I signed up for a game, not a lottery

Dragon_Nexus

Deadpooool wrote:

I think we need to be patient.

I recall when there were only 03x 4* - IW, Fury and XFWolvie, they weren't easily available as well, unlike how now we are essentially given a 4* for hitting 1,000 and 1,300 points in pvp.

Oh the glorious days when you'd see these elusive 4* characters.
Want one? Able to place 1st or 2nd in PvE or PvP? No? Well, gotta hope you're lucky with those heroic tokens or you're not getting any!

Sound familiar? The only difference is 5*s aren't given out as 1st place rewards. Yet.

Stax the Foyer

Dragon_Nexus wrote:

Deadpooool wrote:

I think we need to be patient.

I recall when there were only 03x 4* - IW, Fury and XFWolvie, they weren't easily available as well, unlike how now we are essentially given a 4* for hitting 1,000 and 1,300 points in pvp.

Oh the glorious days when you'd see these elusive 4* characters.
Want one? Able to place 1st or 2nd in PvE or PvP? No? Well, gotta hope you're lucky with those heroic tokens or you're not getting any!

Sound familiar? The only difference is 5*s aren't given out as 1st place rewards. Yet.

Remember the Fury rollout, with the alliance rewards? Something like that would be great for a 5*, especially given how impractical it is to whale them up with CP. Much, much better than the Probably a Star-Lord Token we get now.

Unknown

Stax the Foyer wrote:

Dragon_Nexus wrote:

Oh the glorious days when you'd see these elusive 4* characters.
Want one? Able to place 1st or 2nd in PvE or PvP? No? Well, gotta hope you're lucky with those heroic tokens or you're not getting any!

Sound familiar? The only difference is 5*s aren't given out as 1st place rewards. Yet.

Remember the Fury rollout, with the alliance rewards? Something like that would be great for a 5*, especially given how impractical it is to whale them up with CP. Much, much better than the Probably a Star-Lord Token we get now.

I think this is a fair proposition. Instead of a Leg Token for Alliance season top 100 reward, we could get a nice shiny 5* cover!

If only they implement this. *wishful thing mode ON*

Ludaa

My problem is that the 5's overtake the 4's with so few covers. The xfdp I just finished this week ( how long since release?) seems pretty **** compared to a 4 or 5 cover OML, which many have obtained in just a month or two of great pulls. Something I labored over and waited ages on was just pooped all over by randomness.

Maybe if their power curve (read: match damage) was slower to ramp up, the longer timeline to OP'ness would allow for corrections to "unlucky" pull percentages. If we all had to collect 9-10 covers before we could float above 1200 in pvp, we'd still complain, who am I kidding.

Working as intended though, frustration and jealousy have brought out many a credit card for this game.

Unknown

Dimh wrote:

Raffoon wrote:

So, I ask the developers: How the hell am I supposed to progress my roster? I've opened almost 100 legendary tokens at this point and still have only 3 5* covers to show for it. Meanwhile, people opening half as many tokens have progressed more than 3 times as fast as me on average. On average, people that have opened the same number of tokens as me are getting to enjoy a new tier of character, while I'm stuck in the same spot with nothing to show and no recourse.

Your sample size is way too low. Let's talk when you get to 10,000 LT and remain at 3% draw rate.

edit> I apparently do not know how to quote things properly...

Sample size is irrelevant in this case. If Raffoon's argument was that his lack of success indicated that the general draw rate was extremely low, then you could make an argument based on sample size. But I don't think that anyone is actually challenging that the average 5* LT draw rate is 10%.

The problem here isn't the general problem of the *average* player, it's the *specific* problem of Raffoon drawing in the bottom 1% of LT token draw permutations.

It's a system that produces extreme divergences of winners and losers and has nothing to do with merit or commitment. If Raffoon's luck is worse than 99.2% of players, there exists a theoretical player on the other side of the probability spectrum. That player has drawn 19 5*s to Raffoon's 3 and has done EXACTLY the same amount of work.

Polares

Malenkov wrote:

Dimh wrote:

Raffoon wrote:

So, I ask the developers: How the hell am I supposed to progress my roster? I've opened almost 100 legendary tokens at this point and still have only 3 5* covers to show for it. Meanwhile, people opening half as many tokens have progressed more than 3 times as fast as me on average. On average, people that have opened the same number of tokens as me are getting to enjoy a new tier of character, while I'm stuck in the same spot with nothing to show and no recourse.

Your sample size is way too low. Let's talk when you get to 10,000 LT and remain at 3% draw rate.

edit> I apparently do not know how to quote things properly...

Sample size is irrelevant in this case. If Raffoon's argument was that his lack of success indicated that the general draw rate was extremely low, then you could make an argument based on sample size. But I don't think that anyone is actually challenging that the average 5* LT draw rate is 10%.

The problem here isn't the general problem of the *average* player, it's the *specific* problem of Raffoon drawing in the bottom 1% of LT token draw permutations.

It's a system that produces extreme divergences of winners and losers and has nothing to do with merit or commitment. If Raffoon's luck is worse than 99.2% of players, there exists a theoretical player on the other side of the probability spectrum. That player has drawn 19 5*s to Raffoon's 3 and has done EXACTLY the same amount of work.

Exactly that!

It is not that we want a bigger rate for 5s, one every 10 LTs is good enough, the problem is when some people get 3 5s in 10 LTs and another one none in 30 LTs. Because 5s ARE ALREADY PREVALENT after 1000 in PvP!!!!

I have always been very unlucky with tokens, but it was not really that important because I won my covers playing most of the time. But for 5s, everything has changed and as the creator of the thread perfectly said, now this game is just a lottery. Some people win, some lose and it sucks when you are the one that loses!

PS: I don't know how devs were so obtuse to let just luck decide the fate of the biggest rewards the game has to offer...

MojoWild

The game was already a lottery with tokens before 5*s, so yeah, it is what you signed up for.

simonsez

MojoWild wrote:

The game was already a lottery with tokens before 5*s, so yeah, it is what you signed up for.

You're not seriously going to make me retype what I just said 8 posts ago to refute that nonsensical assertion, are you?

MojoWild

simonsez wrote:

MojoWild wrote:

The game was already a lottery with tokens before 5*s, so yeah, it is what you signed up for.

You're not seriously going to make me retype what I just said 8 posts ago to refute that nonsensical assertion, are you?

Only if you want to.
Tl:dr

mrflopwelligan

I wish there were a more targeted option for upgrades. I understand that new players need those Standard tokens - but once you get firmly entrenched into 3-star land - they're laughable.

Randomly getting tokens you don't need (or want) day after day, week after week, is just not fun.

I would rather receive a picture of a monkey dressed as a princess than another blasted Moonstone.

kalex716

simonsez wrote:

MojoWild wrote:

The game was already a lottery with tokens before 5*s, so yeah, it is what you signed up for.

You're not seriously going to make me retype what I just said 8 posts ago to refute that nonsensical assertion, are you?

Today is an interesting day, because its the last day to reasonably whale up a 4 star with gold (if you could even call it reasonable, its probably insane).

Which position would you rather be in with 10 LT's to pull.... A transitioner sitting on 30,000 gold who is chasing the missing cover on a Hulkbuster, Jean Grey, and Red Hulk (all 1/1/0), or someone looking to pull a third cover on any of the 3 5 stars (all are 1/1/0)?

simonsez

kalex716 wrote:

Which position would you rather be in with 10 LT's to pull.... A transitioner sitting on 30,000 gold who is chasing the missing cover on a Hulkbuster, Jean Grey, and Red Hulk (all 1/1/0), or someone looking to pull a third cover on any of the 3 5 stars (all are 1/1/0)?

Sounds like a trick question. You're basically asking would I rather have all the necessary 4*s and an unusable number of 5* covers, or an unusable number of 4* covers and an unusable number of 5* covers. I don't see any benefit in opting for less. Is your point that everybody is tinykitty'd, and it's just a matter of degree?

kalex716

simonsez wrote:

kalex716 wrote:

Which position would you rather be in with 10 LT's to pull.... A transitioner sitting on 30,000 gold who is chasing the missing cover on a Hulkbuster, Jean Grey, and Red Hulk (all 1/1/0), or someone looking to pull a third cover on any of the 3 5 stars (all are 1/1/0)?

Sounds like a trick question. You're basically asking would I rather have all the necessary 4*s and an unusable number of 5* covers, or an unusable number of 4* covers and an unusable number of 5* covers. I don't see any benefit in opting for less. Is your point that everybody is tinykitty'd, and it's just a matter of degree?

It wasn't a trick question, just interested in your opinion. Theres a brewing sentiment that with the 5 star pool being scarce right now, lucking out and skipping 4 star tier entirely is an ideal possibility.... But yes, you are right that ultimately I believe we are all **** and its just a matter of degree.

I won't argue, that it is objectively true, theirs more controlled ways and methods of getting 4 star covers compared to 5 star. RNG is the ONLY way to get 5 stars. Yet, nevertheless, depending on play style, goals, and availability at any given time, RNG is often just as cruel to all of us.

People tend to hate RNG when we are on the **** side of it. But the best part about it is... Tomorrow, my luck could change. With the exception of course, someone trying to whale their way into 4 star land. They don't have tomorrow as a realistic option any longer.

simonsez

kalex716 wrote:

Tomorrow, my luck could change.

But here's the thing... if you've already drawn 150 tokens and are getting only 5% 5's, even if you do have a change in luck, maybe it'll help to catch up with people who've had a "normal" pull rate. It's extraordinarily unlikely, statistically speaking, that you will ever catch up to someone who's had better-than-normal luck so far.

simonsez

simonsez wrote:

kalex716 wrote:

Tomorrow, my luck could change.

It's extraordinarily unlikely, statistically speaking, that you will ever catch up to someone who's had better-than-normal luck so far.

To follow up and quantify, if you pulled less than 15 5*s on your first 150 tokens, after pulling 150 more, your chances of catching up to someone who pulled more than 15 5*s on their first 150 tokens, is only 16%. Once you fall behind, for most people it's like chasing a train that never slows down.

DaveR4470

simonsez wrote:

It's extraordinarily unlikely, statistically speaking, that you will ever catch up to someone who's had better-than-normal luck so far.

Well... statistically speaking, it's impossible to NOT catch up to someone who's had better than normal luck so far, as all participants regress inevitably to the mean as n (number of pulls) approaches infinity. But I do take your point, as this is a bounded analysis.

I just wanted to say that every time I see the title on this post, all I can think of is "Dammit Jim, I'm a doctor, not a mind-reader...."

MPQ_Daywalker

aesthetocyst wrote:

DaveR4470 wrote:

Well... statistically speaking, it's impossible to NOT catch up to someone who's had better than normal luck so far, as all participants regress inevitably to the mean as n (number of pulls) approaches infinity. But I do take your point, as this is a bounded analysis.

If only we all had infinite LTs to open, so we could all regress together!

I'm for this solution. Infinite LTs for all!

DaveR4470

Question: if an infinite amount of monkeys sat at an infinite amount of iPhones and opened an infinite amount of LTs, how many phones would be thrown at the wall after a run of 4 unusable Sue Storm covers?

simonsez

DaveR4470 wrote:

Well... statistically speaking, it's impossible to NOT catch up to someone who's had better than normal luck so far, as all participants regress inevitably to the mean as n (number of pulls) approaches infinity. But I do take your point, as this is a bounded analysis.

Thanks for conceding I'm correct after devising a contrivance to imply I'm wrong.

DaveR4470

simonsez wrote:

Thanks for conceding I'm correct after devising a contrivance to imply I'm wrong.

No, I pointed out that your absolute statement is only correct in limited circumstances. If you say "the sun never rises", you're absolutely wrong, unless you only meant "between 2 and 3 AM in Caracas, Venezuela".