RNG sucks ... AGAIN

Polares

Yesterday, after Strange was added to LLs I decided it was time to cash my 'hard' earned LLs. I also planned to use my CPs (I didn't in the end), and try to pull as much BBolt/Strange covers as possible. Of course, things didn't work out as expected.

I had 28 LTs. I opened all of them. I pulled ONE 5, JUST ONE **** 5.

I pulled the 5 on the second pull and then a streak of 26 tokens ins a row without any 5.

That's just a 3% pull ratio.

I have the worst luck possible in LLs (not true, I know there are people with even a worse luck than me). I barely get to the 10%, since the 15% change just 21 5s over 200 pulls.

I can't really understand how it is possible that we still don't have some type of system to address these issues. Yeah maybe when I get to 1000 pulls my chances will course correct and I will reach the advertised 15%, but then it will be too late for me.

Is is that hard to have some system that after 20 pulls without a 5 the next pull will be 100% a 5? or make the chances bigger for every 8 pulls without a 5? Even giving a 5 exactly after 8 pulls. This system is not fair (it is just fair in the very long run), luck is not fair in the short term, and in this game the short term matters A LOT.

Of course, if there were other ways of winning 5s, like 4s, 3s, or 2s, things would be different, but NO, you can just win 5s by playing LT roulette.

The endgame is still just RNG and I T S U C K S .

PS: Sorry for my rant, but it is really 'depressing' getting these results, while other people pulls 4 out of 10 or 7 out 25

johnmcclane

Polares wrote:

Yesterday, after Strange was added to LLs I decided it was time to cash my 'hard' earned LLs. I also planned to use my CPs (I didn't in the end), and try to pull as much BBolt/Strange covers as possible. Of course, things didn't work out as expected.

I had 28 LTs. I opened all of them. I pulled ONE 5, JUST ONE tinykitty 5.

I pulled the 5 on the second pull and then a streak of 26 tokens ins a row without any 5.

That's just a 3% pull ratio.

I have the worst luck possible in LLs (not true, I know there are people with even a worse luck than me). I barely get to the 10%, since the 15% change just 21 5s over 200 pulls.

I can't really understand how it is possible that we still don't have some type of system to address these issues. Yeah maybe when I get to 1000 pulls my chances will course correct and I will reach the advertised 15%, but then it will be too late for me.

Is is that hard to have some system that after 20 pulls without a 5 the next pull will be 100% a 5? or make the chances bigger for every 8 pulls without a 5? Even giving a 5 exactly after 8 pulls. This system is not fair (it is just fair in the very long run), luck is not fair in the short term, and in this game the short term matters A LOT.

Of course, if there were other ways of winning 5s, like 4s, 3s, or 2s, things would be different, but NO, you can just win 5s by playing LT roulette.

The endgame is still just RNG and I T S U C K S .

PS: Sorry for my rant, but it is really 'depressing' getting these results, while other people pulls 4 out of 10 or 7 out 25

I had 3 LTs, got 1 5-star. 33% ratio. But I do prefer too a 100% cover after x tries.

I played MAA on Facebook, and there was a similar system for a special type of characters:
you needed to collect 8 covers of them in order to recruit them. The first cover was a new one (duh), then the real system started:
for the second cover, 1) you got lucky and get it at first try or 2) you get it 100% with the third try
for the third cover, 1) or 2) after the fourth try
for the fourth 1) or 2) after the fifth
and so on..

So you could get the character with 8 covers (..hypothetically)<x<1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8 covers
Lucky or not, after a certain number of covers you'd get it.

Polares

johnmcclane wrote:

...
But I do prefer too a 100% cover after x tries.
...

This is probably the fairest system of all. Luck would just be to know which cover you will end up pulling, so there is still a RNG factor. But people that plays more (or spends more money) would be assured that they would get more 5s, there would be a clear motivation to get LTs and CPs knowing that you will get a certain amount of covers. ALWAYS. This is good for players and for whales, so it is also good for Devs.

I don't understand the stupid love Devs have for RNG systems. Why have a system in place that is fair for both people that play and spend money when we can have something completely random, that just rewards blind luck. This is beyond me.

If I wanted to play roulette I would be in a Casino !!!!

Bowgentle

Polares wrote:

This is probably the fairest system of all. Luck would just be to know which cover you will end up pulling, so there is still a RNG factor. But people that plays more (or spends more money) would be assured that they would get more 5s, there would be a clear motivation to get LTs and CPs knowing that you will get a certain amount of covers. ALWAYS. This is good for players and for whales, so it is also good for Devs.

I don't understand the stupid love Devs have for RNG systems. Why have a system in place that is fair for both people that play and spend money when we can have something completely random, that just rewards blind luck. This is beyond me.

If I wanted to play roulette I would be in a Casino !!!!

That's exactly the point of F2P.
It's basically a casino.
And of course the system we have now works for whales - they're prepared to spend however much it takes to cover/maxchamp a new 5.

Giving guaranteed covers after X LTs would limit the spending to a quantifiable amount, which is not something the beancounters want.

It's F2P Gacha.

If you don't want to play RNG roulette, I propose you find a new game.

Polares

Bowgentle wrote:

Polares wrote:

This is probably the fairest system of all. Luck would just be to know which cover you will end up pulling, so there is still a RNG factor. But people that plays more (or spends more money) would be assured that they would get more 5s, there would be a clear motivation to get LTs and CPs knowing that you will get a certain amount of covers. ALWAYS. This is good for players and for whales, so it is also good for Devs.

I don't understand the stupid love Devs have for RNG systems. Why have a system in place that is fair for both people that play and spend money when we can have something completely random, that just rewards blind luck. This is beyond me.

If I wanted to play roulette I would be in a Casino !!!!

That's exactly the point of F2P.
It's basically a casino.
And of course the system we have now works for whales - they're prepared to spend however much it takes to cover/maxchamp a new 5.

Giving guaranteed covers after X LTs would limit the spending to a quantifiable amount, which is not something the beancounters want.

It's F2P Gacha.

If you don't want to play RNG roulette, I propose you find a new game.

I don't agree that whales would spend more in the current system than in a fixed system. The system on average gives this 15% of covers so on average whales would spend the same (in one char release they would spend more in another less, so on average the same). But I think that people in general would spend more. I think there is a barrier to some people to spend money that is "what if I am unlucky", this barrier would disappear completely, and probably more people would spend more money.

And you still need to pull a particular char, so there is still a RNG factor (and the colors you want, etc.)

I also don't believe in the "if you don't like this, go to some other place". I believe more in the "to fix things you have to fight for them", things don't get fixed on their own so maybe, just maybe, if we keep insisting about the things we think are broken, maybe, just maybe, they will eventually get fixed (even though I think this might be a lost battle )

drcassino

I feel the OPs pain. Currently on a 0-24 streak from legendaries, my second worst ever (worst was 0-41). It's disspiriting, to say the least.

Polares

drcassino wrote:

I feel the OPs pain. Currently on a 0-24 streak from legendaries, my second worst ever (worst was 0-41). It's disspiriting, to say the least.

My worst was in the 10% era of 0 - 51. Later on I got a good streak and I recovered a bit and I finished the 10% era slightly under the advertised 10% , which I guess it was ok. But those months were 'sad' days in my MPQ history (but at least at that time I was still building my 4 roster, now I just care about 5s).

SummerGlau

i'm at roughly 20% for 5 stars from legendary tokens

CCW1208

Polares wrote:

drcassino wrote:

I feel the OPs pain. Currently on a 0-24 streak from legendaries, my second worst ever (worst was 0-41). It's disspiriting, to say the least.

My worst was in the 10% era of 0 - 51. Later on I got a good streak and I recovered a bit and I finished the 10% era slightly under the advertised 10% , which I guess it was ok. But those months were 'sad' days in my MPQ history (but at least at that time I was still building my 4 roster, now I just care about 5s).

I can not get any new 5 star from latest legend tokens for several months. I remembered my last one was in the 2nd civil war boss event. I passed most of 4 star DDQ and championed some 4 stars to get tokens. But I can not get any 5 star from latest legend tokens. I may get some 5 star from classic tokens. But it's really upset without new 5 star characters to play. Actually, I am tired of collecting cps. I may feel waste of my life after collecting cps by grinding nodes repeadly and......get another 1000 ISO by drawing legend tokens

dsds

The casino like RNG is what makes it attractive to the developers and players. If they had a guaranteed 5* every 8-9 covers, they would be giving out too much covers. It wouldn't be 15% anymore, it would be like 30%. This is because people can still get 5* at 3 covers and so there's no balancing the odds back to 15% mechanism.

I guess you can make the cost of an LT more expensive and guaranteed a 5*. But then the casino nature of the game is gone.

The reason why the casino nature of the game is so good for the developers is because newbies can potentially get the best characters in the game with very little effort like a lottery buy (albeit at the cost of some other poor sap who has a bad 5* streak). So it draws in new players and gives hope to players even though most of that hope is false hope.

Also because RNG makes it hard to predict how much you need to spend, some people may just spend the maximum. You have to understand the behavior of big spenders. If someone bought the maximum amount of cp required from buy clubs. If the covers comes much earlier, they will still spend the hp, cp on something else, they will be less frugal spending the excess. Because in their mind, the max cover cost x amount of dollars, and if they have left over, it is a bonus and they will value it less and spend it less efficiently. And if the opposite happens and you get a bad streak and it costs you more than what you expected, some people will keep putting money in since they think the odds are in their favor since they lost so many times already. It's just like casino, people win money and they will take more risks because they didn't earn that money. And if they lose, they will double up to hope to win it back.

udonomefoo

I was on a streak of no 5* covers, I think about 24 in a row. You know what's worse? Finally seeing that purple icon to break the streak and it's...... Cap Yellow. There should be no disappointing 5* covers.

dsds

udonomefoo wrote:

I was on a streak of no 5* covers, I think about 24 in a row. You know what's worse? Finally seeing that purple icon to break the streak and it's...... Cap Yellow. There should be no disappointing 5* covers.

It could have been worse, it could have been the 6th cap yellow cover for you. If it was, my condolences.

mpqr7

Cap Yellow's not so bad. Cap Blue is particularly bad though... doesn't even work until you do Cap Red or one of a few other rare abilities from other characters.

broll

dsds wrote:

The casino like RNG is what makes it attractive to the developers and players.

As a player I disagree with the last 2 words of this sentence.

Hendross

broll wrote:

dsds wrote:

The casino like RNG is what makes it attractive to the developers and players.

As a player I disagree with the last 2 words of this sentence.

This game is the worlds shittiest casino. Even basic strategy at blackjack gives you a 40+% chance of winning.

dsds

broll wrote:

dsds wrote:

The casino like RNG is what makes it attractive to the developers and players.

As a player I disagree with the last 2 words of this sentence.

Haha. Yeah well depends on how you define attractive. I didn't say like. Antifreeze attracts animals to it because it is sweet but it kills them?

broll

dsds wrote:

broll wrote:

dsds wrote:

The casino like RNG is what makes it attractive to the developers and players.

As a player I disagree with the last 2 words of this sentence.

Haha. Yeah well depends on how you define attractive. I didn't say like. Antifreeze attracts animals to it because it is sweet but it kills them?

Not really. It doesn't attract me. I've been dreading even starting 4* transition due to this. I'm seriously considering just sitting on all LTs and CPs until the day they actually provide a fix for this. Otherwise it's just tinykitty in the wind...

Spiritclaw

Hendross wrote:

broll wrote:

dsds wrote:

The casino like RNG is what makes it attractive to the developers and players.

As a player I disagree with the last 2 words of this sentence.

This game is the worlds tinykitty casino. Even basic strategy at blackjack gives you a 40+% chance of winning.

Please direct me to the nearest f2p casino, where I can win money without risk.

The way gambling law works in my state, it isn't gambling if the participant doesn't risk his assets, by definition.

Crowl

There needs to be a bad luck counter that increments each time an LT isn't a 5* and once it reaches a certain value the next pull is definitely a 5*, given that 15% is roughly 1 in 7, it could be set at 10 as a reasonable balance with the chance of getting them too often at other times.

Skygazing

Sanctum LTs were surprisingly kind to me, and I ended up getting 4 out of 23 (1/1/2), which is about 17.39%.

Cashed out my remaining LLs when Strange rotated in and finally broke my dry streak at 1 out of 19 LTs (5.26%) with a "lovely" Black Bolt Yellow... Now up to 0/0/2.

Currently my overall LT pull rate since the change is still less than the original 10% rate. And still no usable PHX (1/3/1) or OML (0/1/1), with highest being the mediocre battery that is SS (2/4/1).

I'm not a huge fan of the RNG but it is what it is, so for now I'm just sticking to the 4* meta and trying to enjoy that.

HaywireII

I feel like they put in a bad luck breaker for me. Twice since they changed the 5* pull rate to 15% I've pulled 29 4*'s in a row then pulled a 5* on the 30th pull. I'm now at 150 tokens opened at the new rate and sitting on a 10% pull rate. Luckily I'm pretty engaged in my 4* champion backlog now so my 2/0/0 OML and 0/0/1 Silver Surfer are just gathering dust. Actually, all of my 5* characters are unusable but there's not enough ISO to go around so I'm not sure it matters.