Day 989...and still no usable 5*

OneLastGambit

SnowcaTT wrote:

OneLastGambit wrote:

People at my level sure do (day 345) but we can't be considered noobs really.

Not noobs - but OP has played almost 3x longer than you! In what sounds like pretty heavy play! That kind of time commitment and roster level should be able to move into 5* land much more quickly.

For example: 2*'s have always had a hard time catching the older (long-time) 3* vets. Then the 3*'s had a hard time catching the longer-played 4* vets. But now 3*'s can simply catch up with the 5* vets, while the 4* vets sometimes can't even transition into 5*!

As far as "Privileged position" - CP with RNG has made a world where mini-whales don't matter but mega-whales lord over us all.

I disagree that RNG is a good thing. The "have-nots" don't have to face only max rosters now - MMR sees to that.

What system do you propose in its place?

If you make the covers attainable then the effect is the same mega whales will simply earn them faster than everyone else and will still be top of the pile. RNG is frustrating but it is both equal and fair. Any system where people can earn the prizes will just mean those already at the top will remain there.

Here is the problem with the argument (for the record I get frustrated by the rng too) let's say you make all covers earnable by being the prize for first place in pve and PvP...who do you think will win them? It won't be vets. It will be whales and if you think they grind hard now wait till a 5* is top prize. So you widen the scope (like They did with pve placement prizes) how far do you cast the net? T2? In my experience that's still whale territory. T5? Well now you're rewarding people at my level again because I can make t5 In any event should I try.

The next problem? So you give 5* covers to a larger portion of the player base...then the complaint becomes "day 900 vet with a fully covered but Unlevelled and useless oml"


Every time I pull my 24th extra star Lord pink (yep I have pulled that many) I get mad at RNG but if the covers were earnable then none of us would ever see them.

Edit: the streak buster system which has been mentioned before is a better system. Go 20 pulls without a 5* and you get a 5*

I'll concede defeat on that point.

simonsez

OneLastGambit wrote:

RNG is frustrating but it is both equal and fair

You have a twisted idea of "equal and fair" if you think it's fair that Player A has champed 5*s even though he's earned fewer tokens than player B, who still hasn't fully covered any. That's pretty much the opposite of equal and fair.

OneLastGambit wrote:

What system do you propose in its place?

It's not rocket science. We earn CP, and 5*s should be award for accumulating CP, not awarded for accumulating CP with a high-variance random element overlaid on top of it. 140 CP gives you a classic 5*, and 175 CP gives you a newer 5*, end of story.

Linkster79

OneLastGambit wrote:

What system do you propose in its place?
.

Command Points are not given as a reward for purchases and only available in game as rewards for placement and progression, sort of how they were alluded to be before launch, by doing this the developers could allow for much much higher odds (talking almost 50/50) safe in the knowledge that players would be able to progress in a fairer way. To me it's not right for the 'God Tier" is based purely on luck and luck alone.

The damage is done now and has been proven to be a nice little earner for D3Go! so I don't expect it to ever change.

wymtime

I am on day 936 and just pulled my 11th OML cover today. What got me there was once I got some top end 4* after the champion feature came out I was able to use coordination to hit 1300 in PVP consistently. Once I started doing that and hitting PVE for max progression and doing LR I built up a stable of max covered * and now have 12 championed e*. With all the command points I earned I was able to get a very usable 5* and was lucky enough that it was OML. The reality is 5* are so random and you really need to be a strong PVP player and be willing to invest time in coordination to earn the CP necessary so your RNG luck will balance out. I had pulled 300 CP with out a 5* then 2 out of my next 3 were 5* a BSSM blue and OML.

Bowgentle

wymtime wrote:

I am on day 936 and just pulled my 11th OML cover today. What got me there was once I got some top end 4* after the champion feature came out I was able to use coordination to hit 1300 in PVP consistently. Once I started doing that and hitting PVE for max progression and doing LR I built up a stable of max covered * and now have 12 championed e*. With all the command points I earned I was able to get a very usable 5* and was lucky enough that it was OML. The reality is 5* are so random and you really need to be a strong PVP player and be willing to invest time in coordination to earn the CP necessary so your RNG luck will balance out. I had pulled 300 CP with out a 5* then 2 out of my next 3 were 5* a BSSM blue and OML.

Eventually RNG will balance out, possibly, yes.
But 300 CP are 15 pulls.
There are people, me included, who have gone 0/40+.
That's one hell of a stretch to play through.
0/15 is nothing.

Vhailorx

eventually RNG will even out, but only over the course of thousands of pulls. Only the top tier of players in this game have even amassed hundreds of LT pulls, let alone thousands. Maybe some of the ultra-whales have thousands of LT pulls to their name. But for the vast majority of the playerbase, there simply won't ever be enough tokens to even out RNG discrepancies at the 5* level. That's why RNG-only 5*s has always been a terrible idea (and one made even worse by system that actually encouraged tens of thousands of dollars of spending on 'unwhale-able' characters).

simonsez

wymtime wrote:

your RNG luck will balance out.

This is where everyone gets it wrong. If we had infinite tokens, then yes, it would. But we don't. Not counting CP buyers, how many tokens do most people expect to open before moving on or having the game fade away? 200? 300? Let's be real generous and say 500. Under the current system of classics, five 5* distributed across a 15% pull rate, if everyone pulled 500 tokens, you'd end up with almost the same number of people with 0-2 maxed 5*s as you would with 4-5 maxed 5*s. Let that sink in.

This is where the devs got this RNG nonsense the most wrong. They might've been thinking it'll all balance out in the end too. Except given the parameters they've set up, and a reasonable estimate of what "the long run" is, it doesn't even come close to balancing out. The drop rate and # tokens distributed result in far too much variability.

OneLastGambit

simonsez wrote:

OneLastGambit wrote:

RNG is frustrating but it is both equal and fair

You have a twisted idea of "equal and fair" if you think it's fair that Player A has champed 5*s even though he's earned fewer tokens than player B, who still hasn't fully covered any. That's pretty much the opposite of equal and fair.

OneLastGambit wrote:

What system do you propose in its place?

It's not rocket science. We earn CP, and 5*s should be award for accumulating CP, not awarded for accumulating CP with a high-variance random element overlaid on top of it. 140 CP gives you a classic 5*, and 175 CP gives you a newer 5*, end of story.

So you're proposing to replace one random system with another? How can you say random is awful the suggest a system just as random? Yeah I know you get a guaranteed 5* but how long then before everyone is on here complaining about how they've pulled their 100th surfer black 9r 5teve yellow? And then we are right back where we started.

As for random being fair and equal that statement is correct - if all players have an equal chance of earning a 5* (that is exactly what random is) then that is both equal and fair. I think you might be confused as to what constitute fair and equal as you're opinion is that those who have better rosters should get better prizes (in not arguing against that point by the way) but that is not a fair system as only those at the top get top prizes....kind of like how in real life only the rich can get rich (unless you get a lottery win...huh how about that a random event which equalised the playing field...weird completely unfair right?)

OneLastGambit

simonsez wrote:

wymtime wrote:

your RNG luck will balance out.

This is where everyone gets it wrong. If we had infinite tokens, then yes, it would. But we don't. Not counting CP buyers, how many tokens do most people expect to open before moving on or having the game fade away? 200? 300? Let's be real generous and say 500. Under the current system of classics, five 5* distributed across a 15% pull rate, if everyone pulled 500 tokens, you'd end up with almost the same number of people with 0-2 maxed 5*s as you would with 4-5 maxed 5*s. Let that sink in.

This is where the devs got this RNG nonsense the most wrong. They might've been thinking it'll all balance out in the end too. Except given the parameters they've set up, and a reasonable estimate of what "the long run" is, it doesn't even come close to balancing out. The drop rate and # tokens distributed result in far too much variability.

I didn't realise there was a limit to how many tokens you can win? Can someone enlighten me as to what the maximum tokens are? Id like to make sure im not close to it as if I am I'll stop playing now since there's no tokens left...

Vhailorx

OneLastGambit wrote:

I didn't realise there was a limit to how many tokens you can win? Can someone enlighten me as to what the maximum tokens are? Id like to make sure im not close to it as if I am I'll stop playing now since there's no tokens left...

The limit is on the rate at which players can GET token, not the total number they can have. Even grinding your fingers down to nubs will only result in a few hundred tokens every year. Spending thousands of dollars will only result in dozens more.


with small samples sizes like that, its entirely possible for RNG to screw some players and favor others.

simonsez

OneLastGambit wrote:

So you're proposing to replace one random system with another?

No, I'm not, and I don't see where you got that out of what I said.

OneLastGambit wrote:

if all players have an equal chance of earning a 5* (that is exactly what random is) then that is both equal and fair.

The outcomes are demonstrably unequal and unfair. Would you work for a company where every year there's a random drawing in which one employee gets a $10 million salary and the rest get nothing? Hey, it's all random, and everyone has an equal chance. No one in their right mind would describe that salary structure as "equal" and "fair".

simonsez

OneLastGambit wrote:

I didn't realise there was a limit to how many tokens you can win? Can someone enlighten me as to what the maximum tokens are? Id like to make sure im not close to it as if I am I'll stop playing now since there's no tokens left...

Even though you're being an ****, I'll answer you anyway. The limit is based on your lifetime and the lifetime of the game, genius. Neither is infinite, hence there's a limit. Tough concept, I know. Consider yourself enlightened.

wymtime

simonsez wrote:

wymtime wrote:

your RNG luck will balance out.

This is where everyone gets it wrong. If we had infinite tokens, then yes, it would. But we don't. Not counting CP buyers, how many tokens do most people expect to open before moving on or having the game fade away? 200? 300? Let's be real generous and say 500. Under the current system of classics, five 5* distributed across a 15% pull rate, if everyone pulled 500 tokens, you'd end up with almost the same number of people with 0-2 maxed 5*s as you would with 4-5 maxed 5*s. Let that sink in.

This is where the devs got this RNG nonsense the most wrong. They might've been thinking it'll all balance out in the end too. Except given the parameters they've set up, and a reasonable estimate of what "the long run" is, it doesn't even come close to balancing out. The drop rate and # tokens distributed result in far too much variability.

So first I don't think the way to distribute 5* is the best way right now. There definatly should be a way to earn them not just LT luck. I have been extremely lucky with my LT luck as I was able to champion almost all my 3* right when championing cam out and got a plethora of 4*. Because of the 4* I got I was able to start hitting 1300 in PVP regularly and got enough CP consistently to get a really good OML. End game for most players will be a max covers 4*. The end game for others will be a usable 5*. The fact that it is possible for a FTP player to get a usable 5* is amazingly positive. There could be a better system in place, and I don't know what it should be. As if now I will continue to encourage players to keep pulling their CP and be positive. Eventually if you keep playing and earn a lot of CP then you will get a usable 5*. It might be SS, it might be BSSM, or it might be OML. When 5* came out I didn't think I would ever max cover one and now I am 2 OML covers away from doing that.

mohio

OneLastGambit wrote:

I didn't realise there was a limit to how many tokens you can win? Can someone enlighten me as to what the maximum tokens are? Id like to make sure im not close to it as if I am I'll stop playing now since there's no tokens left...

As another mentioned, of course you are being sarcastic, but still I like doing things like this so I will go for it anyway...

3 PvP a week = 75 CP + let's say 3 CP placement rewards, so 78 CP
3 PvE every 2 weeks = 37.5 CP per week
2 CP per day in PvE nodes = 14 CP per week
1 CP per day in PvE sub placement = 7 CP per week
25 CP season progression = 6.25 CP per week
1 LT from DDQ every 5 days = 1.4 latest LT per week

So - just from in-game rewards you get ~143 CP per week plus the added 1.4 pulls from DDQ That comes out to around 8.5 pulls a week just from event/node rewards.

With champion rewards adding extra pulls and CP, I really have no idea how to quantify that, but it could be close to 1 pull a week potentially.

So, close to 10 LT pulls a week for the most hard-core of grinders. Over the 6-7 months that this has been out, that equates to around 260-300 LT, but that's likely a low estimate due to the large number of extra pulls from initially championing 3/4*.

I seem to have forgotten more RNG involved in LT calculations...the vault pulls...So you could easily have more if you're super lucky and pull the LT out of your DDQ or PvE vaults on a regular basis.

OneLastGambit

Of course there was some tongue in cheek involved with my posts as I was simply being a reactionist going over the top for comedic effect.

Simon you suggested a system whereby x amount of cp nets you a classic 5* and x amount gives you a latest 5*. Perhaps I misread your post but is that not another rng suggestion?

Or where you suggesting that you get to SELECT the 5* character that you get?

I know this is an argument which nobody will ever win but you're all saying rng sucks and who cares if everyone has an equal chance of earning one. It should be vets that get them and that's fair. I disagree, if anyone DESERVES to get them it's surely the people funding the game as without their patronage all of us low spenders and f2p would have no game to play. So should we reward those people and change all 5* covers to direct purchase only? No of course not because it's not fair when certain people can get the best items and others can't...right?

And would I work for a company with a lottery? Well that analogy is not comparable since we aren't talking about feeding our families here it's a digital game not a career.

Now if you said would I play a game where I could randomly win a million ? Yeah sure why not. Who wouldn't ? Which is better to randomly win a million or to earn it over the course of 50 years?