Poll: Time for Daily Crash

alphabeta

mckauhu wrote:

10 CP reward? That's like huge nerf if so since latest legend is 25CP worth. I voted "not daily but more frequently" since there wasn't better option.

Current - 1 LT every 5 days = 25 cp per cycle
Favoured proposal - 1 Clash per day worth 10 cp = 50 cp per cycle

How exactly is that a nerf? No one official is suggesting anything is going to change this is entirely a player wish at the moment.

Gmax101

alphabeta wrote:

Gmax101 wrote:

So, one possible option is to SCL gate the DDQ...

keep daily crash as is... for everyone.

What about command points/Legendary tokens?

It's fine for 4* transitioners to say clash is to hard because there are lots of other routes to 4* covers in progression in PVE and PVP - clash is a rare chance at an LT and the RNG nature of 5* transition is brutal and a much less accessible step.

I'm all for clash being same difficulty (no one has a right to win and most clashes are winnable well covered at level 120) but daily for 10 cp. DDQ doesn't need complicating (Demi would only mess it up) the format is fine (double ISO would be nice though if they wanted to keep it there) it just needs adjusting to reflect volume of 4* characters now in the game.

Firstly, I agree that the risk of Demi messing it up is significant and not be ignored

For me, it is about who the Crash/DDQ is designed for.

The only criticism levelled at the Crash is that it is not for 4* Transitioners... you need a 4* at about level 120 with decent covers to do it reliably (invisible characters are outliers) and that is not what a person just coming in to 4* land has.

Where as DDQ is an awesome 3* transitioner tool... the nodes are doable with a 2* star max level roster, and 3* characters make it easier. It is also a steady supply of specific covers.

Without a 4* targeted DDQ-esque event the 4* is reliant on progression in PVP and PVE... but a 4* DDQ means that even one cover opens up the flow...

and with nearly 40 different 4* characters, I don't think that a cover a day is excessive.

But that is entirely my opinion and alternate opinions are probably equally or more valid.

But the Crash, as is, should stay. It gives developing rosters the occasional LT and the higher level rosters with many championed 4* a more frequent LT supply. I just feel that 4* transitioners need something to aim at, and DDQ did that for me at 3* transition level...

alphabeta

Gmax101 wrote:

alphabeta wrote:

Gmax101 wrote:

So, one possible option is to SCL gate the DDQ...

keep daily crash as is... for everyone.

What about command points/Legendary tokens?

It's fine for 4* transitioners to say clash is to hard because there are lots of other routes to 4* covers in progression in PVE and PVP - clash is a rare chance at an LT and the RNG nature of 5* transition is brutal and a much less accessible step.

I'm all for clash being same difficulty (no one has a right to win and most clashes are winnable well covered at level 120) but daily for 10 cp. DDQ doesn't need complicating (Demi would only mess it up) the format is fine (double ISO would be nice though if they wanted to keep it there) it just needs adjusting to reflect volume of 4* characters now in the game.

Firstly, I agree that the risk of Demi messing it up is significant and not be ignored

For me, it is about who the Crash/DDQ is designed for.

The only criticism levelled at the Crash is that it is not for 4* Transitioners... you need a 4* at about level 120 with decent covers to do it reliably (invisible characters are outliers) and that is not what a person just coming in to 4* land has.

Where as DDQ is an awesome 3* transitioner tool... the nodes are doable with a 2* star max level roster, and 3* characters make it easier. It is also a steady supply of specific covers.

Without a 4* targeted DDQ-esque event the 4* is reliant on progression in PVP and PVE... but a 4* DDQ means that even one cover opens up the flow...

and with nearly 40 different 4* characters, I don't think that a cover a day is excessive.

But that is entirely my opinion and alternate opinions are probably equally or more valid.

But the Crash, as is, should stay. It gives developing rosters the occasional LT and the higher level rosters with many championed 4* a more frequent LT supply. I just feel that 4* transitioners need something to aim at, and DDQ did that for me at 3* transition level...

Are 4* covers a problem to acquire? Genuinely I'm coming out of 4* and into 5* transition so I don't know but I'd be surprised if they are - 25 cp progression per PVE and PVP event with an 85% change of a 4* plus one in each progression that's likely to generate 5 covers for 4*s per week from progression and 125 cps per week if you hit all.

Post CC's assume transitioners only get 10 cp per PVP that drops it to 5 covers and 80 cp - assume your spend that 80 cp on Classic Legends and get 1 5* (above average draw rate) that's 8 4* covers per week.

There are 38 active 4*s today (pre Blade and excl Dino and Howard) so that's 494 covers needed - that's 61 weeks to fully cover all 4*s assuming no cover rewards from a zero base and anyone who's finished 3* transition isn't likely to be at anywhere close to a zero base on 4*s.

Now there will be dupes but there are also cover rewards from 3* champion levels and tokens which at a population level should offset the dupes (I've had bad RNG luck to so I know for individuals there are white whales that the RNG loves to hide).

To Champion a 4* from level 70 is around 380k ISO so to champion all 38 you'd need 14.5m ISO - that will take far far far longer to earn than the 494 covers above.

Hence my question - are the covers really the problem transitioning into the 4* tier?

A solely rewarding 4* cover node is merely likely to exacerbate the ISO problem because you'd have more dupes having to be sold earlier because people are short of the ISO needed to stand any chance of championing them before they expire.

mckauhu

alphabeta wrote:

mckauhu wrote:

10 CP reward? That's like huge nerf if so since latest legend is 25CP worth. I voted "not daily but more frequently" since there wasn't better option.

Current - 1 LT every 5 days = 25 cp per cycle
Favoured proposal - 1 Clash per day worth 10 cp = 50 cp per cycle

How exactly is that a nerf? No one official is suggesting anything is going to change this is entirely a player wish at the moment.

Isn't the prize supposed to be for the effort it makes you go through, that's why I see it as a nerf. However if they make crashes easier and more frequent, there is no problem then.

alphabeta

mckauhu wrote:

alphabeta wrote:

mckauhu wrote:

10 CP reward? That's like huge nerf if so since latest legend is 25CP worth. I voted "not daily but more frequently" since there wasn't better option.

Current - 1 LT every 5 days = 25 cp per cycle
Favoured proposal - 1 Clash per day worth 10 cp = 50 cp per cycle

How exactly is that a nerf? No one official is suggesting anything is going to change this is entirely a player wish at the moment.

Isn't the prize supposed to be for the effort it makes you go through, that's why I see it as a nerf. However if they make crashes easier and more frequent, there is no problem then.

If the prize is for the effort why do 7 day PVE and 3 day PVE offer same CP progression? It's economics if the availability of a good increases its value has to fall for the economy to remain in balance.

broll

I'd like to see it move to daily and the reward change to covers of that character instead of LTs. Need something similar to the 3* DDQ and I think that could work. Fight the RNG!

Escape2victory

GrumpySmurf1002 wrote:

I voted keep as is...with this caveat: It's time for a clearance level version of DDQ.

Instead of 1*, 1/2*, 2*, 3* essential, wave for a 3* rewards, there should be an upgraded version which is 2*, 2/3*, 3*, 4* essential, wave for that 4*. With more iso to boot.

That gives you a daily 4* cover, and then crash can continue to reward a token every 5 days.

Yes and no.
I've got rid of all but 3 decent 2* characters to free up roster space. I've got Juggs as the only 1* for the 1* fight. Works well for me as it is. Agree that a daily 4* cover of a specific colour is now needed.
However, I bet you began doing the Big Enchilada with a decent 2* team. Why not transpose that model for the Clash ? 4 waves of nasties which, with skill you could take down with a good 3* team ? Now that would be tasty. End up with well covered but underlevelled 4*s ? Probably, but at least more people could actually use them at say 180 rather than the lowly covered 4*s on my roster which remain at 70 because they have no chance in current Clash.

mckauhu

alphabeta wrote:

If the prize is for the effort why do 7 day PVE and 3 day PVE offer same CP progression? It's economics if the availability of a good increases its value has to fall for the economy to remain in balance.

Beats me, it's silly indeed. 7-day events should give more CP. I didn't understand what that other sentence meant sorry...