[edit] Randomness and Luck is good for this game

bbigler

Crnch73 wrote:

I think from a pure numbers standpoint, here is the issue: when randomness takes place, it has to be done in higher volume. Sure, you can roll a die and that is a rand-mod-6 (plus one). However, think of a board game where you roll the die 10 times and never get to move. How often would you keep playing the game when your progress is halted no matter what you do?

I have played my fair share of video games throughout my life, and I have written crude software to make simple games. I have written code that simulates Monopoly. There are plenty of fun games that do (and plenty that do not) rely on some randomness. But you get to roll the dice every turn, and something generally happens as a result of that roll. And when you play a game, for example, where you create a character and have to earn weapons and armor. Usually, if you get items that you don't want or need, you can use them to earn levels towards a new item. Nothing goes to waste, and yes... selling a 4* cover you can't use because you got the same color over and over and over... that is going to waste for 1000 ISO. But if I pulled a helmet in a different game, I could usually try to forge it with other items and work towards a better helmet. Or sell it for XP.

The mechanics of this game probably worked much better with a small character pool. Now that we have 5 tiers, and soooo many characters in total, the randomness needs to be tweaked. I have my ghost rider at 4/5/0, but I keep getting red covers (up to 20 reds for him so far). Rather than sell them for 1000 ISO, there should be a mechanic where I can use each subsequent red cover to earn a "dot" on my ghost rider, and every 5 "dots" means I can turn that into any color I want for that character. That allows for RNG to still take place, but does not make you stand completely still after hours of play.

TL;DR Randomness is ok when in high volume to make up for wasted time, either by making drops more frequent or covers/tokens less expensive. We need a new system to make sure covers aren't wasted, because anything 4* or above is solely reliant on RNG. It takes more time to earn the wasted cover than it would 1000 ISO.

OK, I agree with you. It would be better if we could swap out covers that we already have 5 of and the character is not fully covered yet, such as 5/5/2 situations. But in that situation you still have the option to purchase the missing cover with CP, champ the character and use the extra cover you got as a champ reward. So, technically, there's a mechanic in place to not waste covers, even though it is not an efficient use of CP. But if your character is 4/5/0, then you don't have the option to purchase the missing covers with CP, which I agree is frustrating and should be changed.

bbigler

Calnexin wrote:

bbigler wrote:

Think about every board game ever invented and you'll find that luck is purposely built into the game.

Not every one. Try Puerto Rico. Or Diplomacy. Or Chess.

Maybe not Diplomacy. You tend to lose friends.

Randomness is not required to make a game. It evens the playing field. Some games overuse it to the extent that it drowns out any sense of strategy. Others sprinkle it in, relying on largely average results but affording an opportunity for dramatic play.

As others have already eloquently stated, the randomness in this game is in tile drops, and that allows for plenty of dramatic play. Randomness in the meta seems wrong. Most games allow you to progress with effort. That's certainly there in the form of Iso, but you're capped on any given character until the dice favor you. The only reason it's there is to coerce sales. It's gambling. Buy enough tokens so the odds favor you when you start pulling that lever.

In fairness, it's gotten a lot better. The introduction of 4* covers in SCL makes that tier accessible to anyone who has been putting in effort and does already have developed lower-tier rosters. The random path to the endgame is really just 5* at this point. I went from zero useable 4* to 9 champs in ~ 5 months, but it wouldn't have been possible if I hadn't been putting in the time - champing 3*, farming 2*. That part wasn't random at all. Doing that removes randomness on those tiers by making the RNG pull irrelevant. When every cover is useful, you always gain.

Randomness in tile drops doesn't make a big difference in the overall game. Winning a match super fast or losing one hardly makes a difference in your overall progression in the game. Even if you were shield hopping in PvP, a random loss hurts, but it doesn't stop your overall progression. You play enough matches that it all evens out and doesn't matter.

As for the 5* tier, I believe the developers purposely made 5*s so overpowered and hard to obtain in order to keep people playing the game, always having something to shoot for. If someone does champ all 5*s, then there is no higher goal and they would eventually quit, which is why d3 keeps releasing new characters. The finish line keeps moving so that no one can get there and everyone keeps playing. Whether that was their original intention or not, that's what they are doing. So, I believe 5* progression is supposed to be slow so that few people get there (and then possibly quit).

GurlBYE

bbigler wrote:

Calnexin wrote:

bbigler wrote:

Think about every board game ever invented and you'll find that luck is purposely built into the game.

Not every one. Try Puerto Rico. Or Diplomacy. Or Chess.

Maybe not Diplomacy. You tend to lose friends.

Randomness is not required to make a game. It evens the playing field. Some games overuse it to the extent that it drowns out any sense of strategy. Others sprinkle it in, relying on largely average results but affording an opportunity for dramatic play.

As others have already eloquently stated, the randomness in this game is in tile drops, and that allows for plenty of dramatic play. Randomness in the meta seems wrong. Most games allow you to progress with effort. That's certainly there in the form of Iso, but you're capped on any given character until the dice favor you. The only reason it's there is to coerce sales. It's gambling. Buy enough tokens so the odds favor you when you start pulling that lever.

In fairness, it's gotten a lot better. The introduction of 4* covers in SCL makes that tier accessible to anyone who has been putting in effort and does already have developed lower-tier rosters. The random path to the endgame is really just 5* at this point. I went from zero useable 4* to 9 champs in ~ 5 months, but it wouldn't have been possible if I hadn't been putting in the time - champing 3*, farming 2*. That part wasn't random at all. Doing that removes randomness on those tiers by making the RNG pull irrelevant. When every cover is useful, you always gain.

Randomness in tile drops doesn't make a big difference in the overall game.

So randomness in tile drops has no effect on crash of the titans.

No randomness and luck aren't essential to any game video game or board games.

Look at fighting games.

look at most strategy games

It CAN be an element, but doesn't have to.

bbigler

Fightmastermpq wrote:

The best games use randomness to vary the gameplay, but the game is balanced so that you can alter your strategy based on the random events that happen to you to emerge victorious without getting lucky. Games that are frequently determined more by the roll of the dice than from strategy don't stand the test of time for me.

From a video game perspective this game lacks repeatable content. I try to say this every time it comes up hoping that it catches on and starts to resonate with the devs (although it hasn't in over a year, but I'm still trying). Luck-based progression is fine if you have a mechanism to overcome poor luck through repeated play. Think about a RPG dungeon crawler type game with randomly generated item drops. Someone could get lucky and have that OP weapon drop their first time, or they could keep playing that dungeon over and over 24/7 until they finally get that item they have been hoping for - it works because they can keep trying. In MPQ you can't keep trying. You basically get 1 LT pull per event and that's it. If you didn't get the cover you wanted you wait until the next event - meanwhile the 15% of the population that DID get that cover progresses past you and there is nothing you can do to catch up (except spend a boat-load of cash).

Imagine how terrible Zelda would have been if instead of walking up the steps to the Master Sword you got another shovel - the Mr. Fantastic of Zelda items - and had to continue on until the next dungeon fighting without it. You talked to your 7 friends and 1 of them got the Master Sword - all the other various items ranging in usefulness, but none as longed for as that Legendary Master Sword. Would you ever buy another Zelda game if your progression had been randomized like that? Probably only if you had the ability to redo that dungeon for another shot at the Master Sword, or knew you could catch up to that 1 friend if you just kept trying, but not if you got one shot at it and then the game suddenly become more challenging for you as you had to try to continue to progress without it - hoping there would be an event later that would give you another shot at it.

The progression in this game is so extremely slow, taking years, that random events that affect your progression will even out over time. In your Zelda example, the next week your friend gets the shovel and you get the sword. This is a very long road. Plus, it's best not to compare yourself to others anyway. Just be happy that you've improved.

GurlBYE

Calnexin wrote:

bbigler wrote:

Think about every board game ever invented and you'll find that luck is purposely built into the game.

Not every one. Try Puerto Rico. Or Diplomacy. Or Chess.

Maybe not Diplomacy. You tend to lose friends.

Randomness is not required to make a game. It evens the playing field. Some games overuse it to the extent that it drowns out any sense of strategy. Others sprinkle it in, relying on largely average results but affording an opportunity for dramatic play.

As others have already eloquently stated, the randomness in this game is in tile drops, and that allows for plenty of dramatic play. Randomness in the meta seems wrong. Most games allow you to progress with effort. That's certainly there in the form of Iso, but you're capped on any given character until the dice favor you. The only reason it's there is to coerce sales. It's gambling. Buy enough tokens so the odds favor you when you start pulling that lever.

In fairness, it's gotten a lot better. The introduction of 4* covers in SCL makes that tier accessible to anyone who has been putting in effort and does already have developed lower-tier rosters. The random path to the endgame is really just 5* at this point. I went from zero useable 4* to 9 champs in ~ 5 months, but it wouldn't have been possible if I hadn't been putting in the time - champing 3*, farming 2*. That part wasn't random at all. Doing that removes randomness on those tiers by making the RNG pull irrelevant. When every cover is useful, you always gain.

the 4 star tier is just as rng based. 1 of 41 covers every event isn't making a huge impact, it's the random draws that got you your champs, unless you considered 12 covers unuseable.

in fact it is impossible for you to have only gotten covers from progression in the last 5 months, and have gotten champs through it as the full cycle hasn't even happened.

bbigler

dsds wrote:

There is a huge difference between a board game and MPQ. A board game is meant to be played many times over in a span of one day. MPQ is meant to be played once over the span of months and years. You don't need that much RNG to make it replayable as it isn't supposed to be replayed.

1.) The fact that new characters get added every 2 weeks and that you can advance and use different characters makes it very replayable in terms of matches.
2.) Also don't forget there is a weekly boosted list, essentials, etc, that make it interesting and different.
The above 2 points is enough reason that the matches are replayable and different.

Pure reason for RNG is because gambling is addictive and it gets people to spend. If someone is on a streak, they may buy more to continue the streak. If someone is not on a streak, they may buy hoping to break the drought. Pure and simple, it's greed. It's like selling items at a store and one customer gets it at x price, while another gets it at y price. It's ridiculous and needs to stop.

Well, I don't doubt that they may be using gambling mentality to get people to spend money.

As for your other point, I was talking about randomness in personal progression, not the variety of daily game play. Of course, randomness in progression can affect your daily gameplay.

smkspy

Your entire analogy was built around comparing randomness in gameplay of other games to randomness in progression of this game. Moving your own goal posts.

bbigler

GurlBYE wrote:

bbigler wrote:

Calnexin wrote:

bbigler wrote:

Think about every board game ever invented and you'll find that luck is purposely built into the game.

Not every one. Try Puerto Rico. Or Diplomacy. Or Chess.

Maybe not Diplomacy. You tend to lose friends.

Randomness is not required to make a game. It evens the playing field. Some games overuse it to the extent that it drowns out any sense of strategy. Others sprinkle it in, relying on largely average results but affording an opportunity for dramatic play.

As others have already eloquently stated, the randomness in this game is in tile drops, and that allows for plenty of dramatic play. Randomness in the meta seems wrong. Most games allow you to progress with effort. That's certainly there in the form of Iso, but you're capped on any given character until the dice favor you. The only reason it's there is to coerce sales. It's gambling. Buy enough tokens so the odds favor you when you start pulling that lever.

In fairness, it's gotten a lot better. The introduction of 4* covers in SCL makes that tier accessible to anyone who has been putting in effort and does already have developed lower-tier rosters. The random path to the endgame is really just 5* at this point. I went from zero useable 4* to 9 champs in ~ 5 months, but it wouldn't have been possible if I hadn't been putting in the time - champing 3*, farming 2*. That part wasn't random at all. Doing that removes randomness on those tiers by making the RNG pull irrelevant. When every cover is useful, you always gain.

Randomness in tile drops doesn't make a big difference in the overall game.

So randomness in tile drops has no effect on crash of the titans.

No randomness and luck aren't essential to any game video game or board games.

Look at fighting games.

look at most strategy games

It CAN be an element, but doesn't have to.

Yes, that's true, but the reason I started this thread was to show people that random token pulls are good for the game because it seems like everyone complains about it. I personally don't have a problem with it, so I thought I would share my reasoning.

carrion_pigeons

bbigler wrote:

Yes, that's true, but the reason I started this thread was to show people that random token pulls are good for the game because it seems like everyone complains about it. I personally don't have a problem with it, so I thought I would share my reasoning.

Random token pulls would be good if they were random pulls from covers you need instead of random pulls from everything, and also if the possible pulls don't have such wide variance that it warps strategy. When it's from everything, the value of tokens goes down as you advance in the game, and the proportion of feel-bad moments rises out of control, which is terrible design. Championing helps with this once you actually get a character fully covered, but there are still an awful lot of feel-bad moments being created by unnecessary randomness. The fact that LTs are the main mode of progress for both the 4* tier and the 5* tier does warp strategy, as well. People hoarding tokens to hit particular windows when the odds are favorable and being materially disadvantaged whenever the odds change in a way they didn't expect, for example. It isn't good game design.

broll

bbigler wrote:

broll wrote:

bbigler wrote:

Nellobee wrote:

Chess.
A lot of games have chance, but not all. A lot of games have skill as a factor, but arguably not all (War, for example).

Yes, I realized Chess is all skill and war is all luck, but I'm looking at the majority of games. Games that become predictable, like many FPS missions, get boring over time and you quit.

That completely depends. An FPS done correctly is all about actual PvP (not what this came considers it ) and that randomness is what keeps playing the same map over and over again fresh. it's one of the reasons I'd love to see them at least attempt a true PvP mode.

Yes, PvP in FPS is not predictable, but PvE in FPS is, that's what I was referring to.

You completely missed my point, admittedly I poorly worded it. Most modern FPSs are designed to focus almost all their effort on PvP, as such it's expected that PvE sucks and is boring. The reason they chose to focus on PvP is exactly the thing we've been saying in this thread. Playing a live player is the good kind of random. Random only progression is the bad kind. Random done right, is good for a game. Random done wrong can kill it.

smkspy

Thanos and Dr strange pretty show that players want characters that they cover in a reasonable amount of time.

Because new characters are fun, when they're new and fresh. And few end up being meta characters like iceman, 3strange, and oml. Those guys are the exception and because progress with 4/5s is so random and slow, the devs themselves place greater emphasis on trying to get those gane defining covers over lesser 4s/5s.

Personally, I'd love to experiment with agent venom, spider woman, and drax. But my only experience with them is from essential nodes using one cover, which meant they didn't get used and now months later...all sitting with 2 covers...they are still useless and I've forgotten what they do or if they were fun.

So it's not about always just wanting the best characters, but about being able to actually play with characters we have rostered in, again, a reasonable amount of time.

fmftint

For casual players sure RNG is fine, good even. For competitive players no, RNG is the worst progression model possible. Good luck means you stay competitive, bad luck means you may as well give up

dsds

bbigler wrote:

dsds wrote:

There is a huge difference between a board game and MPQ. A board game is meant to be played many times over in a span of one day. MPQ is meant to be played once over the span of months and years. You don't need that much RNG to make it replayable as it isn't supposed to be replayed.

1.) The fact that new characters get added every 2 weeks and that you can advance and use different characters makes it very replayable in terms of matches.
2.) Also don't forget there is a weekly boosted list, essentials, etc, that make it interesting and different.
The above 2 points is enough reason that the matches are replayable and different.

Pure reason for RNG is because gambling is addictive and it gets people to spend. If someone is on a streak, they may buy more to continue the streak. If someone is not on a streak, they may buy hoping to break the drought. Pure and simple, it's greed. It's like selling items at a store and one customer gets it at x price, while another gets it at y price. It's ridiculous and needs to stop.

Well, I don't doubt that they may be using gambling mentality to get people to spend money.

As for your other point, I was talking about randomness in personal progression, not the variety of daily game play. Of course, randomness in progression can affect your daily gameplay.

Here's the thing you have to understand. These free to play games all have a ton of random draws in it for a reason. It's because it makes the most money. Not setting a price on an in game item and having for you to gamble for it is a huge money maker. No physical retailer could ever do that under the consumer protection laws.

Yeah for sure random progression can affect your daily game play. But I just stated my 2 points there saying that you don't need random personal progression, because you've got other things that make daily game play interesting. I get your points, random progression forces you to make teams that you otherwise wouldn't. If everyone got to choose, they would probably have a team of iceman, OML, and Medusa probably. But here's the thing, if they gave out more specific character covers, it wouldn't make everyone have the same teams because everyone else's life is random. So people would still have different teams due to their life schedule conflicting with events. Not everyone has time to play all the events

Also you can make it less random by awarding more covers. For instance, instead of awarding 3 elite tokens, they can award 2 covers and an elite token. Just a little bit of random would go a long way. You don't have to make random like the nightmare it is. The thing that I hate the most is that the LT tokens are so random between 4 or 5 star cards. At the very least make a token for 4 stars and one for 5 stars. Make the one for 5 stars extremely hard to get, but at least this guarantees you a 5 star.

bbigler

dsds wrote:

Here's the thing you have to understand. These free to play games all have a ton of random draws in it for a reason. It's because it makes the most money. Not setting a price on an in game item and having for you to gamble for it is a huge money maker. No physical retailer could ever do that under the consumer protection laws.

Yeah for sure random progression can affect your daily game play. But I just stated my 2 points there saying that you don't need random personal progression, because you've got other things that make daily game play interesting. I get your points, random progression forces you to make teams that you otherwise wouldn't. If everyone got to choose, they would probably have a team of iceman, OML, and Medusa probably. But here's the thing, if they gave out more specific character covers, it wouldn't make everyone have the same teams because everyone else's life is random. So people would still have different teams due to their life schedule conflicting with events. Not everyone has time to play all the events

Also you can make it less random by awarding more covers. For instance, instead of awarding 3 elite tokens, they can award 2 covers and an elite token. Just a little bit of random would go a long way. You don't have to make random like the nightmare it is. The thing that I hate the most is that the LT tokens are so random between 4 or 5 star cards. At the very least make a token for 4 stars and one for 5 stars. Make the one for 5 stars extremely hard to get, but at least this guarantees you a 5 star.

Here's some ideas then:
1) we have 4 types of Legendary tokens: each type contains 3 x 5* characters and 10-12 x 4* characters, so you can choose which pool to pull from
2) they do away with the 15% chance of a 5* and just make every 7th pull give you 1 of the 9 possible 5* covers (3 characters)
3) if you get a cover you don't need then you can swap it out for another random cover at the same tier level in that pool

This would maintain their random cover distribution, but make it much easier and less frustrating to fully cover the characters you need/want.

smkspy

I'd imagine that it would be really hard to track individual single pulls. I would just introduce a 10 pack with a guaranteed random 5 star for classics. I would leave latest alone, but remove many of the older 4s so that they are a truly latest token of 4s and 5s.

Pylgrim

firethorne wrote:

The game Go is at least 2500 years old, and is a game of pure abstract strategy, with no element of luck, or hidden information. Chess is another similar example, and can be traced back 1500 years. It is absurd To say an element of random luck is essential when we have clear exceptions standing the test of time for over a millennium.

The big difference, though, is that those games are not continuously maintained and updated and don't need to be monetised in order to feed the people doing it. You buy them once and never pay again for them, but the game will never change, for better or worse. It is been proven, sadly, that a random outcome is far more profitable than a guaranteed one due to inherent fallacious thinking of the human mind.

Now, I'm not saying that MPQ's use of RNG is perfect, far from it. But using Chess as an example is comparing apples to oranges.

GurlBYE

bbigler wrote:

dsds wrote:

Here's the thing you have to understand. These free to play games all have a ton of random draws in it for a reason. It's because it makes the most money. Not setting a price on an in game item and having for you to gamble for it is a huge money maker. No physical retailer could ever do that under the consumer protection laws.

Yeah for sure random progression can affect your daily game play. But I just stated my 2 points there saying that you don't need random personal progression, because you've got other things that make daily game play interesting. I get your points, random progression forces you to make teams that you otherwise wouldn't. If everyone got to choose, they would probably have a team of iceman, OML, and Medusa probably. But here's the thing, if they gave out more specific character covers, it wouldn't make everyone have the same teams because everyone else's life is random. So people would still have different teams due to their life schedule conflicting with events. Not everyone has time to play all the events

Also you can make it less random by awarding more covers. For instance, instead of awarding 3 elite tokens, they can award 2 covers and an elite token. Just a little bit of random would go a long way. You don't have to make random like the nightmare it is. The thing that I hate the most is that the LT tokens are so random between 4 or 5 star cards. At the very least make a token for 4 stars and one for 5 stars. Make the one for 5 stars extremely hard to get, but at least this guarantees you a 5 star.

Here's some ideas then:
1) we have 4 types of Legendary tokens: each type contains 3 x 5* characters and 10-12 x 4* characters, so you can choose which pool to pull from
2) they do away with the 15% chance of a 5* and just make every 7th pull give you 1 of the 9 possible 5* covers (3 characters)
3) if you get a cover you don't need then you can swap it out for another random cover at the same tier level in that pool

This would maintain their random cover distribution, but make it much easier and less frustrating to fully cover the characters you need/want.

If this were in game it'd be a wonderful step.

it's not so much the randomness as it is just a shot in the dark.

What you suggest allows randomness while still working towards a goal.

As it stands, an LT is 1 of 50+ things that i need 13 of that currently have hard stops of 5 per color.

Fightmastermpq

bbigler wrote:

Fightmastermpq wrote:

The best games use randomness to vary the gameplay, but the game is balanced so that you can alter your strategy based on the random events that happen to you to emerge victorious without getting lucky. Games that are frequently determined more by the roll of the dice than from strategy don't stand the test of time for me.

From a video game perspective this game lacks repeatable content. I try to say this every time it comes up hoping that it catches on and starts to resonate with the devs (although it hasn't in over a year, but I'm still trying). Luck-based progression is fine if you have a mechanism to overcome poor luck through repeated play. Think about a RPG dungeon crawler type game with randomly generated item drops. Someone could get lucky and have that OP weapon drop their first time, or they could keep playing that dungeon over and over 24/7 until they finally get that item they have been hoping for - it works because they can keep trying. In MPQ you can't keep trying. You basically get 1 LT pull per event and that's it. If you didn't get the cover you wanted you wait until the next event - meanwhile the 15% of the population that DID get that cover progresses past you and there is nothing you can do to catch up (except spend a boat-load of cash).

Imagine how terrible Zelda would have been if instead of walking up the steps to the Master Sword you got another shovel - the Mr. Fantastic of Zelda items - and had to continue on until the next dungeon fighting without it. You talked to your 7 friends and 1 of them got the Master Sword - all the other various items ranging in usefulness, but none as longed for as that Legendary Master Sword. Would you ever buy another Zelda game if your progression had been randomized like that? Probably only if you had the ability to redo that dungeon for another shot at the Master Sword, or knew you could catch up to that 1 friend if you just kept trying, but not if you got one shot at it and then the game suddenly become more challenging for you as you had to try to continue to progress without it - hoping there would be an event later that would give you another shot at it.

The progression in this game is so extremely slow, taking years, that random events that affect your progression will even out over time. In your Zelda example, the next week your friend gets the shovel and you get the sword. This is a very long road. Plus, it's best not to compare yourself to others anyway. Just be happy that you've improved.

This is demonstrably false. You have to compare yourself to others because you compete against them in almost every game mode. The difference between a -5% and a +5% draw rate over a 2+ season hoard is HUGE......example. If we are talking about two players struggling to transition to the 5* tier it means that one player gets there literally MONTHS ahead of the other. That's months where one player is able to hit 1200 in PvP while the other isn't - making for even faster progression. And what if you saved up 300 latest pulls and end up without any usable 5*s compared to someone that ends up with 3 level 460s? Now what do you do as they move to classics? Continue to chase them for even longer? Meanwhile the guy with the +5% draw rate pounds you into the ground for the next 2+ seasons while you try to catch up.

In general I agree that luck is a big part of what makes games fun, but if there isn't anything in place to allow players to overcome really terrible luck it just becomes defeating and loses appeal.

Crnch73

the biggest problem with the randomness is that you can get nothing from it. Though the gambling mentality (and psychology behind it) can make us spend more money, eventually most people will walk away from a casino table if they lose enough. So... we have to win sometimes for them to get us hooked. Plus, I am actually willing to spend more money on things I can definitely get, than I am on things I have to gamble. I spend more on video games in a year than I do at a casino in a year.

My problem is that I haven't "won" with RNG in quite some time. I actually took it into my own hands and spent CP on specific 4* covers just to finish them off, because I was tired of pulling the same color AND the same character. with the amount of 4* characters, the pool is very diluted, and it needs to be treated as less amazing. The code is written so that 4* are pretty hard to come by, unless your roster is already really good, in which case you probably don't even need them as badly. I understand 5* being very hard to obtain, but 4* should be easier now that there are over 40 of them. They are a great tier, great characters, and a stepping stone... they are not the holy grail.

getting 4* from progression in higher SCL was a good start but certainly was not enough. In all honesty, I was hoping SCL8 would bring multiple 4* from progression, and maybe just up the total CP award for progression. 2-3 covers of a chosen 4* from progression, 35-40 total CP for final prog (10 split up at lower prog, and then 25 for the final?). That seems fairly reasonable and makes the jump to the next tier much easier.

Long story short, I still love this game overall. I just wish the developers were keeping up with their own new releases. Every new 4* released, they should make 4* slightly easier to get. You can't dilute the tier with sheer numbers and then still treat the entire tier as "super rare".

Calnexin

GurlBYE wrote:

the 4 star tier is just as rng based. 1 of 41 covers every event isn't making a huge impact, it's the random draws that got you your champs, unless you considered 12 covers unuseable.

in fact it is impossible for you to have only gotten covers from progression in the last 5 months, and have gotten champs through it as the full cycle hasn't even happened.

That's what I meant by "putting in the work". My champs have occurred as the covers come - but come they do over time, greatly assisted by the farms and champ rewards. There are now guaranteed avenues for obtaining 4* covers. Pulling from tokens is still random, yes, but there are many more ways to get them. RNG is still a factor, but not nearly as much as it used to be.

Now, that only truly works if you're willing and able to roster everything. Constantly drawing characters you don't want to keep negates their utility for the rest of your roster, and RNG hurts more.

I wasn't trying to imply that randomness isn't a factor. It's just much less of one, and no longer one I'd consider a barrier to people trying to climb into the 4* tier. It is the dominant factor in trying to build a 5* roster. You only have a 10% chance using the rarest resources in the game. No champ rewards, no progression. There is no slow build opportunity - the only thing you can do is roll the dice and get lucky.