New Feature: Bonus Heroes! *Updated (3/1/17)

Pylgrim

whycantwesyncpc wrote:

Pylgrim wrote:

whycantwesyncpc wrote:

Pylgrim wrote:

Solution: pick one of the characters that are closer to be max-covered and you look the most forward to play with and make it a favourite. So instead of getting a smattering of 4*s that you may or may not care for, who are close or not to be max-covered, you get a good 4* of your choice max covered and champed much more quickly than you would have before. Then pick the next one you'd like to champ and so on. This will increase your competitiveness at much higher rates that complete randomness allowed in the past. All while getting more quickly fully covered the newer 4*s which include some of the best characters in the game!

The closest I have is maybe 6 covers. I have almost none of the twelve chosen ones rostered and 100hp. I'm going to hit that progression brick wall really fast. Unbreaking the game would be a far better solution

If this is the case, your complaint makes even less sense. If the highest 4* you have has 6 covers, (and assuming a somewhat even distribution for sake of the argument), you'd first get one cover of every 4* in the game (an ever-increasing number), before you'd get the second of any given character. Meaning that to get your 6-covered 4* to 13 covers, it would take you a theoretical 315 or so 4* pulls or almost 4,500 heroic tokens (I'm also assuming that you don't get that many Legendary tokens at your roster current status). Obviously, randomness doesn't work like that and you could get it much earlier or much later, but the mean is good enough to draw conclusions.

On the other hand, under current circumstances, you could make that 6-covered character your favourite and get 7 covers from only 140 4* pulls or less than 2,000 heroic tokens.

As for roster slots for newer characters... well that always has been an issue and all I can tell you is that once you become more competitive (by, for example, champing more quickly some good 4*s) your HP flow will greatly increase to the point that you will actually start coming head.

EDIT: With Anthony's new clarification things look even better. It's not 5% of your 3* or 4* pulls but 5% of all your pulls, so, according to Anthony, more like 17% of your 3* and 4* pulls. With that figure, you'd get your 7 covers from only ~700 heroic tokens.

It's still pure stupid. I have almost none of the chose rostered. I have a large number of the earlier ones rostered. Actually being able to use covers pulled is better than drawing and letting them rot. Why would I want to champ a single 4*, it's just going to screw up scaling for the rest of my roster. Of course this is greedy devs trying to force us to pony up for hero points to roster the new characters. Pure greed, nothing else. If this was about making it easier to separate characters as things get diluted they wouldn't lock the old ones away. Why don't we just be honest about the flat out greed?

I'm going to have to ask you to explain exactly how your gameplan before this feature was better. As I just explained, going by pure chance, it would take you literal thousands of tokens to get a given 4* that you want to champ to 13 covers. (In all fairness, it's much less than that because we can also get covers from 3* champs and placement and progression rewards in events, but that's something that counts towards both models.) The only negative change that you can point to is that you now will feel "forced" to roster the newest 4*s since you'll be drawing them more regularly (solution: sell your old, bad 4* characters that have 2 or less covers to make room for them since you won't be able to randomly draw them anymore, anyway). Other than that, your gameplan towards transition has improved as you can surgically target which old 4*s you want to advance. Think that choosing only 1 will break your scaling? Then pick 3 or 5. It will be slower, but still, more reliable than the old method allowed.

Vhailorx wrote:

rixmith wrote:

This change looks great for me. I have all the older 4*'s champed, and now I can easily get the newer ones up to the level where they can win their DDQ and get champed. I've spend a couple hundred CP and pulled a bonus 5* and a bonus 4*, and gotten a bonus 3* from a LR Standard Token. So far it looks great to me.

Have you ever seen a 370 cyclops or Rulk? And when devastating at that level. Amd whem boosted FROM 370, they are easily better than any 5* in the game. Now even fewer players will ever have a chance to see a champ 4* above level 320, let alone 370. That is the downside to this change, and it's a very big one. Now there are clearly some upsides to this set of changes too.

Do you want a level 370 Rulk? Now it is EASIER to achieve that than before. Take a moment and do the maths for yourself and tell me the estimate of pulls you'd need to get a 100 Rulks under the old model. I'll wait. (And yes, I know that you mean more than just Rulk but still, ask yourself how many of the pulls towards max-champing Rulk and all the other good characters would be "wasted" on the characters that you don't really care that much for under the previous model.)

astrp3

Wumpushunter wrote:

So everyone so far that thinks this is a good idea has already championed a ton of characters but those who just started will almost never champion certain great characters. This is an unnecessary change and hurts my interest in continuing with this game.

I don't have any 4*s champed, or even usable, and I am OK with the change. I have about 30 4* rostered and the most covers I have for one of them is 8. There are only 4 I've never had a cover for (not counting Devil Dino - haven't been playing long enough to get him) but have never had a Hulkbuster cover, so the change couldincrease my chance of getting him.

It's not as good for me for the 3*s. I have half of them championed, but most of the ones I don't are in the bottom half, and the 20 in the stores are mostly in the top half, but I'm still OK with the change, since I can now get more covers for the two top-ten characters I haven't champed.

zulux21

broll wrote:

zulux21 wrote:

So, champ the new characters before focusing on champing all of the old?

That's the problem. This game is a never ending stream of new. There will never be a chance to focus on the old.

then only pay attention to the old you care about?
it's like the entire point of this change.

you can pick and choose which old characters you still care about and still get covers for them, at a slower rate than the new but you still get to ignore everyone you don't care about if you want to. (and if you only want covers for 1-2 4* this new system is faster than the old to get covers for them)

there are only a select few old characters that are really competitive, and as time goes on we will continue to get stronger and stronger new characters as they need to make people want them over the old. the focus has always been on the new, now you just have a choice on focusing the old.

Roguewookie26

So after reading the new breakdown. This is still one of the worst ideas in a long history if bad ideas by this game. They basically said in the breakdown they mislead everyone with the bonus cover percentages. Was that common core math? And all this 1 in 20 stuff sound great. But its an independant chance each time. You could pull 100 4* and never get a bonus cover. Its still all rng. This was the "big thing" that kept them from working on a pretty much game wide player request? Why not just give us a swap system or a colorless cover pull? Why not try just one time to make your player base happy and earn some much needed goodwill? Why does it always have to be like this? Youve already lost a big chuck of vets with your prior changes. And your not doing great on drawing new players in....maybe its time to listen to your players for a change. I agree with the previous posters. Im done spending on this game. If their desire is make people spend more they are going about ut in the exact opposite way they should be.

jredd

how are we to continue to add champ levels to characters who no longer appear in the token pool?

it's obviously still early here, but i'm really skeptical about this being a positive change.

you know what woulda been just fine and met with the approval of a large chunk of the player base? COLOURLESS COVERS!!

we've only been asking for these for how long now. and then we get this...

zulux21

Roguewookie26 wrote:

So after reading the new breakdown. This is still one of the worst ideas in a long history if bad ideas by this game. They basically said in the breakdown they mislead everyone with the bonus cover percentages. Was that common core math? And all this 1 in 20 stuff sound great. But its an independant chance each time. You could pull 100 4* and never get a bonus cover. .

its very basic math and called odds.
go buy a lotto scratch off ticket sometime. they will break down your odds there to saying that you have a 1:9 chance of getting $1 ect and like a 1:4.61 overall.

buying 5 tickets doesn't mean you will have at least one winner, it means over the entire run of the whole game that every 1 in 4.61 tickets you should have a winner. (aka if you had 461 total tickets in the run of the lotto game there would be 100 total winners spread out between all of them, and could have multiple winners in a row, or even a gap of 50+ losers)

it's just how lotto odds are done.
it's not suddenly different than having a 15% chance for a 5* as before, they just have it represented in odds instead of percent (for 5* they have 1 in 7 which is actually a little over 14% but still.

jredd wrote:

how are we to continue to add champ levels to characters who no longer appear in the token pool?

by making them a favorite character so when you get a bonus cover their cover will show up?

whycantwesyncpc

[/quote]

I'm going to have to ask you to explain exactly how your gameplan before this feature was better. As I just explained, going by pure chance, it would take you literal thousands of tokens to get a given 4* that you want to champ to 13 covers. (In all fairness, it's much less than that because we can also get covers from 3* champs and placement and progression rewards in events, but that's something that counts towards both models.) The only negative change that you can point to is that you now will feel "forced" to roster the newest 4*s since you'll be drawing them more regularly (solution: sell your old, bad 4* characters that have 2 or less covers to make room for them since you won't be able to randomly draw them anymore, anyway). Other than that, your gameplan towards transition has improved as you can surgically target which old 4*s you want to advance. Think that choosing only 1 will break your scaling? Then pick 3 or 5. It will be slower, but still, more reliable than the old method allowed.[/quote]

I haven't really started on the 4* yet, but I figure I will do it the same way I did 3* characters and go by what I get. Eventually I will start leveling, likely enough to bring them to a comparable level to my 3* so I don't screw up scaling, eventually I'll max out and champ based on what I've got. I'm not one of the people that wants to rush to be stuck using 3 characters for everything and Not looking forward to being stuck with lots of unusable covers because I'm locked out the non-chosen ones and don't have to resources to either roster or lvl the chosen ones. I am not selling anyone, and if I would it would be fake characters like Peggy or marvels dumb **** like spider-Gwen/gwenpool and TA hulk. Don't care about the quality in game

Vhailorx

zulux21 wrote:

Aside from this initial period where there are suddenly 12 characters that have much higher odds it won't be much of an issue. and in general the new characters are more useful than most of the older ones anyways so you want to be focusing on champing them to remain competitive.

but sure you might miss out on a few champ rewards during the process, you will also however have more iso because of it since 5% of the time worst case you just get bonus iso in the form of a cover.

I mean missing champ rewards is sad, but at the same time everyone always complains that it is iso iso iso they need, and champ levels don't give you extra iso, just other things, this system does increase iso a bit as well as allow you to focus on certain characters.

in the long run this should be better for pretty much everyone. But hey that is just my view. I still won't give this company a penny due to them still screwing over steam users, but I really don't get the anger with this change. I suppose people just like to hate change.

4* champ levels don't offer iso? I direct you, sir or madam, to champ level 273, which offers 2.5k iso. And the rewards only go up from there. Selling a 4* cover is always a net loss relative to a 4* champ level. You are losing out on 2.5k or more iso, 50 or more HP, 3 or more CP, or an LT. And this change will result in many players losing out on a pretty large number of champ levels over time. Yes, it's nice to be able to target specific character. But the favorites system did not have to be tied to this token pool change. They are unrelated systems. And the net effect for players is probably a slight to moderate negative (though it's still early. things could definitely turn out to be a bit better or worse than I anticipate). But please don't just look at the best elements of this change and say "I like those, so the change must be good."

Demi has done this before. Remember when they changed the scoring/scaling system in PVE? And half the players said "I like that I don't see lower point totals if I grind consecutively now, so this is good," and the other half said "but wait, anyone who wanted top 50 before could do it while playing on any schedule even with the old system, so the only effect this change has is to make top 20 grinders play an even more demanding grinding schedule." And now what do we have now? A more demanding grind schedule, and anyone who wants top 50 can get it playing however they want . . just like they could before the change. Demi almost always ties bad news to some other, shiny bit of good news. Don't let them distract you from the whole picture.

And note: the 5* odds are still 15%. For some stupid reason demi decided to switch to listing the odds as ratios, and ~1:7 (NOT 1:7, but ~1:7) is the closest whole number approximation of 15% that keeps a "1" in the numerator.

jredd

zulux21 wrote:

Roguewookie26 wrote:

So after reading the new breakdown. This is still one of the worst ideas in a long history if bad ideas by this game. They basically said in the breakdown they mislead everyone with the bonus cover percentages. Was that common core math? And all this 1 in 20 stuff sound great. But its an independant chance each time. You could pull 100 4* and never get a bonus cover. .

its very basic math and called odds.
go buy a lotto scratch off ticket sometime. they will break down your odds there to saying that you have a 1:9 chance of getting $1 ect and like a 1:4.61 overall.

buying 5 tickets doesn't mean you will have at least one winner, it means over the entire run of the whole game that every 1 in 4.61 tickets you should have a winner.

it's just how lotto odds are done.
it's not suddenly different than having a 15% chance for a 5* as before, they just have it represented in odds instead of percent (for 5* they have 1 in 7 which is actually a little over 14% but still.

jredd wrote:

how are we to continue to add champ levels to characters who no longer appear in the token pool?

by making them a favorite character so when you get a bonus cover their cover will show up?

why would i do that? if i'm getting a bonus cover i'd like to get it for a character i still need covers for. get a champ level cover for an old character. then get a bonus cover for the new one. that makes more sense to me.

jredd

Vhailorx wrote:

the favorites system did not have to be tied to this token pool change.

pretty much this.

zulux21

Vhailorx wrote:

4* champ levels don't offer iso? I direct you, sir or madam, to champ level 273, which offers 2.5k iso. And the rewards only go up from there. Selling a 4* cover is always a net loss relative to a 4* champ level.

over the entire run of a 4* champ you only earn enough extra iso compared to selling to cover the original champ charge you paid. thus why I said champ levels don't give you iso, because in the long run they don't, they give you the iso you normally would get for selling the covers.

you will get a little bit of extra iso overall from champing due to selling tokens and what not, but it doesn't straight up give you more iso then merely selling covers in the long run. you will easily get more overall iso from selling bonus covers from the new system then you would from champ levels.

now I won't disagree that champ levels aren't worth it, the other resources are great. but in the long run those other resources are meaningless as it all comes down to iso.

so if you want to talk strictly the long run, the new system that nets you a little bit more iso compared to champ levels would be better no?

I mean for me I am trying to keep a nice balanced roster and this limited token thing is really going to screw up my 3 stars but w/e overall it means I can actually build the characters I want, and maybe before the game shuts down I can actually get an OML red cover now. before I wasn't sure I could.

zulux21

jredd wrote:

how are we to continue to add champ levels to characters who no longer appear in the token pool?

by making them a favorite character so when you get a bonus cover their cover will show up?[/quote]

why would i do that? if i'm getting a bonus cover i'd like to get it for a character i still need covers for. get a champ level cover for an old character. then get a bonus cover for the new one. that makes more sense to me.[/quote]

and that is your choice. just saying if you want more champ levels of a given character you can do that with the favorites system.

edit: odd. I could have sworn I was in the edit not a new post o.O

jredd wrote:

Vhailorx wrote:

the favorites system did not have to be tied to this token pool change.

pretty much this.

the favorite system is clearly introduced as a way to be able to do the token pool change. a change that has been needed for a long time as the pools are getting to diluted.

yes they could have done something like the favorites on their own and if they did it may have been better. but it's still an in general improvement even for old characters for getting what you want (higher odds than the whole pool being there), and overall an improvement for getting more 3-5* characters.

jredd

another question. if we were to pull a 6th specific colour cover for a 5* from a bonus draw will qs change the colour of the cover for us? or because it's a 'bonus draw' we should just be happy with the 2000 iso...

whycantwesyncpc

zulux21 wrote:

Vhailorx wrote:

4* champ levels don't offer iso? I direct you, sir or madam, to champ level 273, which offers 2.5k iso. And the rewards only go up from there. Selling a 4* cover is always a net loss relative to a 4* champ level.

over the entire run of a 4* champ you only earn enough extra iso compared to selling to cover the original champ charge you paid. thus why I said champ levels don't give you iso, because in the long run they don't, they give you the iso you normally would get for selling the covers.

you will get a little bit of extra iso overall from champing due to selling tokens and what not, but it doesn't straight up give you more iso then merely selling covers in the long run. you will easily get more overall iso from selling bonus covers from the new system then you would from champ levels.

now I won't disagree that champ levels aren't worth it, the other resources are great. but in the long run those other resources are meaningless as it all comes down to iso.

so if you want to talk strictly the long run, the new system that nets you a little bit more iso compared to champ levels would be better no?

I mean for me I am trying to keep a nice balanced roster and this limited token thing is really going to screw up my 3 stars but w/e overall it means I can actually build the characters I want, and maybe before the game shuts down I can actually get an OML red cover now. before I wasn't sure I could.

Actually champing does help gain extra iso. Every champ level gives xp towards shield ranks, selling covers doesn't. every rank gives a nice chunk of iso. Again, why do we have to be locked out of more than half the characters available to pick someone to focus on. They wanted to lock the roster to try and force people into buying roster spots for the chosen 12. The bonus hero part (these are two separate things) was to keep people from revolting. I can think of at least 2 way they could do this that would make everyone in the player base happy. (although it wouldn't make the people trying to force us to buy roster spots any happier, so I guess they would never work due to not fitting the greed requirement)

shusheshe

While getting a 'bonus' is nice, this system puts early/mid 4* vet transitioners in an incredibly awkward position. I am well aware that I'm lucky that I've got certain top tier, 'older' 4*s champed/done already like iceman, 4cyclops, teen!jean, red hulk. But I'm still missing some good ones like quake and max!pun.

So I'm supposed to depend solely on bonus heroes, progression and placement from now on? Or whale it from the vaults?

zulux21

whycantwesyncpc wrote:

[
Actually champing does help gain extra iso. Every champ level gives xp towards shield ranks, selling covers doesn't. every rank gives a nice chunk of iso. Again, why do we have to be locked out of more than half the characters available to pick someone to focus on. They wanted to lock the roster to try and force people into buying roster spots for the chosen 12. The bonus hero part (these are two separate things) was to keep people from revolting. I can think of at least 2 way they could do this that would make everyone in the player base happy. (although it wouldn't make the people trying to force us to buy roster spots any happier, so I guess they would never work due to not fitting the greed requirement)

fair enough on the champ thing (though even with that I think statistically the new system comes out a bit ahead as you will still only get like a one third to half of a shield level fully champing one 4*), but as for this being strictly focused on getting people to buy roster slots. I think that is just missing the point of this move.

this is clearly to work on fixing the diluted character pool.
before this change it was basically impossible to build a new character from 20CP draws (and other various draws not related to just whaling a character bonus odds token) now you can actually build new characters.

it's really not hard to get hp for roster slots at all. If a casual player like me can do it no problem, any serious player should have enough hp that it should be almost trivial to get a few roster slots if they don't buy tokens with HP.

jredd

zulux21 wrote:

jredd wrote:

how are we to continue to add champ levels to characters who no longer appear in the token pool?

by making them a favorite character so when you get a bonus cover their cover will show up?

why would i do that? if i'm getting a bonus cover i'd like to get it for a character i still need covers for. get a champ level cover for an old character. then get a bonus cover for the new one. that makes more sense to me.[/quote]

and that is your choice. just saying if you want more champ levels of a given character you can do that with the favorites system.

edit: odd. I could have sworn I was in the edit not a new post o.O

jredd wrote:

Vhailorx wrote:

the favorites system did not have to be tied to this token pool change.

pretty much this.

the favorite system is clearly introduced as a way to be able to do the token pool change. a change that has been needed for a long time as the pools are getting to diluted.

yes they could have done something like the favorites on their own and if they did it may have been better. but it's still an in general improvement even for old characters for getting what you want (higher odds than the whole pool being there), and overall an improvement for getting more 3-5* characters.[/quote]

while i will agree that the amount of 4* were causing some dilution, why not separate legendaries into 'latest' 'regular or just legendary' and then a 'classic'; put all the oldies in a separate pool and have it a 15 or 20 cp draw.

Vhailorx

Do you want a level 370 Rulk? Now it is EASIER to achieve that than before. Take a moment and do the maths for yourself and tell me the estimate of pulls you'd need to get a 100 Rulks under the old model. I'll wait. (And yes, I know that you mean more than just Rulk but still, ask yourself how many of the pulls towards max-champing Rulk and all the other good characters would be "wasted" on the characters that you don't really care that much for under the previous model.)

It's the bold part of your sentence where we part ways. I don't just want a single 370. I want a bunch of them. Under the old system, the only characters for whom I "wasted" a cover were those that I would not be able to champ fast enough for lack of iso. I was happy to get a champ level for any 4*. Hell, I even champed Fantastic when I had 6 expiring covers for him and no other clearly superior 4*s waiting to be champed. champing was a fairly player-friendly addition to the game, because it mitigated the downside of RNG token pulls. Now every character could potentially be turned into a useful resource farm with an initial iso investment. And the more you champed characters, the more productive tokens became.

My concern is that the new system will give me a nice 5% boost of targeted covers (yay!) but also turn an extra 15% or 20% of my 4* token pulls into unusable "wastes" because I can't champ the newest characters fast enough. That would be a net negative (Boo!).

Now it's possible that once we are 6 or 9 months into this system, it will turn out that I can collect 13 covers and enough iso to level a new 4* fast enough that I won't be overly burdened by the new system. And if it turns out to be true, then the new system may be more positive than I suspect, but I am a little skeptical. I would not be surprised if, in the long run, the net result of these changes was that where a player may once have had 40 4* champs at an average level of 300, the same player would now end up with something like 5-10 4* champs at level 350, and 30-35 champs at level 280. and I would personally prefer the former.

whycantwesyncpc

zulux21 wrote:

whycantwesyncpc wrote:

[
Actually champing does help gain extra iso. Every champ level gives xp towards shield ranks, selling covers doesn't. every rank gives a nice chunk of iso. Again, why do we have to be locked out of more than half the characters available to pick someone to focus on. They wanted to lock the roster to try and force people into buying roster spots for the chosen 12. The bonus hero part (these are two separate things) was to keep people from revolting. I can think of at least 2 way they could do this that would make everyone in the player base happy. (although it wouldn't make the people trying to force us to buy roster spots any happier, so I guess they would never work due to not fitting the greed requirement)

fair enough on the champ thing (though even with that I think statistically the new system comes out a bit ahead as you will still only get like a one third to half of a shield level fully champing one 4*), but as for this being strictly focused on getting people to buy roster slots. I think that is just missing the point of this move.

this is clearly to work on fixing the diluted character pool.
before this change it was basically impossible to build a new character from 20CP draws (and other various draws not related to just whaling a character bonus odds token) now you can actually build new characters.

it's really not hard to get hp for roster slots at all. If a casual player like me can do it no problem, any serious player should have enough hp that it should be almost trivial to get a few roster slots if they don't buy tokens with HP.

Only so much from champ levels on 1 4*, but what about champ levels from multiple characters. When you have trouble getting those champ levels for 3* that aren't worthy of being available it really hurts. Why do resources have to be taken away for something like this to happen?

No, this was not put in place to dilute the character pool. They can give you ways to get the characters you want without locking out over half the characters from those that want them. With the 4*'s why not split them like they do with the 5*? Why not let use just pick the ones to favorite as the bonuses alone would still help people get what they want if they want specific ones. Why limit token to only the 12 most recent only? Simple, this forces new character on you on a regular basis, plain and simple. It's nice you don't have a problem getting the hp. I'm a casual player too and I do have trouble. So I guess I'm not worthy of pulling tokens

Why split the 3 stars at all? They've added what, 2 in the last 2 years? Makes no sense other then to reduce champ rewards, which reduces 4* covers and hp's gained. Oh, making it tougher to keep up. Fork up the cash or get lost.

zulux21

whycantwesyncpc wrote:

With the 4*'s why not split them like they do with the 5*? Why not let use just pick the ones to favorite as the bonuses alone would still help people get what they want if they want specific ones. Why limit token to only the 12 most recent only? Simple, this forces new character on you on a regular basis, plain and simple. It's nice you don't have a problem getting the hp. I'm a casual player too and I do have trouble. So I guess I'm not worthy of pulling tokens

Why split the 3 stars at all? They've added what, 2 in the last 2 years? Makes no sense other then to reduce champ rewards, which reduces 4* covers and hp's gained. Oh, making it tougher to keep up. Fork up the cash or get lost.

really the 5* pool is just as much screwed up as the 4 star pool. with the low odds to get a 5* getting a classic 5* covered was going to be basically impossible anymore. the new way will help make sure you can at least slowly progress a 5* of your choosing. as for why limit it to 12.... well that means that character will be featured for about 6 months. as a casual player this should make you super happy as that is a good amount of time to get some pulls in. you can get what 10-20 pulls from the clash, and like 20 pulls from CP giving you a decent chance of getting at least one of each cover for the character. it's to allow people to actually build up new characters in a timely manor instead of taking forever (or needing to whale it).

and yes as a casual player you either have to choose to spend HP to buy roster slots or spend it on pulling tokens, you aren't worthy to be able to do both since you are a casual player.

as for why split the 3*s. I imagine that we are going to see a few more 3* added this year, likely paired up with some more 5* versions as they tend to go over fairly well. thus they are just prepping for that.

I don't see how limiting the 3* pool reduces champ rewards though. it allows you to go through those 20 3* easier, and build up some high level 3* more quickly. you get champ rewards for all of those, and if you reach max level on them you can always just start farming them like 2* *shrugs*

I am not saying the change is perfect, but in general it seems to be a step in the right direction. and I won't say that they couldn't do it better for the players, they could, but they have to balance that line where players are happy and they can still make money and keep people playing. the people in this forum seem upset, but my entire alliance is happy with the change as is all of my other friends that play *shrugs*

edit: I should note, at the very least they should introduce something like a legacy 20CP draw (aka have two different 20cp draws the current one and this one) that strictly has the retired characters and the 5*s. as that would fix most of the complaints I think.