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

NewMcG

Vhailorx wrote:

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.

The choice was between "keep a diluted 4* token pool" and "limit it by vaulting older 4*" They picked a side, and it allows for focused fire toward roster building.

Imagine the outcry if they implement bonus characters, keep the token pool the same as it was, and then someone draws a 6th or greater cover on a non-covered 4* from a legendary, and then get a bonus cover that's also fits that description. It would be "what's the point of bonus covers if they're as useless as the diluted tokens we get them from?"

Jaedenkaal

Vhailorx wrote:

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.

Well I don't agree with that last part. And you can still get your older champions up to 340, one at a time, faster than you could before. As a whole, yes, it's slower.

I definitely agree that the vaulting system does seem very much at odds with the very successful championing feature, which I'm pretty confident in saying has been the most well-received major feature they've introduced.

It will all rest on the acquisition rate of 4* covers from tokens vs from vaults, progression, and placement. I'd have to go back and look at my 4*s pretty carefully, and I doubt I can remember where I got all of those covers from. I know for all the new ones (since Peggy, probably), since they added 4*s as progression rewards in PVE, a large percentage of my 4* covers for those characters have been from that. And another significant percentage from PVP simulator. Boss events are also pretty generous in the 4* cover department (are they typically new-12 covers? Maybe. Not always. Rulk comes to mind).

NewMcG

aesthetocyst wrote:

New McG wrote:

Imagine the outcry if they implement bonus characters, keep the token pool the same as it was, and then someone draws a 6th or greater cover on a non-covered 4* from a legendary, and then get a bonus cover that's also fits that description. It would be "what's the point of bonus covers if they're as useless as the diluted tokens we get them from?"

That's still quite possible. Nothing about this changes prevents it.

It is possible. But there's also a much greater chance that someone has 5 covers in a given color of an old 4* than one of the current dozen.

fmftint

aesthetocyst wrote:

New McG wrote:

Imagine the outcry if they implement bonus characters, keep the token pool the same as it was, and then someone draws a 6th or greater cover on a non-covered 4* from a legendary, and then get a bonus cover that's also fits that description. It would be "what's the point of bonus covers if they're as useless as the diluted tokens we get them from?"

That's still quite possible. Nothing about this changes prevents it.

I know several who've got a bonus 5 of a character/color that they already have at 5
It can happen at all tier levels

Jaedenkaal

New McG wrote:

aesthetocyst wrote:

New McG wrote:

Imagine the outcry if they implement bonus characters, keep the token pool the same as it was, and then someone draws a 6th or greater cover on a non-covered 4* from a legendary, and then get a bonus cover that's also fits that description. It would be "what's the point of bonus covers if they're as useless as the diluted tokens we get them from?"

That's still quite possible. Nothing about this changes prevents it.

It is possible. But there's also a much greater chance that someone has 5 covers in a given color of an old 4* than one of the current dozen.

Uh... well, it's more likely that they'll have more covers overall of older 4*s, which would result in having more old 4* with 5 covers in one color compared to new ones.

That's not very comforting to the (statistically existent) players out there staring at their 5/0/0 Medusa and their 0/5/0 Mordo (or whatever).

I wonder if it would help if the bonus cover was guaranteed to be in a color that wouldn't be redundant. Wouldn't make a difference to champions of course, but it would make targeted championing much less painful. Too good for 5*s? Maybe. Too hard to take everything into account? Possibly, since the RNG likely can't know what you have on the vine, as it were.

NewMcG

fmftint wrote:

aesthetocyst wrote:

New McG wrote:

Imagine the outcry if they implement bonus characters, keep the token pool the same as it was, and then someone draws a 6th or greater cover on a non-covered 4* from a legendary, and then get a bonus cover that's also fits that description. It would be "what's the point of bonus covers if they're as useless as the diluted tokens we get them from?"

That's still quite possible. Nothing about this changes prevents it.

I know several who've got a bonus 5 of a character/color that they already have at 5

I would also add the stipulation "if you pick a bonus character that may kick you a bonus cover you can't use, that's really just the stupid tax being paid".

Jaedenkaal

New McG wrote:

fmftint wrote:

aesthetocyst wrote:

New McG wrote:

Imagine the outcry if they implement bonus characters, keep the token pool the same as it was, and then someone draws a 6th or greater cover on a non-covered 4* from a legendary, and then get a bonus cover that's also fits that description. It would be "what's the point of bonus covers if they're as useless as the diluted tokens we get them from?"

That's still quite possible. Nothing about this changes prevents it.

I know several who've got a bonus 5 of a character/color that they already have at 5

I would also add the stipulation "if you pick a bonus character that may kick you a bonus cover you can't use, that's really just the stupid tax being paid".

If that's the only character you really want, it's no worse than before. It's still more covers of that character than you would see previously.

NewMcG

Jaedenkaal wrote:

Uh... well, it's more likely that they'll have more covers overall of older 4*s, which would result in having more old 4* with 5 covers in one color compared to new ones.

That's not very comforting to the (statistically existent) players out there staring at their 5/0/0 Medusa and their 0/5/0 Mordo (or whatever).

Right, I know it does exist with newer as well. (As someone who often gets 2 covers of a new release plus an alliance cover, it rarely fails that I'm sitting at 0/1/3 on new characters after the first progression giveaway. The front-loading of new toon covers is real.) But I have no shortage of older 4s with 5 in SOME cover, and in several cases, two of them at 5. Those aren't going to be my priority for placing in the bonus character pool when I have plenty that don't have any certain colors above 4.

NewMcG

Jaedenkaal wrote:

If that's the only character you really want, it's no worse than before. It's still more covers of that character than you would see previously.

Sure, but now if it's the actual ONLY character you want, you've got a 1/20 chance of at least guaranteeing it's their cover, (color not guaranteed), and not the 1/40+ chance that previously existed every time that pulsing gold cover animation popped up. (Color also not guaranteed.)

firethorne

Jaedenkaal wrote:

If that's the only character you really want, it's no worse than before. It's still more covers of that character than you would see previously.

Which is a considerable If to contend with. Provided you have only one or two favorites, you'll do better. But, if you do have more than that, the odds get considerably worse than before. So, if you want champ levels for a lot of oldies but goodies, like Iceman, 4Thor, Teen Jean, Hulkbuster, and Starlord, your odds are actually now worse off.

Math: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=60335

Jaedenkaal

firethorne wrote:

Jaedenkaal wrote:

If that's the only character you really want, it's no worse than before. It's still more covers of that character than you would see previously.

Which is a considerable If to contend with. Provided you have only one or two favorites, you'll do better. But, if you do have more than that, the odds get considerably worse than before. So, if you want champ levels for a lot of oldies but goodies, like Iceman, 4Thor, Teen Jean, Hulkbuster, and Starlord, your odds are actually now worse off.

Math: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=60335

Yup. From tokens. There's still no (publicised) change to the rates of those covers in rewards from vaults/progression/placement etc...

But yes. It'll be a faster ride, for fewer characters.

NewMcG

firethorne wrote:

Jaedenkaal wrote:

If that's the only character you really want, it's no worse than before. It's still more covers of that character than you would see previously.

Which is a considerable If to contend with. Provided you have only one or two favorites, you'll do better. But, if you do have more than that, the odds get considerably worse than before. So, if you want champ levels for a lot of oldies but goodies, like Iceman, 4Thor, Teen Jean, Hulkbuster, and Starlord, your odds are actually now worse off.

Math: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=60335

Or you just go one at a time, get them to where you want and/or the risk tradeoff gets where you want (I have Iceman at 3/5/3 blue, so right now he's behind my 4/3/3 Peggy and 4/4/2 Medusa on the bonus rotation, since their bonus covers are sure things still.) There's still randomness inherent to the system, but you can at least take that second level of randomness and focus it.

CNash

Anyone else annoyed that this run of EOTS is not a new charater release PVE, so its event tokens are in Vault format? EOTS is well known for its generous token rewards, and it would have been a great way to demo this new feature.

Dragon_Nexus

Quick question: Have they said if this counts for vault tokens too? Is it any Heroic and above token, or just the blind ones (non-vault)?

n25philly

Dragon_Nexus wrote:

Quick question: Have they said if this counts for vault tokens too? Is it any Heroic and above token, or just the blind ones (non-vault)?

It all applies to non-vault tokens only

sinnerjfl

Dragon_Nexus wrote:

Quick question: Have they said if this counts for vault tokens too? Is it any Heroic and above token, or just the blind ones (non-vault)?

Its only for tokens, vaults are excluded and do not have bonus heroes.

Dragon_Nexus

Well that kinda eats =/

Oh well, a bonus is still a bonus

killerkoala

i think dilution of the pool could be fix a little bit if all covers were non colored. it's more disheartening to sell a cover cause ur maxed out on that particular color. it'd be change to a race to get iso or HP to roster.

Polares

Jaedenkaal wrote:

firethorne wrote:

Jaedenkaal wrote:

If that's the only character you really want, it's no worse than before. It's still more covers of that character than you would see previously.

Which is a considerable If to contend with. Provided you have only one or two favorites, you'll do better. But, if you do have more than that, the odds get considerably worse than before. So, if you want champ levels for a lot of oldies but goodies, like Iceman, 4Thor, Teen Jean, Hulkbuster, and Starlord, your odds are actually now worse off.

Math: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=60335

Yup. From tokens. There's still no (publicised) change to the rates of those covers in rewards from vaults/progression/placement etc...

But yes. It'll be a faster ride, for fewer characters.

And forget champion levels and all fantastic rewards you get, specially for 4s.

Now we are FORCED to champ chars like Wasp, Luke, Riri, Spiderwoman, Blade, etc if we want those rewards (and waste a ton of iso in some of those). And at the current speed of releases you will never be able to get them above 320 where is when they are useful again to 5 players and where the best champion rewards are.

We are loosing A LOT of iso, HP and Cps because of this.

And we are forced to hoard again so we can get the iso to champ those chars. I don't want to hoard! I was following the rule of always having half of the 4s champed before opening LTs. Now, I am obviously down this number. Really annoying.

Again, I see this change as a complete kick in the stomach for veterans. Man, every single thing they do is against their veterans. Seriously.

killercool

Polares wrote:

Again, I see this change as a complete kick in the balls for veterans. Man, every single thing they do is against their veterans. Seriously.

It feels like the devs have chatted with some of the whales and got their feed back on the changes (because frankly only having the latest 12 4* releases in the draw pool is a huge bonus for whales) and decided the whales speak for all veterans. The amount of money that would need to be dropped on this game on a regular basis to keep the hamster wheel spinning is simply beyond the majority of the player base. Just when you start to get champ rewards from the current crop of 4*s they will be rotated out and it will be time to chase the next rainbow.