Do we boycott Vintage Heroics?

Daredevil217

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.

Ayasugi-san

Brigby wrote:

Players used to find acquiring Classic 5* to be a painfully slow process, because there were so many 4*s diluting the pack.

Except it wasn't the 4*s diluting the pack, it was the 5*s. The odds for 5*s was always 15%, but it was split among all of them in the pack with the number always increasing. And the vaulting has done squat to solve that issue, because the odds of getting a 5* in Classics is still the same.

JHawkInc

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.

See, this makes me think none of the devs really play the game. Vaulting fixed "Dilution" without fixing what made Dilution a problem in the first place.

Dilution is bad because the odds of pulling a specific character at the 4* and classic 5* level were really low, and were getting lower. Vaulting made the odds of pulling the 12 newest 4* characters skyrocket. But it made the odds of pulling the OTHER THIRTY THREE characters go to zero. The problem was "low odds" and this was fixed by making the odds ZERO for 75% of characters.

That's why people want the old Classic Legends back. Because "tiny odds that aren't all that great" is leaps and bounds better than "no odds at all, forever and ever the end." We would rather rewind to an imperfect system, because even though it needed improvements, it still worked. The Vaulting system just doesn't work. And it's frustrating when the devs want to put bandaids on it instead of admitting it's a bad idea, backpedaling, and starting over.

Bringing back the old Classic tokens wouldn't fix the problems of the old system, but it would sure as hell do a lot for good will.

But we can learn from this experiment, too. As bad as Vaulting is for the long run, I've personally benefited greatly from it for covering and building up newer characters. The "12 4*s in a pack" thing works, but only for those 12 4*s. So create a "Featured Legends" token, 25CP, three 5* characters, twelve 4* characters, selected from the pool of characters that aren't in Latest Legends. Classics would cover everyone. Latest would feature better odds at newer characters for a cost increase. Featured would feature better odds at some of the older characters for the same cost increase (and the condition that you'll have to wait for multiple cycles to see every character get a chance to be Featured). THAT would fix dilution AND the problems behind it, by eventually cycling all characters through it, so eventually all 4*s/5*s get to benefit from the more satisfying odds. It doesn't even have to be exactly like that. It's just an idea, a starting point, trying to use the part that does kinda work to fix the problem that still remains.

And one last thing.

Players used to find acquiring Classic 5* to be a painfully slow process, because there were so many 4*s diluting the pack.

You've got something mixed up here. Because 5* odds and 4* odds have never had anything to do with each other. The odds have been 15% for a 5* for virtually forever. Adding a new 5* dilutes the pack, because more 5*s are having to share that 15%. Adding new 4*s dilutes the 4*s, because more characters have to share the 85%. But adding new 4*s does nothing to the 5*s, because that 15% stays the same. In fact, Vaulting did absolutely nothing to improve the acquisition rate of Classic 5*s, because that part of Classic tokens didn't change. Changing the number of 4*s from 30+ to 12 didn't alter the 15% 5* pull rate, of the same characters. That dilution is still there. And it's still a problem.

.........
.........

We know you work hard, and we really do appreciate it. Some responding on the forums was an extreme rarity, and before you joined us, people would have laughed if we said someone was addressing concerns on the forums on a Friday afternoon. A large part of the reason you get bombarded with complaints and questions and stuff all the time is because we finally have someone that is willing to listen to us, and we appreciate that. (and I feel like we've seen more communication from others like Cthulhu as well)

tgibbs40

Boycott? Meh. To each their own. Two opposing views from earlier were stated (I'm not quoting, it's a pain, I'm on my phone here)
1) 4* vaults...people WANT the single pull...nothing changed...recent MPQ track record not good for listening.
2) Step in the right diection...give them a chance...
Let everyone pick a side. I pick 1. MPQ, show me I'm wrong.

killerkoala

someone is gonna get yelled at, bag man has bags to riches tokens not vintage heroic

astrp3

killerkoala wrote:

someone is gonna get yelled at, bag man has bags to riches tokens not vintage heroic

Maybe Bags to Riches is a special event for AFD and they will have the standard two off-season PvPs starting Sunday with vintage tokens (that means that Bagman would be running concurrently with another PvP though).

hodayathink

astrp3 wrote:

killerkoala wrote:

someone is gonna get yelled at, bag man has bags to riches tokens not vintage heroic

Maybe Bags to Riches is a special event for AFD and they will have the standard two off-season PvPs starting Sunday with vintage tokens (that means that Bagman would be running concurrently with another PvP though).

I'm guessing so, especially since Bags to Riches doesn't actually start/end at the time the first off-season PvP normally does.

Khanwulf

JHawkInc wrote:

That's why people want the old Classic Legends back. Because "tiny odds that aren't all that great" is leaps and bounds better than "no odds at all, forever and ever the end." We would rather rewind to an imperfect system, because even though it needed improvements, it still worked. The Vaulting system just doesn't work. And it's frustrating when the devs want to put bandaids on it instead of admitting it's a bad idea, backpedaling, and starting over.

...

But we can learn from this experiment, too. As bad as Vaulting is for the long run, I've personally benefited greatly from it for covering and building up newer characters. The "12 4*s in a pack" thing works, but only for those 12 4*s. So create a "Featured Legends" token, 25CP, three 5* characters, twelve 4* characters, selected from the pool of characters that aren't in Latest Legends. Classics would cover everyone. Latest would feature better odds at newer characters for a cost increase. Featured would feature better odds at some of the older characters for the same cost increase (and the condition that you'll have to wait for multiple cycles to see every character get a chance to be Featured). THAT would fix dilution AND the problems behind it, by eventually cycling all characters through it, so eventually all 4*s/5*s get to benefit from the more satisfying odds. It doesn't even have to be exactly like that. It's just an idea, a starting point, trying to use the part that does kinda work to fix the problem that still remains.

This is a set of spot-on observations and a workable solution that would improve the base issue as well as address current (zero) access situations.

And... are you (Brigby) rolling your eyes because bonus heroes gives selected 4* a 5% chance of being pulled as bonus? Don't. Many, many covers are needed to even complete a transition roster let alone champion and advance that set in 4*-land. Pulls for 4* heroes are sufficiently rare only well-developed rosters will see any impact from the bonus.


--Khanwulf

firethorne

Brigby wrote:

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 any 4* to be a painfully slow process, because there were so many 4*s diluting the pack.

I just saw this little snippet, and yeah, I'm dumbfounded. They don't want a solution with dilution, so they implemented the solution with nearly the most diluting imaginable? A method with clearly more dilution than the way they rejected for having too much dilution? Packs with not only the same set of 4*s, but 3*s and 2*s as well?

We aren't stupid. And I'm going to keep assuming you aren't either. So, do you want to take another run at that explanation?

Just be honest. If this is about trying to make some money, to get some hp sales, then fine. Just say so. If that's the reason, then that's the reason. Even if it isn't popular, it is better than trying to lie to us.

GurlBYE

I'm confused.

If the packs were just divided then we'd just see people spend an extra 5 CP to actually get new characters and spend 5 less for oldies.

How would that not have a solution for dilution and a solution for older characters being accessible?

DFiPL

Brigby wrote:

Edit: Sorry for the confusion. I must've accidentally pressed 5 instead of 4. I meant that the dilution of 4* made it hard for players to acquire and max them, especially as the newer ones were being released.

Vaulting doesn't change that, though, Brigby. It shifts the burden of completion from the newer characters to the older. Sealing off 75% (and growing) of the 4* library might improve the odds of pulling the newer characters, but it impedes the ability of a non-trivial portion of the playerbase to acquire the LTs to pull those covers through, say, the Crash of the Titans.

And if dilution were a concern, as others have pointed out, introducing a token which contains 70% 2* doesn't do a thing to address that concern.

I mean, here I was skeptical at the idea of a vault because it might contain 2*; the developers literally took the idea of a new token and said "what is the absolute worst implementation of a new token we can find? Let's do that!"

Maybe there's more coming. Your edit of Khanwulf's (I think that's who it was?) attempt at "here's what a PR response should have looked like" certainly sounded that way. But if there was going to be a repurposing of an existing framework to tackle the solution, it should have been in the context of a Vintage Legendary token. And, I mean, maybe that's all that was needed. Or maybe there would have still been a multifaceted approach to the problem.

But a Vintage Legendary token would have allowed developers to reintroduce those characters to the economy and say "have at it." RNG is still involved, and there's no guarantee I wouldn't pull (say) my 10th Professor X if I chose to buy that token. But I'd still have a reasonable shot to pull his . Eventually.

And, no mistake, I'd have to choose between the plethora of 10+ cover 4* I have who'd be in that Vintage token, or covering the newer ones. There's no cake-and-eat-it-too going on there, although those newer ones would eventually land in the Vintage token (in which case my progress would proceed going forward as it has the past several months, and that's not a bad thing).

But while I'd have to choose between trying to cover Cyclops, Red Hulk, and Iceman, or Luke C4ge, Carol, and Medusa, the choice would be mine, and not dictated by the vagaries of the new character release schedule.

A Vintage Legendary, or something substantially similar, would have offered the player a vestige of control.

The Vintage Heroic? Does no such thing. It's a placebo, and not a very good one.

And I say all of that as someone who's in a "good" place roster-wise. The majority of my 4* roster has won, or can win, their respective Crashes. Those who cannot are, largely, the new characters whose progress has accelerated with the advent of vaulting. My favorite character in the game went from four covers to 10 in short order (even though she's about to have four wasted covers because the vaulting mechanic means she's going away soon).

I've been in the "keep my powder dry" camp on the recent changes, and I've tried to identify possible compromises that address the concerns of those whom vaulting hurts while preserving at least some of the gains for those whom vaulting benefits, but this is indefensible.

Of all the...let's not call it a solution, but a bandaid. Of all the bandaids which might have been selected while a more comprehensive approach is being workshopped, Vintage Heroics are quite possibly the worst. They deliver no appreciable benefit to anybody but the accountants.

hodayathink

DFiPL wrote:

Brigby wrote:

Edit: Sorry for the confusion. I must've accidentally pressed 5 instead of 4. I meant that the dilution of 4* made it hard for players to acquire and max them, especially as the newer ones were being released.

Vaulting doesn't change that, though, Brigby. It shifts the burden of completion from the newer characters to the older. Sealing off 75% (and growing) of the 4* library might improve the odds of pulling the newer characters, but it impedes the ability of a non-trivial portion of the playerbase to acquire the LTs to pull those covers through, say, the Crash of the Titans.

Vaulting doesn't change that. Bonus heroes is what was supposed to, but everyone loves to ignore it because it doesn't pop often enough.

Wjohnson992

You're aswell of getting the 2* from the regular heroic.

homeinvasion

Ban vintage tokens, lol what. Ban the stoopid new character only tokens and implement the old sustenance again

Daredevil217

firethorne wrote:

Brigby wrote:

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 any 4* to be a painfully slow process, because there were so many 4*s diluting the pack.

I just saw this little snippet, and yeah, I'm dumbfounded. They don't want a solution with dilution, so they implemented the solution with nearly the most diluting imaginable? A method with clearly more dilution than the way they rejected for having too much dilution? Packs with not only the same set of 4*s, but 3*s and 2*s as well?

We aren't stupid. And I'm going to keep assuming you aren't either. So, do you want to take another run at that explanation?

Just be honest. If this is about trying to make some money, to get some hp sales, then fine. Just say so. If that's the reason, then that's the reason. Even if it isn't popular, it is better than trying to lie to us.

This is exactly what I've been saying. It's mind boggling really. I would love a developer response to this!

MaskedMan

I still don't understand the whole idea behind dropping all the old 4*s. There are tons of players who either have these characters partially built or want to build them up. Waiting for the occasionally event is not sufficient, that is like hoping for a Shield Drop.

If delusion is issue, a 3rd vault with "archived characters" and a favorite system seems like a solution that everyone would love. Require everyone to pick AT LEAST 10/15 (or whatever) FAVORITES for this vault and let her rip. Players don't get buried in "bagmen" (i.e. tons of characters they don't want), old characters are still available for same price as current and no one's character development is arbitrarily cut off so new characters can come out.

Personally a lot of things here seem less than well thought out it seems a lot like my office.

Sidlon

My ideal Classic Legendary token: just like the old version, but double probability of drawing each of the 12 newest.

Alternately, just let there be 3 kinds of LTs: Latest/Recent/Classic

killerkoala

Now that vintage token is gone from active token page will open up my tokens later today.

killerkoala

vintage were gonna replace off season heroic.  still never spent the ones from last go around.

itstime1234

Jamie Madrox said:

Boycott is not the answer. If these new tokens sell well, I can see them becoming a permanent thing. I can even see them going as far as swapping an event token for one of these in each event or adding one of these tokens to progression rewards.

But none of that is going to happen if the knee-jerk negative reactions to every positive step keep happening.

Not the answer why cuz you said so. If others want to send a message about the alarmingly awful rates that is there call. If you are happy with the rates good for and happy opening. 

But the fact that it's new doesn't mean it's good. If they opened another legendary token and the odds of a 5* would be 1% you would be fine with that too?

poor argument and who are you to say if someone is acting in a knee jerk reaction. You don't know what thought process they put through you. 

As a mod this is disgraceful and seems to me close to putting down others thoughts as naive. At a minimum you are extremely judgmental of others.