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

Crowl

whycantwesyncpc wrote:

I'd image it would be that easy if it were just legendary tokens that were that way, but I'm sure the other tokens probably would be a bit more work although I know I'd be happy if those went back to the way they were before the change, although I'm sure some coding would have to be done to get them to work with the bonus hero stuff. Bottom line I think it's more work than any of us realize

There is no need to do it for all tokens, leaving the other ones how they are would result in marginally more covers for the new characters, it is not like they are overly generous with 4*s for most people anyway, whereas the LTs are going to be the primary source of such covers for most people.

fmftint

On the subject of dilution, imo only having the newest 12 characters in the pool doesn't provide enough variety. Maybe the newest 12 plus 5 characters that you select giving each character (17) a 5% draw chance

I'd like to see:
5 15%
Agent Coulson 5%
Mordo 5%
Riri 5%
Medusa 5%
Agent Venom 5%
Blade 5%
Gwenpool 5%
Cage 5%
Spider Woman 5%
Wasp 5%
Peggy 5%
Player choice 1 5%
player choice 2 5%
player choice 3 5%
player choice 4 5%
player choice 5 5%

whycantwesyncpc

Crowl wrote:

whycantwesyncpc wrote:

I'd image it would be that easy if it were just legendary tokens that were that way, but I'm sure the other tokens probably would be a bit more work although I know I'd be happy if those went back to the way they were before the change, although I'm sure some coding would have to be done to get them to work with the bonus hero stuff. Bottom line I think it's more work than any of us realize

There is no need to do it for all tokens, leaving the other ones how they are would result in marginally more covers for the new characters, it is not like they are overly generous with 4*s for most people anyway, whereas the LTs are going to be the primary source of such covers for most people.

I was hoping they would undo the vaulting for the 3*'s as well

Ayasugi-san

The vaulting of 3 s was at least promised to be rotating, and there are a bunch of strong ones in the current pool. Possibly too many; I hope that when they rotate, they leave some of those strong ones in. Getting some solid answers on how often the 3 s will be rotated in and out of the vault and how they'll choose would also be nice. For the 4 s they at least gave us solid statements. **** ones, but we knew just what would happen.

Wumpushunter

Brigby wrote:

Magic wrote:

@cthulu and @Brigby who is lurking at the forum while I write this.

Please make sure that the development team doesn't rush into any decisions. I hope they will focus on multiple angles while trying to sort out this storm.

-snip-

Hi Magic. Rest assured, we will definitely be taking the appropriate amount of time to analyze all the feedback from the community, in order to identify the best solution possible.
(The community gave a LOT of feedback, so this might take some time. )

But dont go so slowly just to wait out the furor and leave things lIke they are, I have temporarily quit until something is done about vaulting. Discuss, analyze, and give updates to the community, please.

whycantwesyncpc

Ayasugi-san wrote:

The vaulting of 3 s was at least promised to be rotating, and there are a bunch of strong ones in the current pool. Possibly too many; I hope that when they rotate, they leave some of those strong ones in. Getting some solid answers on how often the 3 s will be rotated in and out of the vault and how they'll choose would also be nice. For the 4 s they at least gave us solid statements. tinykitty ones, but we knew just what would happen.

The original post only says that if any are added they will rotate ones out. It says nothing about switching in the ones already rotated.

Moon Roach

Does unstickying mean that the devs don't want any more feedback?

killerkoala

whycantwesyncpc wrote:

Ayasugi-san wrote:

The vaulting of 3 s was at least promised to be rotating, and there are a bunch of strong ones in the current pool. Possibly too many; I hope that when they rotate, they leave some of those strong ones in. Getting some solid answers on how often the 3 s will be rotated in and out of the vault and how they'll choose would also be nice. For the 4 s they at least gave us solid statements. tinykitty ones, but we knew just what would happen.

The original post only says that if any are added they will rotate ones out. It says nothing about switching in the ones already rotated.

in space gem post

Brigby wrote:

There will be no changes to 3-Stars with this Season.

kinda gives hope to at least there might be a 3* rotation in the future.

Roguewookie26

I am glad they are reviewing this. And honestly if its going to take time to figure out changes and implement thats fine. But if its going to be months. How about you just roll the patch back and put us back to what we had before. Remove the bonus heroes if needed for a time. And try again later. Preferably with a focus group made up of actual players instead of the 2 janitors and im guessing whichever mom is letting you guys use her basement this week. (Saw where you claim the majority of your player base loves your new release schedule. 1.thats a lie 2. You know it. Because if you didnt you wouldnt have mentioned it to start with) Its not just playtesting this game lacks. Its a basic understanding of your player base before you implement changes this large. And yes please learn you can tell us things ahead of time instead of 5 mins after you do it. If you had posted a couple, or even 1 week early, what your plans were then you could have avoided a lot of this firestorm.

whycantwesyncpc

killerkoala wrote:

whycantwesyncpc wrote:

Ayasugi-san wrote:

The vaulting of 3 s was at least promised to be rotating, and there are a bunch of strong ones in the current pool. Possibly too many; I hope that when they rotate, they leave some of those strong ones in. Getting some solid answers on how often the 3 s will be rotated in and out of the vault and how they'll choose would also be nice. For the 4 s they at least gave us solid statements. tinykitty ones, but we knew just what would happen.

The original post only says that if any are added they will rotate ones out. It says nothing about switching in the ones already rotated.

in space gem post

Brigby wrote:

There will be no changes to 3-Stars with this Season.

kinda gives hope to at least there might be a 3* rotation in the future.

Or could just mean that there were no new 3* characters and that's why there is no rotation. Hopefully they just realize that vaulting is bad period and remove it completely

stewbacca

Although I get everyone's issue with the vaulting. HavING pulled a bonus five star I think is the biggest feature, no more pure randomness it will help get the specific character covers I need immensly. Plus that fact that the bonus (strange), came with me only spending classic 20 pts. Why anyone would spend 25 pts ever makes no sense.

Magic

stewbacca wrote:

Although I get everyone's issue with the vaulting. HavING pulled a bonus five star I think is the biggest feature, no more pure randomness it will help get the specific character covers I need immensly. Plus that fact that the bonus (strange), came with me only spending classic 20 pts. Why anyone would spend 25 pts ever makes no sense.

For many reasons. One would be you only have 5% of the 15% of pulls to get the bonus cover (say Strange from classics pull) - so lucky you. On average you should get 15 5* covers in 100 pulls. And only 5% of them will have the bonus (so 1 in 20 of that limited quantity). Which means you will get on average 1 out of 200 20 CP pulls (might get 2 if lucky).

In the latest you get 5% of chances to get the latest cover. So Strange should show up 5 times in 100 pulls.

If you need less simplistic math - dig in the thread as there are plenty of people who did the calculation to give you the probability.

Oldboy

So here's what i think may be typical for some in the coming weeks and months if the current state continues:

I now have 4 covers of Gwenpool (lvl 200) and 4 of Kate Bishop (lvl 120) on the vine but only enough iso to champ one of them before the other covers expire. With the news that Kate is going to be rotated out, it looks like Gwenpool will be the one getting champed. In the meantime Kate will probably be languishing at lvl 120 for a long, long time. She's usable when boosted for her essentials but there's less incentive now for me to put levels into her. I have enough 4* champed to make it through most weeks.

Seems to me a waste of dev time and effort to design a character when said character just ends up collecting dust in the 'closet'.

Xzasxz

After 502 days playing this game I have 8 freshly championed 4 . None of them in the packs. Goodbye further advancing.
I have 15 heroes sitting at 10+ covers. Hulkbuster, Red Hulk, Deadpool, Thor (to mention just some of them) among them. How many of them in the packs? Only 1! Thank You ******** much. How am I to gather missing covers?
12 4 heroes in the packs. Four of them considered ones of the weakest ones. Out of these 12, I am interested to collect only 3 of them, the rest is useless, 75% of them.
If there is over 40 (and more coming) heroes in game, why few people dictates all the players which ones they are going to play? Why You limit our choices? The big whales sitting on almost all 4 fully champed may be happy with the changes. I am not.
And I am not talking about 3 yet, where the situation may be similar for many players that started playing just few months ago. Wait, maybe not that many? Is the population shrinking? At least paying population? maybe only whales count atm? I hope I am wrong. I hope You will withdraw from this stupid idea.
One last thing. What diversity of rosters in the Versus mode You expect after couple of months? None? All the same (except big whales of the game)?.

broll

DayvBang wrote:

Daredevil217 wrote:

We the players have been discussing solutions all weekend and the one that seems to be getting the most universal praise, and that will help solve the problem you were trying to address (dilution) without impacting your bottom line (financially speaking) is to add the older vaulted legends to the classic packs and leave the newest in the latest packs.

This also has the added benefit for both developers and players of probablyt being the single easiest fix to put in. If they decided it was the right answer, or even the right answer for a few months while hashing out other ideas, they could probably implement it in just days or even mere hours.

Agreed. I think that's absolutely the best short term solution. Long term, I think the most is to have more than 2 CP packs.

25 CP - Latest, exactly the same as is in game now.
20 CP - Up and Coming, All 5* but the 3 latest, plus 12 middle aged 4*s
10/15 CP - Classics - 4* only pack containing any 4* not in the top 24/limited section.

What this would look like with today's characters:

kyo28

broll wrote:

25 CP - Latest, exactly the same as is in game now.
20 CP - Up and Coming, All 5* but the 3 latest, plus 12 middle aged 4*s
10/15 CP - Classics - 4* only pack containing any 4* not in the top 24/limited section.

Love this idea. It's similar to another idea I posted where I also said we needed more than 2CP Vaults. This really needs to happen, either in the form you suggested or a similar form!

broll

kyo28 wrote:

broll wrote:

25 CP - Latest, exactly the same as is in game now.
20 CP - Up and Coming, All 5* but the 3 latest, plus 12 middle aged 4*s
10/15 CP - Classics - 4* only pack containing any 4* not in the top 24/limited section.

Love this idea. It's similar to another idea I posted where I also said we needed more than 2CP Vaults. This really needs to happen, either in the form you suggested or a similar form!

I added my idea to the suggestion area:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=60687

Crowl

broll wrote:

Agreed. I think that's absolutely the best short term solution. Long term, I think the most is to have more than 2 CP packs.

25 CP - Latest, exactly the same as is in game now.
20 CP - Up and Coming, All 5* but the 3 latest, plus 12 middle aged 4*s
10/15 CP - Classics - 4* only pack containing any 4* not in the top 24/limited section.

The obvious drawback to such a plan, plenty of people will want a broad range of 4*s in order to feed their steadily growing roster of champs and then they want a reasonable chance of getting the 5*s that they want, forcing people to abandon 5*s entirely or severely curtail their 4* roster development seems like as big a step backwards as the current vaulting system.

Latest legends should have two versions - one with all the 4*s and latest 5*s, one with just latest 4*s and 5*s.

Classics should have multiple versions (or generations) - each one should include all 4*s and 4 of the older 5*s (in chronological order) so the odds of getting what you want has improved but is still worse than latest legends.

Pylgrim

I think that the mechanic is convoluted as it is, plus is already accomplishing everything that it set off to do. The side-effect of diminishing the frequency of champion levels of old 4*s needs to be addressed on its own by another feature rather than by adding exceptions or riders to this feature. Example: Adding a Big Enchilada-like node to DDQ that rewards a different 4* every day (that you have to previously had) will increase the numbers of covers any given old 4* gets in a year back to the numbers that you could expect to open from tokens in a year or close.

Magic

Sorry Broll but this has a making of even worse. In your proposed "middle" group there are only 3 4* worth the shot. I would not pull from there and that would limit my 5* progression to a full stop. No thanks.

We simply need a 4* token without 5* chance for 10 CP that has all the 4* (new and old). If you are not into 5* progression - you have a nice place to use the CP. Simple and elegant.