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

kyo28

El Satanno wrote:

You're not getting anywhere for one very simple reason. Look at your own choice of words; my emphasis above. You cannot 'fix' that which is not broken. I'm speaking objectively here. Vaulting is working correctly, as far as any of us on this end can tell. There is nothing objectively broken. Subjectively speaking, it quite obviously is a horrid thing, but that's your own opinion. It's quite glaringly obvious that the devs have a diametrically opposing opinion to yours.

You have chosen to stop spending money on the game until some change is effected, and although I suspect it will be a wholly symbolic gesture (especially if you keep playing) I salute your resolve. Indeed, voting with your wallet is probably the single most effective means of communicating your displeasure. But it does seem you are in the minority. Even within my own family of alliances, buy clubs still go on with staggering regularity and at least 4 people have renewed their VIP this week.

To put it as mildly as possible: Stop wasting your breath. If you feel strongly enough, stop playing the game. Maybe go so far as to tell your friends who do/might play to stop, if that's your fancy. You might try redirecting your energy to offering reasonable suggestions to make things even out for the players instead of shouting "Fix it!" over and over again. Banging on around here only makes everyone annoyed with you.

For reference I'm not entirely committed one way or the other on the issue, although my general inclination is to say that in its current incarnation vaulting sucks. I'm just not convinced enough by either side. Besides, there are bigger fish to fry...I'm looking at you, 5* tier...

I get what you're saying and it is, in part, of course a way of venting frustration. But on the other side in multiple posts I've tried to explain in detail where the new vaulting system causes problems and have offered up constructive ideas on how to solve the issue(s) at hand. A few of my suggestions:
1. Add extra CP/LT vaults and put the older 4*s in there
2. Add an extra Classics LT Vault and divide older 4*s and 5*s among those vaults
3. Increase CP return so we can pull more tokens and get more bonus heroes
Those are not the be-all-end-all of solutions but at least I'm trying to come up with something that might work for all players involved as well as for the devs.

I can see for some players that vaulting + BH is actually a blessing. But my concern is with those, like myself, who are stuck in the middle: we were buidling up our 4*s gradually and slowly getting there but now get stopped in our tracks and forced to restart with the all-new-all-different 12 4*s. Granted, the plus side for me was it allowed me to quickly champ 4* Luke Cage who is a beast in the latest PVE's. But the downside is I had a ton of other great 4*s coming up that are now all but dead in the water. And that feels very unfair to me, especially considering I've been playing faithfully on a daily basis for over 450 days and have been a paying player as well.

Putting a system in place, having players spend money and time to build up a roster only to one day, without warning, flip the whole system on its head is ... poor taste in my opinion.

Straycat

It has almost been 4 weeks since this change, so I wanted to do a little progress report.

Champs: I've champed 1 4*, Spiderwoman. She was fully covered beforehand, thanks to a boss event and the subsequent pve or pvp progression rewards. I'm on the way to champ Blade. RNG was real nice with him. He was maybe a 1/2/3 before but now at 4/4/5 with a cover waiting.

Progress on other latest 12: I got Kate Bishop to 3/4/5 up from 2/2/5, teasing me before she left. Captain Marvel has been my favorite since it started, and she's now annoyingly at 1/5/5. Medusa, another favorite, is now at 1/2/5. I've recently pulled a bunch of Mordo, he's my next most covered. Cage went from 1/1/1 to 3/2/3. Wasp was already at 12, now at 13.

Dupes: I've gotten maybe 4 total. Kate Bishop, 2 Gwenpool, and a Medusa. Each has 5 in only 1 color, so a little bad luck.

Champ levels: 2 for Peggy, 5 for Spiderwoman.

5*: Latest got 1 BP, Classic got GG and a Cap

Differences: Well without the change, I for sure would have 3 champs instead of 2. I also probably would have had more champ levels and more dupes. I had sold a Kingpin and Miles cover I could have champed and instead used the iso to level Carol, Medusa, Blade etc up to the 180 range. I also have Red hulk sitting at 3/5/5 that I would have champed without extra covers. Without the change I wouldn't have gotten so many new covers. Pve has been a little more fun experimenting with the new characters that are suddenly usable.

Review: I had most of the vaulted characters well covered or champed, so this change helped me to get a more diverse usable roster. The lack of iso now means I will be championing less characters since I don't like leaving them at 70, but will have more "usable" characters. For pve thats good, but pvp still relies on boosted champs, so I'll probably hit 900 and 2000 in sim less often. And I have noticed I've been lacking hp, I assume it is due to the lack of champ rewards.

This was definitely a reset. I think the iso deficit spiked a little. I had to level up new characters since they had enough covers and the saturated pool made the iso demand sharper. I might never be able to get back to the new champ every 2-3 weeks pace that I was on before.

RemoDestroyer

In 79 pulls from latest legends tokens since bonus heroes went live i only pulled 2 4* bonus heroes and 0 5* bonus heroes.

bluewolf

I was in my alliance chat and posted about Peggy leaving next week, and my plan to use CP before that happened. At least two members - one fairly high level with 4* champs - were surprised about the rotating vault part of things.

After next week expect more anger as a top tier 4 leaves and people realize what that means....

Wumpushunter

Does the token exploit and minimum node issue just seem like subject changes to get people to forget about vaulting? Those issues seem trivial and effecting very few people unlike vaulting.

JHawkInc

Wumpushunter wrote:

Does the token exploit and minimum node issue just seem like subject changes to get people to forget about vaulting? Those issues seem trivial and effecting very few people unlike vaulting.

Easy there, your tinfoil hat is on so tight it's cutting off circulation.

They're allowed to work on more than one thing for the game at once. Chill out.

Crowl

JHawkInc wrote:

Wumpushunter wrote:

Does the token exploit and minimum node issue just seem like subject changes to get people to forget about vaulting? Those issues seem trivial and effecting very few people unlike vaulting.

Easy there, your tinfoil hat is on so tight it's cutting off circulation.

They're allowed to work on more than one thing for the game at once. Chill out.

I think his point is more about the speed at which some far more minor things are getting fixed contrasting greatly with the deafening silence from the devs on a situation that negatively impacts far more people.

JHawkInc

Crowl wrote:

JHawkInc wrote:

Wumpushunter wrote:

Does the token exploit and minimum node issue just seem like subject changes to get people to forget about vaulting? Those issues seem trivial and effecting very few people unlike vaulting.

Easy there, your tinfoil hat is on so tight it's cutting off circulation.

They're allowed to work on more than one thing for the game at once. Chill out.

I think his point is more about the speed at which some far more minor things are getting fixed contrasting greatly with the deafening silence from the devs on a situation that negatively impacts far more people.

Except that's not what he said. He said that the devs addressing other issues was a way to change the subject to avoid having to address vaulting at all.

And given that we don't know when the token exploit or minimum point thing became problems in the first place, NOR how easy they are to fix, we can't speak to the speed at which they are being addressed.

Someone is taking offense at the devs improving aspects of the game. Even more evidence that these forums will complain about absolutely anything. When you bite the hand that feeds, you aren't exactly giving them a reason to look into improving Vaulting.

smkspy

Easy there, Trent Reznor.

Xzasxz

JHawkInc wrote:

Someone is taking offense at the devs improving aspects of the game. Even more evidence that these forums will complain about absolutely anything. When you bite the hand that feeds, you aren't exactly giving them a reason to look into improving Vaulting.

What?! Are you serious? Who's feeding whom?! OUR money FEEDS them. THEY love only few BIG spenders disregarding the rest. THEY should at least COMMUNICATE. WE want THEM to COMMUNICATE. Is it really that much?! Think of it before you write something like this. One post in one MONTH!! It's a joke.

Quebbster

Xzasxz wrote:

JHawkInc wrote:

Someone is taking offense at the devs improving aspects of the game. Even more evidence that these forums will complain about absolutely anything. When you bite the hand that feeds, you aren't exactly giving them a reason to look into improving Vaulting.

What?! Are you serious? Who's feeding whom?! OUR money FEEDS them. THEY love only few BIG spenders disregarding the rest. THEY should at least COMMUNICATE. WE want THEM to COMMUNICATE. Is it really that much?! Think of it before you write something like this. One post in one MONTH!! It's a joke.

They have posted quite a bit about this in the last month - Cthulhu asking for our feedback and Brigby doing his best to keeping us updated on what is being discussed. Here is a post Brigby made this week on the topic (found here):

Brigby wrote:

Hi Everyone. I'm sorry I haven't been able to communicate much on this topic lately. Due to unforeseen reasons, we were unable to have one of our usual meetings with the development team last week, so I haven't had much new information to pass along.

Having said that though, last time we spoke they had dwindled the evaluation options down to either a store or a vault, so it would seem they're close to settling on a design.
(I speculate it would be similar to either a token store or an event vault, respectively)

We will be speaking with them later today, and if there is any new information I can provide, I will be sure to update everyone. Thanks for your patience!

Nellobee

I hope whatever it is, it comes soon.

Nellobee

Nellobee wrote:

I hope whatever it is, it comes soon.

Whatever the next fix is, I hope it comes soon.

Alsmir

I hope we get any fix that actually solves the problem.

Crnch73

haha well we got our wish... they came up with a plan to fix this. It is NOTHING we asked for, but they at least did something. right? right?!

what a joke. Earn a max of 6 token pulls in the offseason, then spend HP! AKA PayWall!

broll

Brigby wrote:

Nellobee wrote:

It has been two weeks. Brigby?

*Hope you don't mind the copy-and-paste of my response from another thread

The intent behind Bonus Heroes, and the removal of older 3 and 4-Star characters from packs, was to reduce pack dilution and provide a way for players to acquire newer characters faster. Having said that though, the team recognizes the community concern regarding older 3 and 4-Star progression, and has decided to start exploring several options to try and alleviate those concerns.

Keep in mind that this is still exploration, and nothing is 100% guaranteed, but here are some of the ideas that the team is investigating:

- A new store containing older 3 and 4-Star characters - Rotations for removed 3 and 4-Star characters - A new vault containing older 3 and 4-Star characters

As you can tell, these ideas are sparse in detail, as the team is still figuring out which could work the best. Once we have more information to provide, we'll be sure to update the community.

Out of these options we got a new store containing 2 3 and 4-stars? FFS. What was the thought process that you should tinykitty in the wound? Are you just tired of making the game and want to kill it off by pissing off your players?

kyo28

Yeah, Brigby, can you shed some light on this?

Out of all the options that were under consideration, the one they seemed to go with is a store with older 3 and 4 . BUT, they turned it into a store where you have:
68% chance of pulling a 2
25 % chance of pulling a 3
7 % chance of pulling a 4
And those are odds of 40 packs, the odds get worse if you look at single token pulls.
So if I spend 50-60 Euros to get a 40 pack, on average I'd be able to pull 2.8 4 s. So I'd get 1-2 4 if unlucky and 3-4 if lucky. If RNGesus really hates me, I could potentially end up with 0 4 for that amount of money spent. Unlike Legendary stores or packs, there is literally no guarantee that I can get a 4

So how exactly is a store where over 2/3rds of the pulls are 2 helps us? No really, I'd like to hear the reasoning from the devs aside from the obvious attempt at cash grabbing.

Seriously, what is the plan here?

AlluAllu

I actually like the vaulting as it benefits my progress to 4-star land, but even I think that this is really lackluster way to adress valid issues that people have.

Daredevil217

So I just wanted to post something here that may not get as much traffic in the original thread it was posted in.

This was Brigby's answer (and my response) to why we don't have vaulted characters in classic tokens. Since this was the most requested fix to vaulting and was ignored (until now), I thought it deserved more traffic (almost made a new thread)

I have to say that I LOVE this type of communication from developers. A straight look into their decision-making process. I'm really hoping Brigby responds to this but want to hear the community's take as well.

Daredevil217 wrote:

Brigby wrote:

broll wrote:

As I see it this sounds like a clone of the heroic token with latest in one and classics in another (sounds familar) if they kept both all the time and let people choose which they pulled from, it would be a step forward but would only address the 3* issue and not the 4* issue. If they then changed classic legends to contain the older 4*s then IMO all issues caused by bonus heroes are solved in a reasonable way.

We've definitely heard and evaluated that suggestion, but the one issue with adding the older 4*s to the Classic Legends though, is that you now have the same dilution problem as before. Players used to find acquiring Classic 5* to be a painfully slow process, because there were so many 4*s diluting the pack.

First, dilution is only a problem if people think it's a problem. By now I'm sure you've seen that MANY of your players were just fine with acquiring characters slowly and evenly from a much larger pool. For those who did complain about dilution, the latest legends and change to heroics was a great way for them to progress faster in the way you were hoping. But you left nothing for players who preferred the old method.

Second, with both classic and latest legends there is a 1 in 7 chance of pulling a 5*. The number of 4s in the pool does not affect your odds of pulling a 5. Just like when Strange rotates to classics there will still be a 1 in 7 chance of pulling a 5*. Adding old 4s does not make acquiring old 5s any faster or slower. If this is seriously your concern I'd like you to please go back to developers and revisit it because it's simply untrue.

Third, you talk about all of these changes being in response to players complaining. They complain about dilution, they complain about old fives being acquired too slowly, etc. Well if that truly is the case and these changes are all about good customer service, why not a third token that has all 4's and 5's. Full of dilution-y goodness. The people who don't want dilution can pull from latest; those that liked the old system can pull from the new token (make it 20 CP as well). You are obviously okay with a brand new token as a solution (i.e. the new heroic). I guarantee if you were to implement just one token that contained all available 5s at a 1:7 rate and all available 4s in a 6:7 rate for 20 CP, people would be ecstatic. All your problems would be solved. Since you are discussing this, PLEASE tell us why this would not work. If you need to discuss it with the developers on Monday I understand, but I'm begging you to please not ignore this post.

TLDR:

Brigby-
1. We did look into the suggestion of vaulted characters in Classic tokens

2. We decided against it because that many 4s will make it harder to get older 5s due to dilution.

Me-
1. For some people vaulting is a much bigger complaint than dilution.

2. The Vintage Heroic shows you are not opposed to using a new token as a solution.

3. Your assertion that adding more 4s will dilute the 5s in Classic Legends is wrong.

4. Even if you're right, and want to keep Classics as they are, why not a third option to go with Classic and Latest Legends (Vintage Legends?) for 20 CP that has all 4s and 5s or just the vaulted 4s and 5s. This would seemingly appease the community.

Brigby

I just wanted to hop on real quick to clarify that it was my mistake earlier in that post. I meant to say acquiring 4*s became harder and harder since they were becoming more and more diluted. I've edited the post to add the correction.