4* DDQ discussion.

homeinvasion

san-mpq wrote:

3) For the top tier players (see: Pay To Win), this is a negligible change, and unlikely to alter anything in their day.

As a player that paid $5,000 for my roster I would be demanding a refund if you picked up the same roster for free.

smkspy

homeinvasion wrote:

san-mpq wrote:

3) For the top tier players (see: Pay To Win), this is a negligible change, and unlikely to alter anything in their day.

As a player that paid $5,000 for my roster I would be demanding a refund if you picked up the same roster for free.

Did you demand a refund when the 3 star ddq was started?

Skygazing

Honestly ISO is what really needs a boost. Yes 4* covers daily would be nice, but without more ISO they're functionally useless.

I'm on day 685 with no notable 5*s and 13 champed 4*s, which make up the bulk of my teams. I have 10 fully covered but unleveled 4*s (plus a handful at 11 or 12 covers) and that number only seems to be getting bigger.

It sucks having undercovered and therefor unusable characters sitting on your roster, but what sucks more is having fully covered ones that are still unusable because of what it takes to actually level them.

smkspy

Eh, I'll take covers over iso anyday. At least with covers, I then have a greater choice of where to sink my iso. As it stands, the current path of champing 4 stars generally boils down which 4 star I get up to 13 (currently cyclops but jean and rulk are sitting at 12 too) and if it's more than one which has an extra cover in the RQ (the thing was that rare exception where I hit a streak of like 5 extra covers from LTs).

Probably the only exception to this rule is someone like Mr Fantastic where it makes little sense to champ him when you have several other highly covered 4s on the verge of cover 13.

And here's the thing about rng that kills 4 stars for me, RNG, at least in my case, tends to favor 4 stars the older they get. The past 8 releases in my roster sit at 2-4 covers, and they will sit there while I continue to pull the oldest 4 stars and slowly acquire newly aging 4s like Nova, Punisher, and Wasp. But that's just my personal experience with RNG. Drax, Moon Knight, Spider woman, Luke Cage, Spider Gwen, Winter Soldier, War Machine are all languishing on roster due to bad RNG and I'm confident that I can Agent Venom, Gwenpool, Medusa, and Blade to that list.

acescracked

Skygazing wrote:

Honestly ISO is what really needs a boost. Yes 4* covers daily would be nice, but without more ISO they're functionally useless.

I'm on day 685 with no notable 5*s and 13 champed 4*s, which make up the bulk of my teams. I have 10 fully covered but unleveled 4*s (plus a handful at 11 or 12 covers) and that number only seems to be getting bigger.

It sucks having undercovered and therefor unusable characters sitting on your roster, but what sucks more is having fully covered ones that are still unusable because of what it takes to actually level them.

You are correct, for most regular players 4* covers aren't the issue. We play events and progress. Once a solid 3* roster built, 4* covers start to come in. Generally after time or whaling has passed most regular players find themselves ISO poor and lack of 4* covers isn't the problem.

The OP admitted to playing no PvP, occasional DDQ, didn't specify how much pve and is shocked that he can't progress. But is requesting an *ASAP* change that will award premium content of a free to play game for just signing in periodically.

Of course I'm a consumer just like everyone here and would benefit from such a change, but I'm a realistic consumer. Hell, if he can convince D3 to give their 2nd highest tier of covers away for free daily...props to him!

jgomes32

2-4 months ago i would've agreed. Getting 4* just isn't the issue, the covers and CP are all there. The problem is Iso.... Right now i'm saving iso to champ Cho before the extra cover expires in 12 days, yesterday i had to sell two extra IW covers (had to choose one or the other to champ ) and just now pulled a extra Punisher cover (3*, but still, 129 to champ is 150k+iso). In short: it doesn't matter if you have the covers without the iso to level up.

ClydeFrog76

homeinvasion wrote:

san-mpq wrote:

3) For the top tier players (see: Pay To Win), this is a negligible change, and unlikely to alter anything in their day.

As a player that paid $5,000 for my roster I would be demanding a refund if you picked up the same roster for free.

Whale tears sure are salty.

smkspy

acescracked wrote:

Skygazing wrote:

Honestly ISO is what really needs a boost. Yes 4* covers daily would be nice, but without more ISO they're functionally useless.

I'm on day 685 with no notable 5*s and 13 champed 4*s, which make up the bulk of my teams. I have 10 fully covered but unleveled 4*s (plus a handful at 11 or 12 covers) and that number only seems to be getting bigger.

It sucks having undercovered and therefor unusable characters sitting on your roster, but what sucks more is having fully covered ones that are still unusable because of what it takes to actually level them.

You are correct, for most regular players 4* covers aren't the issue. We play events and progress. Once a solid 3* roster built, 4* covers start to come in. Generally after time or whaling has passed most regular players find themselves ISO poor and lack of 4* covers isn't the problem.

The OP admitted to playing no PvP, occasional DDQ, didn't specify how much pve and is shocked that he can't progress. But is requesting an *ASAP* change that will award premium content of a free to play game for just signing in periodically.

Of course I'm a consumer just like everyone here and would benefit from such a change, but I'm a realistic consumer. Hell, if he can convince D3 to give their 2nd highest tier of covers away for free daily...props to him!

At 42 characters and rising, when does "premium" content stop being premium. 50 four star characters? 20 five stars characters? The inevitable six star tier?

tizian2015

Iso is the bottleneck to champ every 4*, not the choosen one. I think the same people, who saying in other threads, "you have to choose which one you champ, thats the game is all about" (when its about iso-problems) say here, there is no cover problem just iso.

Lampo

Well, that's what Clearance level is for: the stronger you are, the better the prizes, as in any other RPG game.
Winning 1000 ISO every match for a "2* player" would be too much, winning 1000 ISO every match for a "4* player" is even too few.
Once they will adjust properly the rewards for your own level, everything is gonna get better

thanos8587

homeinvasion wrote:

san-mpq wrote:

3) For the top tier players (see: Pay To Win), this is a negligible change, and unlikely to alter anything in their day.

As a player that paid $5,000 for my roster I would be demanding a refund if you picked up the same roster for free.

if you had been paying attention before spending your money youd have seen that money buys time in this game, NOT a permanent advantage. in time (albeit in many cases alot of time) people will catch you. all you get for your money is an amount of time rofl stomping people. enjoy it while it lasts.

and things have always gotten easier to obtain in this game over time, be it covers at each star level, cp even iso, all have been made easier to come by as the game has gone on. you spend money at your own risk in this game, things are always changing.

ZeiramMR

A couple notes on my math:

1) To the people who said an average player does less than what I said in my example, you're right. I was trying to show someone who does 4 clears when they feel like it without "optimal grinding", and PVP without shield pushing to 1200. I specifically chose to say "middle of the road" instead of "average" thinking of time engagement when I typed that post, but even that term was not the best for the example I was presenting.

And BTW, there's nothing wrong with having a smaller time investment in the game. Heck, I don't reach the level of engagement that I quoted. I maybe hit the final progression in Story about 80% of the time, and play to the 900 in PVP maybe half the time? Depends on how much time I can spare in a given week and the event difficulty.

2) There was an assumption I didn't realize I was making on the Daily Reward number. That will be anywhere from just some CP to the roughly one cover equivalent I listed depending on what Day you are at... Legendary Tokens don't show up until about Day 900, CP amounts are lower at less than 2 years, and 4*/5* covers show up more rarely at lower numbers.

Last, I'm not sure if my second post came off as flippant san-mpq, but that wasn't my intention. I even had given rep back then to the people that responded for engaging in conversation in spite of their disagreement with me.

Calnexin

ClydeFrog76 wrote:

DFiPL wrote:

Selfishly, I'd love daily 4* DDQ with an additional cover opportunity daily.

How is that selfish? Pretty much everybody wants it.

It's selfish because it's player-focused. If the players get everything they want right away, the game dies. Devs need to eat, too.

smkspy

Calnexin wrote:

ClydeFrog76 wrote:

DFiPL wrote:

Selfishly, I'd love daily 4* DDQ with an additional cover opportunity daily.

How is that selfish? Pretty much everybody wants it.

It's selfish because it's player-focused. If the players get everything they want right away, the game dies. Devs need to eat, too.

Wait, give me a moment to comment, just threw up in my mouth a little bit.

Calnexin

tizian2015 wrote:

Do we have the same discussion before introducing 3*DDQ ? It´s really annoying, that players argue AGAINST more covers for a completely deluted pool. New players have no chance to get anywhere in this game without spending thousands. No new players means the end, not now, but in the future. If you whales want to be all alone, fine, but dont complain about battling all the same people everytime. Divide et impera -> think about it.

I think this is an excellent point. This game will eventually end. It's on the devs to extend that timeline as long as possible for their own livelihood.

There's pressure from both ends. New players want easier access to higher tiers. Getting pounded in PvP and spending health packs to maintain PvE isn't all that fun. The dropout rate is probably high.

Older players want the satisfaction of having earned their stripes. The years of effort they put in would be insulted with rapid access to higher-tier play. Providing quick progression to the general player base might be their breaking point.

So as the dev, what do you do? Do you promote sales to new players to bring them up to speed, pissing off and maybe losing the business of the vets? Do you stay put and lose business from disenfranchised new blood?

It's a balancing act. Glad it's not my job.

Calnexin

ClydeFrog76 wrote:

homeinvasion wrote:

san-mpq wrote:

3) For the top tier players (see: Pay To Win), this is a negligible change, and unlikely to alter anything in their day.

As a player that paid $5,000 for my roster I would be demanding a refund if you picked up the same roster for free.

Whale tears sure are salty.

Like it or not, someone who spends $5k on the game is providing significant support. They deserve an advantage.

acescracked

smkspy wrote:

acescracked wrote:

Skygazing wrote:

Honestly ISO is what really needs a boost. Yes 4* covers daily would be nice, but without more ISO they're functionally useless.

I'm on day 685 with no notable 5*s and 13 champed 4*s, which make up the bulk of my teams. I have 10 fully covered but unleveled 4*s (plus a handful at 11 or 12 covers) and that number only seems to be getting bigger.

It sucks having undercovered and therefor unusable characters sitting on your roster, but what sucks more is having fully covered ones that are still unusable because of what it takes to actually level them.

You are correct, for most regular players 4* covers aren't the issue. We play events and progress. Once a solid 3* roster built, 4* covers start to come in. Generally after time or whaling has passed most regular players find themselves ISO poor and lack of 4* covers isn't the problem.

The OP admitted to playing no PvP, occasional DDQ, didn't specify how much pve and is shocked that he can't progress. But is requesting an *ASAP* change that will award premium content of a free to play game for just signing in periodically.

Of course I'm a consumer just like everyone here and would benefit from such a change, but I'm a realistic consumer. Hell, if he can convince D3 to give their 2nd highest tier of covers away for free daily...props to him!

At 42 characters and rising, when does "premium" content stop being premium. 50 four star characters? 20 five stars characters? The inevitable six star tier?

Why would number of four or five stars affect their premium status? I would think a six star tier would. I don't see your point there.

Covers & token packs are d3's main source of revenue. Covers are a resource the players want and it's a resource they want the players to pay for, so it's a constant battle.

broll

I think what's more important is that it would take some of the bite out of 4* RNG. 3* DDQ is a reliable pattern. In my spreadsheet I can tell you that on 12/11 Iron Fist Purple will be the cover. This allows you to plan more effectively who to champ and who not to when you're looking at an RNG pile. I want 4* DDQ more for that structure than anything.

broll

acescracked wrote:

smkspy wrote:

At 42 characters and rising, when does "premium" content stop being premium. 50 four star characters? 20 five stars characters? The inevitable six star tier?

Why would number of four or five stars affect their premium status? I would think a six star tier would. I don't see your point there.

I presume when he said premium, he really meant rarity. The s reflect rarity not power. If there are more 4 s than 3 doesn't it no longer make sense? 4 s are now less rare than 3 s, which doesn't jell with the whole idea of = rarity. If the LTs are supposed to have the rarer characters, 5 & 3 might be more appropriate until a 6 comes out

However, the 4 rarity also comes from scarily of the covers, 4 DDQ would continue to make them less rare. Not saying it's bad, but it's interesting to think about.

GurlBYE

homeinvasion wrote:

san-mpq wrote:

3) For the top tier players (see: Pay To Win), this is a negligible change, and unlikely to alter anything in their day.

As a player that paid $5,000 for my roster I would be demanding a refund if you picked up the same roster for free.

Well you already have it, you didn't pay for exclusivity, you paid to get it immediately.