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

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.

ZeroKarma

Polares wrote:

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 balls for veterans. Man, every single thing they do is against their veterans. Seriously.

Completely agree with Polares. There are two subsets of players excited by this change, and we have heard from one. For the recent 4* transitioners this is their chance to get a focused group of 4* leveled and champed.

The other group is superwhales and they are pleased because, as some have mentioned, they no longer need covers for earlier 4* they have at level 370.

There is an ocean of players between those two levels, and we are all annoyed to pissed at the change. I went from being able to use 85% of my draws from LT's to less than 50%. That is AWFUL! And the only way to get back to that level is 2 million+ ISO and champing characters outside of any reasonable priority order.

Wumpushunter

Is it unusual for such a long controversial thread to go unanswered by someone in authority? I am new here and wondering if d3 will actually respond to board controversy?

funeralthirst7

I hate this change. Seriously hate it. This is the change that may end up pushing me away from the game. I'm on day 1217. 4 championed 5*, 37 championed 4*, and all but Thanos championed for my 3*. I was at a point where the vast majority of token pulls would produce something worthwhile for me. Rare was the draw that would be discarded. I would champion my characters based on the order in which covers were obtained. When I drew a cover ten days ago for Spidergwen she became the next champion. Raced for the iso and didn't waste the cover. It was a system that was working for me.

Under the new system, I can only pull 12 different 4*s, of which I only have 5 championed. The rest are either going to prompt a race or just discarding the cover. At some point I'm going to just care less and less and play more casually until I say screw it and walk away.

I really don't see the upside here for veterans. This is great for new players and whales but the rest of us are left out. This could have been great if the older 4* were just moved into classics and we could have had a choice.

D3: one step forward, two steps back.

funeralthirst7

Wumpushunter wrote:

Is it unusual for such a long controversial thread to go unanswered by someone in authority? I am new here and wondering if d3 will actually respond to board controversy?

Not really unusual at all.

Ludaa

Guys, guys, GUYS! Just set your FAVORITES and bam, all problems solved! I set my favorites yesterday and my boss gave me a promotion, someone stole the wheels on my truck and replaced em with 20's, and my once lost dog from childhood showed up at my doorstep. I friggin love Bonus Heroes!

Vhailorx

Wumpushunter wrote:

Is it unusual for such a long controversial thread to go unanswered by someone in authority? I am new here and wondering if d3 will actually respond to board controversy?

This thread seems fairly tame by "controversial thread" standards on this board. No one has started the ad hominem attacks yet, or really busted out the 'tinykitty's.

And it's only 25 pages. I think the baking thead was pushing 50, and the true healing thread back in 2014 was more than 100 pages iirc.

Polares

This change is so dumb! If they want to please super whales they can have the 12 latest 4s in latest LTs and particular stores LTs, but at least leave classic with all 4s.

Personally I would not vault 4s in any token, but I could understand changing latest to please super whales, but not changing both!!! Super whales dont buy classic, so it is a change that just hurts a ton of players because they want to hurt us.

Always the same, add something that can be good (even though bonus heroes still is too much luck dependent), and then do something really bad. And they do it together to mask the bad thing to some players.

Why not just add bonus and see how it goes? No they had to do both together. Man fremium games/devs are the worst...

Moon Roach

Here's another idea.

Remove all but the most recent 12 4* from the game, as essential characters, as rewards, as everything.

Let us sell them at increased rates as we can when characters are nerfed / enhanced.

When a new 4* gets added to the tokens, the oldest 4* drops out and can be sold at increased rates.

That's a Friday afternoon (at least here) suggestion that makes at least as much sense as what has been implemented.

Tintaiwan

AGAIN

if you want to get developers attention * star their game in the android/itunes store.

They look at those. Because it effects their downloads and ratings.

I put one star review up as soon as I realized that they were cutting the token character list, and state they plan to keep rotating out characters, making them harder to get.

So if you want them to listen review low. and let them know why there. I can't guarantee they read this, but I bet they read most * star reviews.

Brigby

funeralthirst7 wrote:

Wumpushunter wrote:

Is it unusual for such a long controversial thread to go unanswered by someone in authority? I am new here and wondering if d3 will actually respond to board controversy?

Not really unusual at all.

It's more so we're trying to get through the immense amount of information being presented to us in this, so far, 25-page-long thread, and process it all so we can figure out how to accurately address it.

We're definitely not trying to avoid touching base on this topic. It's just that we want to be as well-informed as possible of the community's concerns before doing so.

firethorne

Brigby wrote:

funeralthirst7 wrote:

Wumpushunter wrote:

Is it unusual for such a long controversial thread to go unanswered by someone in authority? I am new here and wondering if d3 will actually respond to board controversy?

Not really unusual at all.

It's more so we're trying to get through the immense amount of information being presented to us in this, so far, 25-page-long thread, and process it all so we can figure out how to accurately address it.

We're definitely not trying to avoid touching base on this topic. It's just that we want to be as well-informed as possible of the community's concerns before doing so.

Well, here's the information that I want considered. The new vaulting is incredibly detrimental of you're interested in more than one old character. Look at it like this... Under the old system, 45 draws should get you one of each character. Sure, RNG doesn't work like that, and you'll end up with 2 of one and 0 of another. But, over the long haul, it evens out.

But now, if you want an old vaulted character, you can get one out of every twenty draws. So if you want two characters, it takes 40 draws to get one of each. If you want three, 60 draws to get one of each. For 4, 80 draws for one of each. And so on. For every one character you're interested in that is now vaulted, you add 20 draws to get one of each. The system gets exponentially worse with every additional vaulted character you need. How was that deemed acceptable?

KGB

firethorne wrote:

Brigby wrote:

funeralthirst7 wrote:

Wumpushunter wrote:

Is it unusual for such a long controversial thread to go unanswered by someone in authority? I am new here and wondering if d3 will actually respond to board controversy?

Not really unusual at all.

It's more so we're trying to get through the immense amount of information being presented to us in this, so far, 25-page-long thread, and process it all so we can figure out how to accurately address it.

We're definitely not trying to avoid touching base on this topic. It's just that we want to be as well-informed as possible of the community's concerns before doing so.

Well, here's the information that I want considered. The new vaulting is incredibly detrimental of you're interested in more than one old character. Look at it like this... Under the old system, 45 draws should get you one of each character. Sure, RNG doesn't work like that, and you'll end up with 2 of one and 0 of another. But, over the long haul, it evens out.

But now, if you want an old vaulted character, you can get one out of every twenty draws. So if you want two characters, it takes 40 draws to get one of each. If you want three, 60 draws to get one of each. For 4, 80 draws for one of each. And so on. For every one character you're interested in that is now vaulted, you add 20 draws to get one of each. The system gets exponentially worse with every additional vaulted character you need. How was that deemed acceptable?

Nice and succinctly stated.

The system could be improved a lot by simply rotating the characters every season. So the 20 3*s would flip every season. The 4* would rotate on a 4 season basis (first 12 released, second 12 released, third 12 released, latest 12 released and as more 4* get introduced over time the 12 could become 13 when there are 52 4* and so on).

That way someone who wanted older characters could simply wait until the appropriate season to open tokens.

KGB