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

GurlBYE

I feel like we're all more or less in agreement that no one hates the bonus heros overall and more so dislike the fact that half of 4's and 3's were locked.

Higher end players who wanted champ levels

and lower and players who want to share in the characters kicking everyone in the 4 meta around, ( cyclops, red hulk, jean, iceman etc)

Jaedenkaal

GurlBYE wrote:

I feel like we're all more or less in agreement that no one hates the bonus heros overall and more so dislike the fact that half of 4's and 3's were locked.

Higher end players who wanted champ levels

and lower and players who want to share in the characters kicking everyone in the 4 meta around, ( cyclops, red hulk, jean, iceman etc)

I think that's a good summary of the sentiment.

However. If, as a new player, you wanted to get a fully covered 4* Cyclops (assuming you got all the right colors the first time, although that doesn't really matter) and you had no way of acquiring him through progression, placement, or vaults, you would have to open a lot of legendary tokens. Previously, including Mordo, there were 44 4* characters available in legendary tokens.

You had an 85/44 = 1.931818% chance of getting a Cyclops cover every time you opened a legendary token. On average that means you would have to open 673 legendary tokens before you would get 13 Cyclops covers. (you'd also have 13 covers for every other 4*, plus ~101 5* covers, on average).

That's not taking into account dilution of odds by the addition of a new 4* every two weeks. If you don't start until there are 50 4*s in tokens, now you have to open ~765 legendary tokens.

Anyways, starting yesterday, as a new player with no 4* cyclops covers, you can select him as your favourite 4*. Now you only need to open ~306 legendary tokens before you get 13 bonus 4* covers, which are all Cyclops. That's less than half. (you'll also get about 22 covers of each of the 12 newest 4*s and about 48 5* covers, which includes 2-3 from bonus covers)

And those odds never change as new 4*s are added.

WEBGAS

Don't know if I am unlucky or there is an error
I have opened elite tokens and heroic tokens.....I pulled: :and a : ......but not a single bonus cover.
Is it possible? I thought I should have been credited with 4 bonus 3 covers and a 4 cover of my favourites , but instead ...nothing
Am I wrong? Aren't the bonus covers supposed to be credited each time you pull a 3 or a 4 from the packs?

Jaedenkaal

WEBGAS wrote:

Don't know if I am unlucky or there is an error
I have opened elite tokens and heroic tokens.....I pulled: :and a : ......but not a single bonus cover.
Is it possible? I thought I should have been credited with 4 bonus 3 covers and a 4 cover of my favourites , but instead ...nothing
Am I wrong? Aren't the bonus covers supposed to be credited each time you pull a 3 or a 4 from the packs?

In standard tokens you get a 3* bonus every time you pull a 3* cover. The odds of getting a 3* in standard tokens is apparently 1/43, but when that happens, you get 2

In Elite, Heroic, and Legendary tokens, you have a 5% chance of getting a bonus cover (normalized to account for all the 2*s in Elite and Heroic tokens. It's the full 5%).

But hey, you got a 4* cover out of only 5 tokens, so that's pretty good

SummerGlau

WEBGAS wrote:

Don't know if I am unlucky or there is an error
I have opened elite tokens and heroic tokens.....I pulled: :and a : ......but not a single bonus cover.
Is it possible? I thought I should have been credited with 4 bonus 3 covers and a 4 cover of my favourites , but instead ...nothing
Am I wrong? Aren't the bonus covers supposed to be credited each time you pull a 3 or a 4 from the packs?

there is a 5% chance per pull of a bonus 3 4 or 5 (no bonus 2's)
there is no "credited" and no guarantees
that said i got three bonus heroes from a heroic 10 pack (all 3 star although i did get Moon Knight black as well)
and IM40 broke the 200 barrier

NewMcG

whycantwesyncpc wrote:

What snarky, I'm sorry if I am a bad guy for wanting to play the characters that I want to play. I like characters that I like from the comics. I like Psylocke, Vision, Dr. Octopus, Captain America, Captain Marvel, Bullseye, Storm and Beast and use most of them on a daily basis. I don't care what the quality of the character in game is. I want to level them. I want my champ rewards. I want to be able to progress. I want to play the characters I want without dealing with rng in rng. I want the game to actually be playable and actually be able to progress. Of course I'm always going to have an inbalanced roster. If I am actually allowed to get champ rewards for all of my characters I can keep it close enough that characters remain usuable and I can get the chemp rewards I need. I have never gotten anything higher than a 2* from placement and likely never well. I get maybe one cover for a pve progression, that is going to get me far. DDQ is what 1 cover in over a month? Pathetic.

Sorry if I am really pissed at getting screwed over by the developers greed. You are ok with it and it work for you, great I am happy for you. I'm not happy that my last year of play has been turned into a total waste. I am not happy that I now have no hope of progression due to the gigantic brick resource wall they put in place to try and squeeze us for cash. I'm not happy that I'm being told in a round-about way that I am not welcome in this game anymore. Deal with it, because unless something changes I'm not getting happy anytime soon and when the season changes I'm going to consider myself kicked from the game if this doesn't get changed because I'm not going to let the devs strong arm me into paying to be allowed to progress

Question for you: What WOULD make you happy? You say you don't play enough to get significant placement rewards. You don't roster all the characters, and you say you don't even play enough to make 7k HP in less than "6 or 7 months". (I was out of HP a month ago from rostering two characters in a couple days, and I'm already approaching 4k without spending a dime on HP. And I'm not an elite player by any means.) You only want to play with your favorite characters regardless of whether they're good or not, and don't care about most new releases. You're not the typical player, yet want accommodations that target your circumstances specifically.

So what's the magic elixir to make you feel like you aren't "cheated"? Free cover for a character of your choice for every match you play? Free roster slots? Guaranteed 5 stars every day for even thinking about logging in? I just don't get what you're complaining about.

It's a game. The devs aren't making this out of charity. Things will either require your time or your money if you want to have them. You don't appear that you want to spend much of either, so don't be amazed that your experience may be a bit more limited than others who use more of either or both.

WEBGAS

Ok, so I have been lucky and unlucky at the same time

n25philly

New McG wrote:

whycantwesyncpc wrote:

What snarky, I'm sorry if I am a bad guy for wanting to play the characters that I want to play. I like characters that I like from the comics. I like Psylocke, Vision, Dr. Octopus, Captain America, Captain Marvel, Bullseye, Storm and Beast and use most of them on a daily basis. I don't care what the quality of the character in game is. I want to level them. I want my champ rewards. I want to be able to progress. I want to play the characters I want without dealing with rng in rng. I want the game to actually be playable and actually be able to progress. Of course I'm always going to have an inbalanced roster. If I am actually allowed to get champ rewards for all of my characters I can keep it close enough that characters remain usuable and I can get the chemp rewards I need. I have never gotten anything higher than a 2* from placement and likely never well. I get maybe one cover for a pve progression, that is going to get me far. DDQ is what 1 cover in over a month? Pathetic.

Sorry if I am really pissed at getting screwed over by the developers greed. You are ok with it and it work for you, great I am happy for you. I'm not happy that my last year of play has been turned into a total waste. I am not happy that I now have no hope of progression due to the gigantic brick resource wall they put in place to try and squeeze us for cash. I'm not happy that I'm being told in a round-about way that I am not welcome in this game anymore. Deal with it, because unless something changes I'm not getting happy anytime soon and when the season changes I'm going to consider myself kicked from the game if this doesn't get changed because I'm not going to let the devs strong arm me into paying to be allowed to progress

Question for you: What WOULD make you happy? You say you don't play enough to get significant placement rewards. You don't roster all the characters, and you say you don't even play enough to make 7k HP in less than "6 or 7 months". (I was out of HP a month ago from rostering two characters in a couple days, and I'm already approaching 4k without spending a dime on HP. And I'm not an elite player by any means.) You only want to play with your favorite characters regardless of whether they're good or not, and don't care about most new releases. You're not the typical player, yet want accommodations that target your circumstances specifically.

So what's the magic elixir to make you feel like you aren't "cheated"? Free cover for a character of your choice for every match you play? Free roster slots? Guaranteed 5 stars every day for even thinking about logging in? I just don't get what you're complaining about.

It's a game. The devs aren't making this out of charity. Things will either require your time or your money if you want to have them. You don't appear that you want to spend much of either, so don't be amazed that your experience may be a bit more limited than others who use more of either or both.

I don't want characters taken away from me. No vaulting. I'm giving them until the end of the season to come to their senses. If there isn't any kind of plan at least monday to make all characters available in tokens then it's clear they don't want me as a customer and I'll time my time and money elsewhere. I have no problem spending money and have spent plenty when there have been changes made to be friendly to casual players. This is a 100% toxic change made to try and force money out of us. Not cool. It's a shame as someone who has played every day for two years that a clear message is being sent that I am no longer welcome. It's just plain bad business.

astrp3

GurlBYE wrote:

I feel like we're all more or less in agreement that no one hates the bonus heros overall and more so dislike the fact that half of 4's and 3's were locked.

I agree that that seems to be the case for people posting on the forums, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it's true of the player base overall or even of all the players who read the forums. People who are dissatisfied may be much more likely to post than those who are indifferent or satisfied. It's the same issue as with voluntary polls, which can be inaccurate.

Ann Landers once surveyed her readers and found that 70% said they wouldn't have had kids if they did it all over again. Other, more properly designed polls showed that 91% of them WOULD have had kids if they did it all over again.

NewMcG

n25philly wrote:

It's just plain bad business.

And that can be true for you. It isn't a universal truth. I've got plenty of older 4* I can use more covers for, but I'll trade "I have to cover them via bonus covers" for "I can actually cover new characters after they release". The 20ish most recent 4* which mostly lie somewhere between 5-10 covers, leaving them basically unusable, would have benefited greatly from this being implemented a year ago.

Crowl

Jaedenkaal wrote:

You had an 85/44 = 1.931818% chance of getting a Cyclops cover every time you opened a legendary token. On average that means you would have to open 673 legendary tokens before you would get 13 Cyclops covers. (you'd also have 13 covers for every other 4*, plus ~101 5* covers, on average).

That's not taking into account dilution of odds by the addition of a new 4* every two weeks. If you don't start until there are 50 4*s in tokens, now you have to open ~765 legendary tokens.

Anyways, starting yesterday, as a new player with no 4* cyclops covers, you can select him as your favourite 4*. Now you only need to open ~306 legendary tokens before you get 13 bonus 4* covers, which are all Cyclops. That's less than half. (you'll also get about 22 covers of each of the 12 newest 4*s and about 48 5* covers, which includes 2-3 from bonus covers)

And those odds never change as new 4*s are added.

Those odds ignore all the other characters that you would also be collecting at a similar rate to cyclops though, if the newest 12 were clearly all top tier then this would be less of an issue, but while some are great, others are mediocre and the wasp is one of the worst in the game.

n25philly

New McG wrote:

n25philly wrote:

It's just plain bad business.

And that can be true for you. It isn't a universal truth. I've got plenty of older 4* I can use more covers for, but I'll trade "I have to cover them via bonus covers" for "I can actually cover new characters after they release". The 20ish most recent 4* which mostly lie somewhere between 5-10 covers, leaving them basically unusable, would have benefited greatly from this being implemented a year ago.

As I asked many times, other than as a cash grab is there one actual reason why they have to take away more than half the characters to do this?

NewMcG

n25philly wrote:

New McG wrote:

n25philly wrote:

It's just plain bad business.

And that can be true for you. It isn't a universal truth. I've got plenty of older 4* I can use more covers for, but I'll trade "I have to cover them via bonus covers" for "I can actually cover new characters after they release". The 20ish most recent 4* which mostly lie somewhere between 5-10 covers, leaving them basically unusable, would have benefited greatly from this being implemented a year ago.

As I asked many times, other than as a cash grab is there one actual reason why they have to take away more than half the characters to do this?

Because people will complain regardless, and whatever philosophy they're using for where the game is going works for them under this new method. If they did new 4 and 5* in the latest legendaries, and old 4 and 5* in the classic legendaries, some people would still be complaining to the effect of "well, I want only the old 4*, but I only want the new 5*? Why are you ruining my ability to build the exact roster I want?" There's no winning, particularly on this message board. The vocal minority on the forums aren't their typical players, and as such, shouldn't be the sole driving force behind their decisions.

n25philly

New McG wrote:

n25philly wrote:

New McG wrote:

n25philly wrote:

It's just plain bad business.

And that can be true for you. It isn't a universal truth. I've got plenty of older 4* I can use more covers for, but I'll trade "I have to cover them via bonus covers" for "I can actually cover new characters after they release". The 20ish most recent 4* which mostly lie somewhere between 5-10 covers, leaving them basically unusable, would have benefited greatly from this being implemented a year ago.

As I asked many times, other than as a cash grab is there one actual reason why they have to take away more than half the characters to do this?

Because people will complain regardless, and whatever philosophy they're using for where the game is going works for them under this new method. If they did new 4 and 5* in the latest legendaries, and old 4 and 5* in the classic legendaries, some people would still be complaining to the effect of "well, I want only the old 4*, but I only want the new 5*? Why are you ruining my ability to build the exact roster I want?" There's no winning, particularly on this message board. The vocal minority on the forums aren't their typical players, and as such, shouldn't be the sole driving force behind their decisions.

I'm willing to bet good money that the people for vaulting is the minority.

Crowl

New McG wrote:

Because people will complain regardless, and whatever philosophy they're using for where the game is going works for them under this new method. If they did new 4 and 5* in the latest legendaries, and old 4 and 5* in the classic legendaries, some people would still be complaining to the effect of "well, I want only the old 4*, but I only want the new 5*? Why are you ruining my ability to build the exact roster I want?" There's no winning, particularly on this message board. The vocal minority on the forums aren't their typical players, and as such, shouldn't be the sole driving force behind their decisions.

Obvious solution, they offer two versions of each token, one with the full roster of characters and one with the drastically truncated version.

As far as their philosophy, it is most likely due to them misunderstanding the reasons behind people hoarding LT and CP before spending them all in one go on latest legendaries tokens, they think it is just about getting the newest characters when it is about getting top tier characters covered in a timely fashion. This rationale would also apply to some of the new characters, but not all or even many of them as the quality of 4*s are far more variable.

Crowl

n25philly wrote:

I'm willing to bet good money that the people for vaulting is the minority.

You might lose that bet, plenty of people have been blinded by the bonus heroes and getting newer ones covered more readily parts of these changes to fully realise all the implications on things like championing and xp gain for SCL levels.

n25philly

Crowl wrote:

n25philly wrote:

I'm willing to bet good money that the people for vaulting is the minority.

You might lose that bet, plenty of people have been blinded by the bonus heroes and getting newer ones covered more readily parts of these changes to fully realise all the implications on things like championing and xp gain for SCL levels.

On the forums maybe, although there is plenty of negativity as well. I know in my alliance which is about half new players that many are early in their 3* transition many are not happy that they will likely never get a lot of characters.

Jaedenkaal

Crowl wrote:

Jaedenkaal wrote:

You had an 85/44 = 1.931818% chance of getting a Cyclops cover every time you opened a legendary token. On average that means you would have to open 673 legendary tokens before you would get 13 Cyclops covers. (you'd also have 13 covers for every other 4*, plus ~101 5* covers, on average).

That's not taking into account dilution of odds by the addition of a new 4* every two weeks. If you don't start until there are 50 4*s in tokens, now you have to open ~765 legendary tokens.

Anyways, starting yesterday, as a new player with no 4* cyclops covers, you can select him as your favourite 4*. Now you only need to open ~306 legendary tokens before you get 13 bonus 4* covers, which are all Cyclops. That's less than half. (you'll also get about 22 covers of each of the 12 newest 4*s and about 48 5* covers, which includes 2-3 from bonus covers)

And those odds never change as new 4*s are added.

Those odds ignore all the other characters that you would also be collecting at a similar rate to cyclops though, if the newest 12 were clearly all top tier then this would be less of an issue, but while some are great, others are mediocre and the wasp is one of the worst in the game.

Mmm nope, they're right in there. In fact, in the previous system it was meaningless to say that you were "collecting cyclops" through tokens because you'd get him at the same rate as everyone else. What you were doing was "collecting everyone", and the first one to hit champion first had way more to do with the variations in distribution or in which placement and progression rewards you earned (and this is still true, I suspect).

New system; I've also demonstrated that you'll get about 260 covers for the 12 characters available in the tokens at the time. If you hoard up and do them all at once you'll get about 22 covers for each of the 12 characters available at the time; if you do it over more than 2 weeks, you'll get a standard distribution of covers based on how long they were in the list while you were drawing, still 260 covers and still no more than 22 for any one character (on average).

Jaedenkaal

n25philly wrote:

Crowl wrote:

n25philly wrote:

I'm willing to bet good money that the people for vaulting is the minority.

You might lose that bet, plenty of people have been blinded by the bonus heroes and getting newer ones covered more readily parts of these changes to fully realise all the implications on things like championing and xp gain for SCL levels.

On the forums maybe, although there is plenty of negativity as well. I know in my alliance which is about half new players that many are early in their 3* transition many are not happy that they will likely never get a lot of characters.

Well never fear. At a certain SCL (I forget which one, but surely not higher than 4-5) they'll get a different 3* cover as a reward in every PVE event. Assuming D3 cycles those characters pretty evenly (and I have no reason to suspect otherwise) and assuming an average event duration of 4 days they'll clear the whole 3* tier in 24 weeks, less than half a year. Nevermind that they'll still get 3*s from taco tokens and 2* champion rewards. And as soon as you have 1 cover of a 3* character, you can get one more every 42 (currently) days from DDQ.

Vhailorx

New McG wrote:

Because people will complain regardless, and whatever philosophy they're using for where the game is going works for them under this new method. If they did new 4 and 5* in the latest legendaries, and old 4 and 5* in the classic legendaries, some people would still be complaining to the effect of "well, I want only the old 4*, but I only want the new 5*? Why are you ruining my ability to build the exact roster I want?" There's no winning, particularly on this message board. The vocal minority on the forums aren't their typical players, and as such, shouldn't be the sole driving force behind their decisions.

Enough with the "this message board is so whiny!" meme. This is a forum on invested stakeholders on the internet. It will have people who are passionate about the game (both pro and con) and a share of internet trolls. That's the way the world works. It doesn't mean that the forum is useless or doesn't matter.

As for this change itself, I think GurlBYE is on the right track. Everyone likes the favorites system. Who wouldn't, it's 5% more covers of our choice. That's great! this game has been absolutely desperate for such a mechanic for years.

The problem is tying that very positive change to the new character vaulting system. Dilution was a real issue. But bonus heroes would go a long way towards mitigating it. Why then ALSO make this massive change to the way tokens work? (A change that just happens to appear likely to substantially slow down the rate at which vets can get their older champs up into the 340+ 4* champ promise land, and also makes long term hoard much less efficient.) Demi is fiddling with a lot of different levers all at once, and IMO the most rational explanation for makings changes this way is that they want to obfuscate of the more player-unfriendly changes by doing everything at the same time.