 100 tokens, at which point your benefit grows rapidly, leaving little reason not to wait another 10 tokens, then another.

You may not find it satisfying, but that doesn't justify simply ignoring the actual benefit. You doubled-down on this line of reasoning at the end of the post:

Dauthi wrote:

So if you want to use the system, you will be waiting (600/365*2) .821 years, so about 10 months.

And then again in a later post:

Dauthi wrote:

What it isn't: The Vault (unless you wait 10 months or pay money)

That first bit doesn't even make any sense. The second bit is making a rather large assumption about the time frame in which you will pull a guaranteed reward. It's rather significant because nothing coming out of a token, or meta-token as the Vault is, more or less, has ever been guaranteed. On what grounds did you assume that this reward would be coming in a time frame that you find palatable?

In my opening:

Dauthi wrote:

You start getting a benefit from the Vault system at around 100 tokens, at which point your benefit grows rapidly, leaving little reason not to wait another 10 tokens, then another.

So, it would be silly to stop at 100 tokens after you have already gotten to the point where benefits rise extremely fast by saving longer.

But you aren't done yet. Still another post dropped this out-and-out fallacy that really got me going (emphasis mine):

Dauthi wrote:

They made a feature (The Vault), and made it inaccessible for 10 months.

Inaccessible? Really? So those threads on the front page where everyone is talking about what they pulled from the Vault are all fabrications? Or are you somehow prohibited from using your own tokens? It's a really poor choice of words at best. My problem really stems from this language because there are already plenty of regulars here who are more than willing to bang on endlessly about baseless claims like these. The Vault is not inaccessible to anyone that I am aware of.

They were people pulling with nearly normal rates, do you think that .01% chance effected their 10th pull, let alone the ridiculous amount gained on their 2nd or 3rd? Maybe you are right, it must have been that .003% chance on their 3rd pull that did it. The Vault system virtually did not contribute to this.

The first part I covered above covers this too, you must have missed it in my opening. Again, you would be harming yourself to stop at the point where you are going to start getting substantial gains. Can you imagine saving 200 tokens then not get the 4* you wanted? Ouch.

Dauthi wrote:

Do you believe a .1% increase in drops is significant? From a statistical standpoint, a drop going from 1% to 1.1% has virtually no sway in your drop rate. That is what you get if you wait 2 months. That is a 1/1000 bonus chance to pull the desired cover, meaning if you had 1000 tokens, you are likely to get it (I am not sure how else to explain this). The point we are both trying to get through is that if a system has a ridiculously low effect rate, .1% in that case, why should it be there at all?

Well that depends on what your expectations are. Judging from your prior posts, I'm willing to say that yours are completely unrealistic given the history of the game. Your break point for what constitutes “acceptable” seems to be 30%. That's just laughable.

That's an odd number to throw out and talk about my history. I did say in that very same quote:

Dauthi wrote:

From a statistical standpoint, a drop going from 1% to 1.1% has virtually no sway in your drop rate

Talk to a statistics, or maybe even any math teacher and ask them how relevant a .1% chance is.

In any case, are you reffering to this thread when I said:

Dauthi wrote:

Personally I think it would be reasonable to have one (10/150 pull) or the other (one set of tacos).

Feel free to explain, i'll even overlook the personal attack out of interest. We can continue to talk about the subject at hand afterwards if you don't mind.

Honestly, I think what really bugs me about this whole conversation is that it simply reeks of looking a gift horse in the mouth. Up until this Vault, we've been lamenting the abysmal pull rates from tokens. Incidentally, those have also gone up and I personally have remarked on this on several occasions. Everyone loved taco tokens initially, but then the complaints started rolling in that there still weren't enough decent pulls, ie: 3* covers or HP.

Now we have the Vault, which slowly but certainly increases your odds of pulling those types of rewards. This is completely unprecedented in this game. And it's not good enough for you! No, it isn't perfect, but to write it off completely is behavior somewhere between greedy, impatient and ungrateful.

Like I said above:

Dauthi wrote:

If you tell someone what they are doing is good when it's not, you are not helping.

If you feel like they have given you a gift, help them with some constructive criticism, don't pretend like they did a good job when they didn't (again, on the Vault system itself). Nobody can improve from that.

Wolarsen

I mostly agree with Dauthi on this subject: the pool size is way too big for a 2-per-day pull affecting significantly the chances. The vault has potential, but as far as I know will make very little difference regarding old system.

What I was expecting, and I am proposing it now, is extend the vault to accept other tokens. Setting aside standard silver tokens, we have 3 (heroic, PvE and PvP), wich could be modulated by developer.

On the other hand I would like to see a way to "lock" the vault, so when we get an interesting pool we can work on it for more than 5 days.

El Satanno

Ugh...the dreaded web of nested quotes... If you will allow me, I'll just address the latest additions to this exchange for brevity's sake.

Dauthi wrote:

Let me start by saying when I created the graph I realized the system was created to improve your pulls every time you draw, so that would be it's focus. That, after all, is what was hyped and is what we can expect was intended with the system.

Indeed, and that is what we are getting as far as I can tell. I haven't seen or heard anything to imply that it would take any given length of time for that improvement to become some significant figure. Harping on that it takes too long is rudely demanding, at least.

Dauthi wrote:

You start getting a benefit from the Vault system at around 100 tokens, at which point your benefit grows rapidly, leaving little reason not to wait another 10 tokens, then another.

So, it would be silly to stop at 100 tokens after you have already gotten to the point where benefits rise extremely fast by saving longer.

Be that as it may, no one is under obligation to save their tokens to enhance their pull odds in a given sitting. That's what I was drawing attention to in the bit below, which I emphasized:

But you aren't done yet. Still another post dropped this out-and-out fallacy that really got me going (emphasis mine):

Dauthi wrote:

They made a feature (The Vault), and made it inaccessible for 10 months.

Inaccessible? Really? So those threads on the front page where everyone is talking about what they pulled from the Vault are all fabrications? Or are you somehow prohibited from using your own tokens? It's a really poor choice of words at best. My problem really stems from this language because there are already plenty of regulars here who are more than willing to bang on endlessly about baseless claims like these. The Vault is not inaccessible to anyone that I am aware of.

Dauthi wrote:

They were people pulling with nearly normal rates, do you think that .02% chance effected their 10th pull, let alone the ridiculous amount gained on their 2nd or 3rd? Maybe you are right, it must have been that .003% chance on their 3rd pull that did it. The Vault system virtually did not contribute to this.

The first part I covered above covers this too, you must have missed it in my opening. Again, you would be harming yourself to stop at the point where you are going to start getting substantial gains. Can you imagine saving 200 tokens then not get the 4* you wanted? Ouch.

Okay, maybe we're talking in different directions, but I'm starting to get the impression that I don't actually know how the Vault works.

The Vault contains 300 non-repeating prizes. If you save 100 tokens, you effectively earn yourself a 33% chance to pull any one of the prizes contained therein. Greater than that, even, given that for every one you pull the odds increase for the "good" prize, as they are not repeated. Even in those absolutely stupid 42-packs you don't get even 10% odds for a gold prize, so why is 33% even remotely reasonable? Or am I just way off here?

More importantly, as I concluded with in the last post, this is the first time we are ever getting increasing odds at all. Would you really rather we just had the same static percentages we have always "enjoyed?"

Dauthi wrote:

Feel free to explain, i'll even overlook the personal attack out of interest. We can continue to talk about the subject at hand afterwards if you don't mind.

I'm sorry if you took some kind of personal attack out of all this. I'm not even sure what exactly you might have taken personally. I can think of a couple of people here that I would say are stupid ****, but you aren't one of them.

Dauthi wrote:

If you tell someone what they are doing is good when it's not, you are not helping.

If you feel like they have given you a gift, help them with some constructive criticism, don't pretend like they did a good job when they didn't. Nobody can gain from that.

And I guess that about sums it up! I think the Vault is a step in the right direction and I welcome the movement. You don't. It's a shame, I think.

Unknown

I find the vault much more stressful than the previous store page. Before the change, all I had to do is press a button and I knew I had a ~10% to get one of the featured heroes. For the same, small number of tokens, the odds seem to me much, much worse, In the past I had a 2.2% to get a featured character, or a ~0.7% to get a single cover of each featured character. With the vault, only the first 4 heroes have a higher chance to drop from a token and this is true for only one of their covers!!
For example, in my vault the first 5 heroes are
Sentry (4x / 1x )
Punisher (3x / 2x )
Blade (3x / 2x )
Patch (3x / 1 / 1x )
HT (2X / 2X / 1X )

The highest % is for Sentry yellow with 1.3% and then the 3x covers with 1%. All other covers of featured characters have a smaller chance to drop than they did with the previous store. After seeing how the system works, I have little doubt that the vault was introduced just to make it more difficult to get the covers you need.

Sure you can have a 100% drop rate if you save 300 tokens, but where is the fun in that? And how long do I have to wait until the character I want is offered in one of the first 5 slots in the vault? Not to mention that by the time you have 300 you'll probably have more most covers gained from pvp and DDQ.

The second thing I don't like is that I can see the hero symbols rolling when I am pressing the button. I read some comments which claimed that on mobile devices you can pretty much choose what you get, but I play on Steam and this is definitely not the case for me. In the old system you could always blame the machine for a bad streak, but the vault makes the player feel like it's his fault when he fail to press the button fast enough. I see no point in showing the symbols rolling if this isn't a speed test.

EDIT: I forgot to write that the vault is probably a good deal for the new player without maxed characters. They just need to stay active for 150 days (that's a long time hoarding tokens for impatient new players)for their effort to bare fruit.

Unknown

Didn't they said they are thinking of converting other tokens in some way to fit inside vault too? Or maybe it's just my imagination...

Either way, 10 months is a lot of time, bordering on insane. But my main problem is possibility of scraping/reworking that before hitting 600 token mark. Old DDQ run for what, 300ish tokens? Every token from that became truly expired, and right now I'm supposed to wait twice as long and hope they don't suddenly turn those tacos stale for another change.

Nooneelsesname

Narkon wrote:

After seeing how the system works, I have little doubt that the vault was introduced just to make it more difficult to get the covers you need.

I don't think this is the case. I think The Vault is designed to appeal to the players who like gambling, the kind who like buying giant token packs and are excited at beating the odds.

That's not me and it's not many of the people who post on this forum but we got the base DDQ, expanded PvE Alliance 4* cover rewards, expanded individual PvE 4* cover rewards, an extra 4* progression in PvP, better Sim rewards, streamlined PvE, 24 hour subs, capped roster slot prices and they're turning off community scaling. That's all stuff I like.

The best way for me to use the vault is 298 days from now which is not ideal but it gives something positive to players who aren't like me. That's good.

As it was the taco token system was eventually going to be an exercise in hoarding and waiting for new character week for everybody, which I don't think is appreciably better than what we have now.

And it will probably make Demiurge and D3 and whoever else more money by selling token packs to people who really want that reward that's sitting right in front of them in The Vault like the big teddy bear in the claw machine that they keep just missing. Hey, devs gotta eat.

SnagglePuss

Azoic wrote:

I just hate that there are still duplicates in the Vault. So you can still pull red moonstone 3 times in a row. Remove the dupes, and make it a 100-size vault.

This. The biggest piece of false advertising to paraphrase was
Once you pull it out of the vault there is no chance to pull that one again... This gave the impression of a pulling Moonstone meant no more Moonstone.
But no it just means you won't pull that particular Moonstone purple again, now the other 3 that's different. It's not even one of each colour there are repeated 2* covers diluting your pull.

mr_X

The jury is still out for me on the vault. Think it has potential but if it does reset the contents every 5 days that would be a downer unless your very patient and stock piling or possess the whale power to spend big.

Druss

Bring back the **** taco's! at least with them I always got 500 iso a day - today pulled 2 x 5 health packs - totally useless.

Must admit to not agreeing with the odds on taco tokens - haven't missed a day since it started & managed a grand total of 8 golds - 750HP + 5 3*, hardly 20%+ more like 2%.

I must say the vault did manage to make me smile yesterday - had 4 tokens - looked at the myriad (mostly useless) rewards & opened all 4 tokens - managed to get 4 moonstones!

The more things change ....

Unknown

I think the strategy in the OP is poor. The real strategy should be: have a target percentage, eg say 12% desirable drops for example.

If the chance of pulling a desirable drop >= 12%, use a token
If the chance of pulling a desirable drop < 12%, stop and hoard your tokens.

The % chance changes as you use your tokens. There's still a decent chance you won't get anything, but at least you're increasing your odds. You can weight the drop desirability if you want to get complicated with it, like give a 4* 10X the weight of a 3* cover. Agree with Narkon that this Vault system makes it much more work => more stress. Probably appeals to gamblers.

SnowcaTT

My biggest complaint with Taco tokens, and now Vault tokens, is you have such a decrease in chances to pull anything compared to other non-standard tokens. 1% chance to draw a 4* each token (three 4*'s in 300 tokens) and only a 0.3% chance in Heroics....but ten of those 0.3% chances to get you to 3%! (I know, sort of). 35 3*'s in the vault, so you have an 11.6% chance where in Heroics you have only a 0.6% chance of 3*'s....but fourty of those 0.6%, to get you to 24%!

I understand they are trying to feature a certain run of characters and increase that rate, but they are less "exciting" imo because of the much lower chances of getting -anything- good (I know I left out HP, which adds a bit of goodness), and instead a much higher chance of getting ISO. Even if they want the vault to be a visual introduction to token odds, they should make the odds similar to the Heroic tokens - so visually it will "pop" more.

I still am not certain the way to go with these - hoarding for 300 days seems excessive, but the only way to guarantee the 4*'s. Drawing every day will get you garbage usually, and hoarding for specific 3*'s will be tougher since the odds go down to get another each time you pull one out. It may be best to hoard for when you need health packs and then draw them....but that statement alone pulls a lot of the excitement out of these tokens for sure.