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

Uthgarprime

I gotta say I see this moving hurting them big time when new players realize they won't be able to do most of the 4* essential nodes in about 75% of the events unless they got a lucky pull to get that character. How short sided is that. I knew if I was a new player and saw how hard it was going to be to make progress now, I would stop playing. You won't be able to get the progression rewards and it will likely be harder since if you were lucky enough to get a cover for that 4* essential it will probably be at 1 cover so you be fight 2 against 3 on the hardest node. Wow whoever thought that would get people to spend wasn't very smart, oh wait the players can't spend cause there is no tokens to buy with those characters. I mean really this is the bright idea they came up with, make it harder for newer players. Making things harder for newer players drives them away, it does not entice them to spend more, which they can't do anyway cause there is no place to get that character. Wow, just wow, lol.

whitecat31

n25philly wrote:

They profit from the ticking clock they just created. You can only get the latest twelve from tokens, and they are only available for a limited time only. The first 2 are going to rotate out in around a week. Their hope is that someone who is close to champing them come next week but short on resources will spend to get the resources they need before they are banished from being worthy. That's where they plan to make money. Yes, the older characters are no longer there to entice, but there is no reason to rush to do anything with them so people can take their time and is will could take years to champ them. Now every new character has a ticking clock you need to beat. It's that urgency that will either push people to spend or leave them in the dust.

Well said. They want us to buy ISO, and this is the new motivation.

ZeroKarma

wade66 wrote:

Full disclosure: I am in the group of players this helps the most, having all but 12 covered 4 star characters, 8 of which being the most recent releases.

This tries to solve to many problems with the least amount of work. People complain about new character releases because it takes forever to get them covered to usable levels, hence the tokens now focusing on the newest ones. While the favorite system is a means to give player control over an infinitesimal portion of the RNG locked progression system without flooding the game to appease the players.

There is a subset of players that complain about this, but I am in the same boat as you, and I only complain about the slow influx of covers when we have a chase character like Peggy or Captain Marvel. I have an existing "debt" of approximately 2.7 million ISO. That means I have plenty of work to do to catch up with the new releases ISO-wise and I don't want to have my decisions based on availability rather than character usefulness.

I have all but 9 4* characters champed. I was catching up at my pace, but this changes my plans completely. Especially when you consider that I also would like to champ 5*. So I need to champ every 4* as soon as it comes out to best use covers coming in, and somehow try to catch up on 5* at the same time, which feels impossible and disheartening.

As a side note, I'm not going to buy ISO. Not ever. Not in the past and not in the future. It is a rip off. If the hope is that increasing the value of ISO will result in increased purchases, then I would guess this hope is sorely misplaced.

Crnch73

Uthgarprime wrote:

I gotta say I see this moving hurting them big time when new players realize they won't be able to do most of the 4* essential nodes in about 75% of the events unless they got a lucky pull to get that character. How short sided is that. I knew if I was a new player and saw how hard it was going to be to make progress now, I would stop playing. You won't be able to get the progression rewards and it will likely be harder since if you were lucky enough to get a cover for that 4* essential it will probably be at 1 cover so you be fight 2 against 3 on the hardest node. Wow whoever thought that would get people to spend wasn't very smart, oh wait the players can't spend cause there is no tokens to buy with those characters. I mean really this is the bright idea they came up with, make it harder for newer players. Making things harder for newer players drives them away, it does not entice them to spend more, which they can't do anyway cause there is no place to get that character. Wow, just wow, lol.

wow I never thought about it that way. You are so right, the newer players are in so much trouble. For example... If the next PVE has hulk buster as the required 4*, they will have a really hard time getting max progression. I really hope after EotS, the 4* from progression rewards are the "vaulted" characters, for 2 reasons: it will help me (and others in similar position) to get a cover for them... but also it might help the devs realize the mistake when they see overall numbers are down.

AlluAllu

Uthgarprime wrote:

. I knew if I was a new player and saw how hard it was going to be to make progress now, I would stop playing. You won't be able to get the progression rewards and it will likely be harder since if you were lucky enough to get a cover for that 4* essential it will probably be at 1 cover so you be fight 2 against 3 on the hardest node. Wow whoever thought that would get people to spend wasn't very smart, oh wait the players can't spend cause there is no tokens to buy with those characters. I mean really this is the bright idea they came up with, make it harder for newer players. Making things harder for newer players drives them away, it does not entice them to spend more, which they can't do anyway cause there is no place to get that character. Wow, just wow, lol.

Actually, I am pretty new player. What you described has already been a reality for me for a while. I have about 10 four stars. Two of them have as many as two covers. When I'm lucky enough to come across 4-star essential I can play, I've had to make do with just two heroes. In this new system, I'm still going to need luck, but at least when eventually latest characters are needed in nodes, they should be useful.

MissChinch

After letting this change marinate for the better part of two days, and really considering how this changes my optimal strategy, I'm absolutely convinced it sucks as bad as I thought it did...

I've got every 3* championed, and my requirement is to use my LTs and CP as efficiently as possible, if theres a conflict I prioritize 5* gains over 4* gains.

The 5* landscape hasnt changed, the additional 5% of 14.2% chance to pull another 5* amounts to less than one percent increase in number of 5*s I'll see in this new system, so hoarding and pulling from favorable latest legends, or featured 5* limited time tokens is still the most efficient way to get usable 5*s.

The difference now is in how long I have to hoard, and what options I have to progress while hoarding. Previously, slowly championing 4*s as I get covers from sources other than LT/CP pulls allowed me to substantially reduce the chances of having to sell covers when I pull my hoard, as time goes on each championed 4* would increase the odds I have of a useful LT/CP pull by a decreasing amount as new characters are added. That significantly lowered my minimum iso threshold needed to pull a large number of LT/CP, sure I wont have the latest 10 or so 4*s championed, but I'll have 3/4ths and eventually 4/5ths championed which helps immensely.

After this vaulting change when/if I pull my hoard I'll have a 0% chance to pull the majority of safe 4*s I could have been slowly championing, meaning I'll need the iso necessary to cover just about all the new 4* releases over 4 million iso.

The result, if I go about things in the most efficient way, is I immediately stop putting iso into 4*s likely to be retired before I pull my hoard, effectively halting all roster progress and stagnating while iso comes in less quickly due to less champion rewards (sounds like fun). Waiting until I build up enough LL tokens and CP to have good odds on covering the three 5*s in the LL pack, and pulling only if I have enough iso to ensure I dont lose any 4* covers (4.3 million) or 5* covers (1.1 million... cause I'll just stop if I'm lucky enough to get a 13th cover for the last 5*)

I'll still be token/CP bound, so putting enough iso into the 4* featured in the DDQ crash so they can win is a good tradeoff...

So the net result is instead of pushing on to champion 4*s and progress my roster, I should hoard harder and stagnate. More efficient to skip developing 4*s and jump to 3 well covered 5*s, at which time I anticipate scaling will pretty much force me into playing those 3 5*s to the exclusion of the 50+ viable 3-4*s I have now... (sounds super fun)

Oh then progression from that point, repeat the hoard process with the same iso requirements because those 4*s that I championed will be retired and unable to help improve the odds of me pulling a 4* cover thats usable without the cost of championing someone new...

So, while 6 characters to choose from doesnt compare to 60, I'm guessing at this point having 6 viable 5*s would be entertaining again... Thats well over a year out.



...or I could pretend this is cool, pull tokens whenever and do a happy little jig when I get a bonus cover every 20 or so pulls and pretend that I'm doing something other than creating an army of somewhat covered and occasionally championed 4*s never to see level 300 and build my 5* via the bonus hero pull that will happen in 0.007 or 0.7% of my LT pulls... basically like what trying to build my monster OML by burning CP in classics woulda been like last week...

Tony_Foot

Crnch73 wrote:

wow I never thought about it that way. You are so right, the newer players are in so much trouble. For example... If the next PVE has hulk buster as the required 4*, they will have a really hard time getting max progression. I really hope after EotS, the 4* from progression rewards are the "vaulted" characters, for 2 reasons: it will help me (and others in similar position) to get a cover for them... but also it might help the devs realize the mistake when they see overall numbers are down.

That's because you are thinking from a fair point of view, they don't care about fair. It's just another game mechanic to make it easier for those spending the most. We removed the PVP threat, now remove the PVE threat. Of course I'm joking..

If you want vaulted characters removed from essentials in order to make it fair, well then they should also remove vaulted characters from the weekly boosted too, as that's also unfair if newer 3 to 4* transitioners cannot get covers easily.

It kind of feels like what they really want to do is end this game wipe the slate clean and try again.

Straycat

Crnch73 wrote:

Uthgarprime wrote:

I gotta say I see this moving hurting them big time when new players realize they won't be able to do most of the 4* essential nodes in about 75% of the events unless they got a lucky pull to get that character. How short sided is that. I knew if I was a new player and saw how hard it was going to be to make progress now, I would stop playing. You won't be able to get the progression rewards and it will likely be harder since if you were lucky enough to get a cover for that 4* essential it will probably be at 1 cover so you be fight 2 against 3 on the hardest node. Wow whoever thought that would get people to spend wasn't very smart, oh wait the players can't spend cause there is no tokens to buy with those characters. I mean really this is the bright idea they came up with, make it harder for newer players. Making things harder for newer players drives them away, it does not entice them to spend more, which they can't do anyway cause there is no place to get that character. Wow, just wow, lol.

wow I never thought about it that way. You are so right, the newer players are in so much trouble. For example... If the next PVE has hulk buster as the required 4*, they will have a really hard time getting max progression. I really hope after EotS, the 4* from progression rewards are the "vaulted" characters, for 2 reasons: it will help me (and others in similar position) to get a cover for them... but also it might help the devs realize the mistake when they see overall numbers are down.

Of course they need to have vaulted characters in pve, since pve progression rewards are the only way to get them now. As for new players, assuming they are in the right clearance level, 4 clears required for full progression should get them the required 4* early enough for them to use it to get full progression, since the last subs are worth more points.

The next pve would likely have Miles as the required and the progression reward. Works perfectly for me, since he's at 13 covers. I'm in a good spot regarding this change. I don't have to worry about pulling my 14th cover for characters anymore, and I can plan out my schedule better since the vaulted characters are only available as bonus or progression. Still don't like that all those characters are locked behind the bonus hero RNG, but I am more excited about covering carol and medusa.

Omega Red

Vhailorx wrote:

Omega Red wrote:

Lots of players here seem unwilling or unable to adapt to change. Back when the selling price for two star champs was boosted to 65,000 many saw it as an opportunity to accelerate progression through farming. It's been what, nine, ten months since that change and today, despite the evidence, we still have players refusing to farm because they don't want to spend over 10,000 HP in roster slots, not realizing how this is an investment, not an expense.

Then we had the death of cupcakes and a revamp of PVE. PVP sucks, but PVE was made easier and better rewarded (less clears, no need to play at multiple times of the day, four star in progression reward and more tokens) so I became a PVE player (previously I was sort of hybrid) and my progression has accelerated because of that.

This is a controversial topic to say the least. Perhaps it's better if we don't go there.

Now we have this new set of changes and I decided to open 30 classic tokens today. I needed all the covers available in those tokens so there was no incentive to wait any longer. Thanks to this I just champed Peggy. Moon knight, Blade and Carol are now one cover shy of being completed. Last but not least, all my four characters but the newest are now usable, cover-wise. Now I'll fave four star characters that I already champed while I save iso. Once I have enough I'll simply fave whoever I want to champ next and the cover will come sooner.

Hard to read this as anything other than: the new system worked well for me, so it's great! And it is good new for you. Seriously, grats! But that doesn't mean that the changes are good for the game as a whole.

I would advice, just take what the game gives you. If the game wants you to farm, farm. If the game rewards you more for playing PVE, play PVE. If the game wants you to cover the newest four stars, cover them. If the game wants you to control your progression, control it. The rules change all the time, but the smart player will always find a way to make them work in his favour.

The ability to recognize a negative change is not the same as an inability to adapt to it. Many players here complaining about the new token odds will definitely adapt their playstyle to whatever the eventual system is. That's a separate question from advocating for or opposing any given change implemented in the game.

I'm not particularly for or against these latest changes. On one hand I think it's terrific to be able to cover the newest characters much faster than before. On the other, I hate the way overall progression through four star land will now be much slower.

Defining changes in terms of "good or bad for the game as a whole" is rather subjective. From that perspective I would say vaulting is good because it extends the shelf life of the game. Obviously, for a player who wants to feed those four star champs and reach five star tier as soon as possible the change sucks.

I don't think change works just for some people. I insist on the farming example, proven to be good and yet tons of players in this board still refuse to adopt it. No change can be good enough if the player doesn't take advantage of it with good choices. Even the early four star transitioners, the ones that got the worse from these changes, can also take advantage of the new opportunities.

spatenfloot

One question that has not been addressed:
Will event vaults still randomly contain the characters that were removed from the other tokens?

n25philly

spatenfloot wrote:

One question that has not been addressed:
Will event vaults still randomly contain the characters that were removed from the other tokens?

Yes, this only effects non vault tokens

spatenfloot

n25philly wrote:

spatenfloot wrote:

One question that has not been addressed:
Will event vaults still randomly contain the characters that were removed from the other tokens?

Yes, this only effects non vault tokens

I still see old characters in the taco vault as well, but wasn't sure if any changes had taken effect yet. If that's the case, there are still plenty of options for getting the old ones.

Wumpushunter

How about a 4 star list that included the consensus best characters and not venom and Riri Williams. I would like to have Iceman, red hulk and Jean Grey just as much as someone wanted them 6 months ago.

Jaedenkaal

That would be pretty counter-productive since, in a perfect world, the designers have a stronger incentive to make all characters as equal as possible, from a gameplay perspective. I realize it's impossible to have all 45+ characters in a tier perfectly balanced against each other, but in any case it would make more sense to attempt to smooth out the tiers rather than making them even worse by skewing drop rates towards over-performers.

In fact, from a money perspective you'd think that they would rather make new characters always better than old characters, so that everyone always wants the new ones (for gameplay reasons). At which point we'd ask them to skew drop rates towards new characters... which they have now done.

n25philly

Jaedenkaal wrote:

That would be pretty counter-productive since, in a perfect world, the designers have a stronger incentive to make all characters as equal as possible, from a gameplay perspective. I realize it's impossible to have all 45+ characters in a tier perfectly balanced against each other, but in any case it would make more sense to attempt to smooth out the tiers rather than making them even worse by skewing drop rates towards over-performers.

In fact, from a money perspective you'd think that they would rather make new characters always better than old characters, so that everyone always wants the new ones (for gameplay reasons). At which point we'd ask them to skew drop rates towards new characters... which they have now done.

It's a lot less work to just force the new ones on you with no choice. One thing you learn by spending time here, the less effort that can be put in by the development team to address any problem, the better.

Jaedenkaal

n25philly wrote:

Jaedenkaal wrote:

That would be pretty counter-productive since, in a perfect world, the designers have a stronger incentive to make all characters as equal as possible, from a gameplay perspective. I realize it's impossible to have all 45+ characters in a tier perfectly balanced against each other, but in any case it would make more sense to attempt to smooth out the tiers rather than making them even worse by skewing drop rates towards over-performers.

In fact, from a money perspective you'd think that they would rather make new characters always better than old characters, so that everyone always wants the new ones (for gameplay reasons). At which point we'd ask them to skew drop rates towards new characters... which they have now done.

It's a lot less work to just force the new ones on you with no choice. One thing you learn by spending time here, the less effort that can be put in by the development team to address any problem, the better.

It would be even less work to stop releasing new characters altogether.
I don't disagree with you that there is a conflict with this feature that involves player choice and control (or the illusion thereof). You can bet it has not escaped the notice of D3/Demiurge that their new feature has met with a lot of backlash for reducing the very thing it was supposed to improve. I'm sure they were expecting a reaction of some kind. Dead air would have been even worse, I think.

Speculating on the motives of the design and development team is not something that will be very productive or constructive, however.

Polares

First repercussions in my day to day play. I was going to champ Carnage, after a lot of time, it was finally his time, with two covers in queue. Then I opened some LTs because, well I don't like to hoard, and I pulled a lot of peggys, wasp and lukes. Peggy is cool because I already have her champed, luke is maxed but not champed, wasp... yeah, wasp. Now I am 'forced' to champ Luke. 5>2 and in the future I will win more of his covers, so that's the clever thing to do.

After Carnage I wanted to champ IW, and that is also not happening, the next one will be Blade.

This is really annoying. I can't chose who I want to champ anymore, all new chars have priority now In fact there is almost no point in champing old good/meh/low tier anymore


Ps: And I don't know why but my pulls show A LOT of repetition, the number of peggys, lukes and wasp I pulled is so much higher than the other chars.

amusingfoo1

I don't have nearly the time to follow through this whole thread, but I definitely have an opinion on all this.

I like the bonus hero idea. Actually, I love it.

Vaulting older heroes, especially 4*s? I kind of like it for latest legends. But extending that to classics and (especially) heroics? Who the hell thought this was a good idea? I have championed every 4* that was available in legendaries before this change (I got Danvers earlier that day), and this is still terrible. Championing rewards are heavily backloaded, and now you can never get to that back end without spending many thousands of dollars to get there before characters are rotated out.

Even if you get every available 4* progression and placement reward, you're still only looking at getting about one cover per season, on average, for any given character. And that's going down as new characters keep diluting the pool further. That's already glacially slow, and it's a whole lot less than that for the 99% of people who aren't placing at the top.

OneLastGambit

amusingfoo1 wrote:

I don't have nearly the time to follow through this whole thread, but I definitely have an opinion on all this.

I like the bonus hero idea. Actually, I love it.

Vaulting older heroes, especially 4*s? I kind of like it for latest legends. But extending that to classics and (especially) heroics? Who the hell thought this was a good idea? I have championed every 4* that was available in legendaries before this change (I got Danvers earlier that day), and this is still terrible. Championing rewards are heavily backloaded, and now you can never get to that back end without spending many thousands of dollars to get there before characters are rotated out.

Even if you get every available 4* progression and placement reward, you're still only looking at getting about one cover per season, on average, for any given character. And that's going down as new characters keep diluting the pool further. That's already glacially slow, and it's a whole lot less than that for the 99% of people who aren't placing at the top.

I'm waiting for the inevitable dev announcement which addresses this by saying
"Hey guys we read that you were upset at missing out on all those awesome backloaded champ rewards...so we have changed all the champ rewards so all the good ones are now frontloaded! Enjoy guys!"

Nick441234

I did have to chuckle a bit when I looked at Ragnarok's pack contents and it features no Ragnarok.

It does seem a little bit bonkers when the guy on the cover isn't actually in any of the packs.