Has anyone done the math?

245678

Comments

  • Fightmastermpq
    Fightmastermpq Posts: 995 Critical Contributor
    Welcome Death said:
    Sure thing.  If you pulled all legendaries in a non-vaulted system, you would need to pull about 719 legendaries to cover all 47 4* covers, assuming an even spread and color coverage (it would be higher of course because youd get dupes and runs on one character, but let's assume a perfect world for both systems). Your 5s (If you pulled all classics) would average around 390-405. You would  need 6248 pulls to get every 4* to 370.  At that point, if you pulled all classics, your 5s would be at level 522.  That's max champing all 4s.  


    Now, with a vaulting system, assuming you're only using LTs  and getting the vaulted 4s from those pulls, you would need to pull 10,705 tokens just to COVER the vaulted 4s.  Thats enough pulls to max champ every classic 5*, build dupes and get the dupes to level 483. Max champing the vaulted 4s would require 93,058 pulls. Thats enough pulls to max champ and flip every classic 5* 11 times(!) and have your last set at level 475.  

    These rates are ridiculous.  Sure, building a single 4* faster is a good thing, and if we played a game with no essential 4* / boosts / featured / whatever it would be a non-issue.  But the game is set-up in a way that you have to have all characters rostered in order to compete (even DDQ!)


    So, to answer your question.  Bonus heroes / vaulting made it about 2 times the rate to acquire one single classic 4*.  For the tier in general, the rate is about 6.7% of what it used to be.  In other words, you have to pull about 15 times the amount of tokens to get the same rate on the tier as before.  Bonus heroes = great idea!  Vaulting = ....maybe not so much.  If theyd kept the BH and did away with vaulting and/or gave better rates for BY specifically in the LT store, it would have been a fantastic system for fighting dilution.


    This doesn't feel right to me because I think you are leaving out the dilution aspect of covering characters over time.  Sure it would take longer to cover all the characters that are out right now.  Or rather - if you wanted to spend a ton of money to cover everything today you would have to spend a lot more with vaulting and BH than previously.  But over the long term the total number of 4* pulls you get will be exactly 5% greater with BH and so for anyone that isn't able to get the newest 4*s to 370 before they are vaulted I think the total time to all 370s will actually be faster with BH.

    The newer characters still become vaulted characters, but they get a headstart because you had increased draw rates for them for 8 months.  Under the old system you'd still have to cover those characters, and dilution would make it harder and harder to do so.  So the total number of covers obtained with and without vaulting would be the same, the only difference is BH giving you a 5% boost now.

    And let's not forget that BH let's you pick your character so you don't have dupes of your 370s while RNG keeps your JG at 350 for ages.  With no BH dilution makes pulling all those final covers harder and harder and harder.

  • mohio
    mohio Posts: 1,690 Chairperson of the Boards
    broll said:
    You were gonna get a like until that last paragraph.  There are no clear long-term benefits and those short-term benefits aren't going to suddenly go away.  A few of them will gradually fade, but that will take either vets quitting or a very long time to achieve.
    I respectfully disagree with you on this point. Already there are 49 total 4*, with 2 limited and one new, so 46 would have been in tokens under the old system. I'm going to ignore Heroics, which have only around 7% chance of drawing a 4*, which under the old system comes out to like 0.15% chance of any individual 4*. Suffice to say that BH substantially improves those odds for the few characters you pick. Instead let's take a look at LT.

    Under the old system you would have a 1.85% chance of pulling any given 4* RIGHT NOW. With vaulting and Bonus Hero system we actually have, you have a 4.25% chance of getting a 4* bonus hero, which of course is divided through by how many you pick as your favorites. You said there are no long-term benefits, but what about 6 months from now - what will things look like then? Well, the way it's set up, the bonus hero part will never change. You will always have that 4.25% chance to get one, divided up by however many you choose as favorites. The old system odds though become worse and worse as time goes on. Assuming they stay at the typical pace of 2 new 4* every 6 weeks, there will be ~9 new 4* in the next 6 months. That's 56 available 4*, which means you would have had a 1.5% chance of getting any single one. At 60 4* (about 9 months from now), you could choose 3 bonus heroes and have the same chance as you would have under the old system. 

    It's easy to look at the change as a newer player and say "tinykitty this, now I will never cover iceman/peggy/rulk/etc" - but look at those odds...1.5%!! They were never going to cover them through LT/heroic pulls under the old system either!

    So yeah, we all have to overcome the initial hurdle of having most of the characters undercovered, or at the very least, non-champed, due to them just being newer, but that is definitely a short-term issue, not a long-term one, as we are getting those covers easier than before, and mostly getting enough iso to champion them and keep up with new releases. Long term it will be easier to stay at 100% useful covers (outside of 5/5/1-style dupes, which will be easier to push through also!) since you only have to stay on top of the current 12 characters and don't need to fill in all the older characters you never got around to championing before. 
  • broll
    broll Posts: 4,732 Chairperson of the Boards
    Fightmastermpq said:
    broll said:
    carrion pigeons said:
    The problem people have with vaulting varies according to their status.  Veterans with champed 4*s don't like vaulting because champ rewards for newly champed characters are less valuable than those with more levels.  Vaulting makes it harder to get characters deep into their champ levels, and this reduces the flow of resources to vets.

    People in the 4* transition don't like vaulting because they had a whole bunch of half-developed characters who are suddenly either wasted space or else extremely more long-term projects that can only rely on Bonus Heroes to get anywhere, one at a time.

    People without older characters at all don't like vaulting because they still have to compete against people who have them, and it feels like an unfair advantage they can never overcome, in terms of flexibility and utility.

    Also, everyone objects to the way vaulting causes more wasted pulls.  This is admittedly a short-term problem, but it's one people are having right now.

    Vaulting has clear long-term benefits: it creates a shifting metagame which gives the game more depth.  It lessens the burden on new players in some respects to advance.  It justifies the existence of Bonus Heroes, which probably would never have been implemented without it.  It came with an associated bump in total 4* acquisition.  All of that is nice.  But it's easy to see how a change that had immediate negative effects on every active player in the game would be unpopular.
    You were gonna get a like until that last paragraph.  There are no clear long-term benefits and those short-term benefits aren't going to suddenly go away.  A few of them will gradually fade, but that will take either vets quitting or a very long time to achieve.
    The first rule of Likes is you don't talk about Likes.

    How about the length of time it takes to get to a point where you have virtually no wasted 4* covers getting cut to 1/4 what it was before?  Is that not a benefit?  Feels like a benefit to me.
    To what end?  All it does is change the treadmill.  Now instead of tons of wasted covers we'll have tons of low level champions that may or may not be worth playing, while we're still gonna be up against people who have level 355 Iceman.  A non-whale like me will be able to get the latest 12 championed, but not much past that so we'll have a bunch of 4* all at 270-285 and have trouble getting beyond those numbers until we just abandon 4* tier for 5*s.  It's at best 1 step forward and 2 steps back.
  • astrp3
    astrp3 Posts: 367 Mover and Shaker
    Vhailorx said:
    I think the ultimate bottom line that we see here among the vet/forum community is that vaulting is good for, and liked by, players with 370 4*s (*cough*Fightmaster*cough*), but bad for, and disliked by, players with ~300 4*s (*cough*vhailorx*cough*).


    What about players with no championed 4*s (like me)? I think there are benefits for them as well. It seem that they will now get at least a handful of useable 4*s much more quickly than before and perhaps get to a point where they are more competitive with 4* rosters sooner. For instance, one thing that I don't know has been mentioned is that it might be possible to much more quickly get to the point where you can get top 10 in PvE more consistently and make 900 in PvP, which means more 4* covers (though if they switch the focus on rewards to non-vaulted characters this might not be as much of a benefit).

    I say "might be" because I have not yet started championing my 4*s and may find that even with 6-12 non-vaulted 4*s champs, I'm still not able to compete. And even if I were able to compete, it might only be when one of my 6-12 4*s was boosted, but that's better than having no 4* champs at all. OTOH, in the longer run, I suspect there will come a point where advancing to the next level will require having 4*s that are higher than level 270-300, which is probably going to be harder with vaulting.

    On a side note, believe it or not, in my current situation, there are benefits to dilution and I would actually prefer to go back to the old system for a few weeks, but that's just from a totally selfish perspective and because of my oddball, less-than-optimal, play style. I am currently finishing off championing my last five 3*s and am getting 4* covers for the latest 12 at too high a rate.  But that's because I have chosen to finish off my 3*s before starting the 4*s, even though I could do otherwise. Yes, I know that the "correct" solution is hoarding tokens, but I really hate doing that (plus I'm trying to get Wasp covers before she leaves the stores -  I plan to hoard once Wasp leaves the stores). So my selfish preference would be to go back to a diluted pool for the next few weeks then switch to the latest-12 after I finish my 3*s. And yes, I know that if they added another store, I could take my pick and pull from whichever one I wanted.

  • DaveR4470
    DaveR4470 Posts: 931 Critical Contributor
    Welcome Death said:
    Sure thing.  If you pulled all legendaries in a non-vaulted system, you would need to pull about 719 legendaries to cover all 47 4* covers, assuming an even spread and color coverage (it would be higher of course because youd get dupes and runs on one character, but let's assume a perfect world for both systems). Your 5s (If you pulled all classics) would average around 390-405. You would  need 6248 pulls to get every 4* to 370.  At that point, if you pulled all classics, your 5s would be at level 522.  That's max champing all 4s.  


    First, thanks for putting some numbers down!  I will say, though, that your analysis isn't the one I was asking for.  I was wondering if people did the math to compare the overall chances of getting a given character pre- and post- vaulting.  You're taking it a step further -- a step that increases the difficulty of the math exponentially, if memory serves.  To determine the mean number of pulls required to pull at least one of all 47 characters. (As an aside, I think 719 sounds a bit low....)  There are 49 4* covers now, two of which are unavailable, which means that in the abstract there's a 1/47 chance of pulling a specific character (pre-vault).  That's 2.13%.  There's an 86% chance of drawing a 4* from a legendary.  So the odds of pulling a particular 4* character on a given pull are about 1.8%.  To extrapolate that data into a mean number of pulls before you've covered each character... is difficult.  It's definitely a number between 47 (the minimum required) and infinity (because in theory you could never do it -- probabilities are not guarantees).  In practice, I think you'd calculate it empirically -- you'd do multiple simulations of pulling legendaries until you had pulled all of the 4*s, over and over again, until you had a set of results that you could analyze.  As the number of simulations approaches infinity, you get closer to the true mean value of that pull total.  I think, though, that you can do it mathematically as well; it just requires set theory that's way beyond my abilities.  In any event, I wasn't taking it to that level, although it certainly would be interesting to know that result.

    Now, with a vaulting system, assuming you're only using LTs  and getting the vaulted 4s from those pulls, you would need to pull 10,705 tokens just to COVER the vaulted 4s.  Thats enough pulls to max champ every classic 5*, build dupes and get the dupes to level 483. Max champing the vaulted 4s would require 93,058 pulls. Thats enough pulls to max champ and flip every classic 5* 11 times(!) and have your last set at level 475.  
    Again, to quote Madness.... one! step! beyond!  And out of my math range.  As far as the odds of pulling a specific 4*.... you now have a 1/12 chance of pulling a given unvaulted 4*; that's 8.33%.  Still the 86% chance of getting a 4*, so that's a 7.16% chance on a given pull.  For an unvaulted character, the chance is (86%*5%*(1/35))= 0.12%.  That assumes you favorite every vaulted 4*.  BUT..... with the vaulting/favorite system, you also have control over which covers you favorite.  You do not HAVE to favorite every vaulted character, which means you can control the odds to an extent.  If you only favorite one vaulted character, you now have a 4.3% chance of pulling it.  And the 0.12% odds only apply if all vaulted characters are covered, which -- to bring it to the next level as you did -- would NOT be the case in reality if you were trying to roster each character.  You'd drop characters from favorite status as you acquired them, increasing the odds for the rest of the set.  (I think your 10,705 number assumes keeping the favorite list constant at "all of them", which you would not have to do in real life.)  The best apples-to-apples comparison is the raw odds of getting a given cover.
    So, to answer your question.  Bonus heroes / vaulting made it about 2 times the rate to acquire one single classic 4*.  For the tier in general, the rate is about 6.7% of what it used to be.  In other words, you have to pull about 15 times the amount of tokens to get the same rate on the tier as before. 

    Not sure I follow you here; I think you're mixing concepts.  The "rate" of 4* acquisition is identical with or without vaulting - 86% of your legendary pulls will be 4*s.  The distribution of 4*s within that set is what changes.  And you can never achieve the same distribution as before; that's precisely what has changed.  All you can really analyze is the change in your odds of getting a specific character, or (if you multiply everything by 1/3) the odds of getting a specific character and color, before and after the distribution change.  And what I see is this:  for any given legendary token pull, vaulting/bonus heroes quadruples the odds of acquiring a given 4* nonvaulted character, from 1.8% to 8.3%.  It also changes the odds of acquiring a vaulted character to a variable rate, which is largely in the control of the player, between 0.12% and 4.3% (vs. a flat 1.8% before the change).  (And, as a side note, you can guarantee you won't get unwanted covers for vaulted characters.... which some may find useful.)

    These are significant changes, no doubt; and it would be interesting to extend the math to the practical application of the changes in terms of mean-pulls-to-coverage and such.  But I've seen some people saying that this will mean people can "never" cover vaulted characters.  That's simply not true -- in fact, if you focus specifically on covering that character, you will statistically do it significantly faster than you would have before.  And of course this doesn't take into account special events, reward covers, and potential vault rotation.  

    Ultimately, I'm not arguing with those who are saying "vaulting sucks; I hate it".  It's fine to not like something.  I'm arguing with the people who are saying "this breaks the game" or "now players can never cover vaulted characters". 

    @Vhailorx , I don't think I'm making a false equivalence at all.  To the contrary, my goal is to compare equivalent things pre- and post-change.  To me, a false equivalence would be "I have a greater chance of getting 3*s which offsets the lower chance of getting 4*s".  That's false because the value of a 3* and a 4* are very different.  I'm just comparing flat odds per token pull for a given cover/character, which is really the only thing that vaulting/bonus changes.   I'm all ears if you see it differently, though...

    tl;dr I have probably spent too much time thinking about this.  

  • Fightmastermpq
    Fightmastermpq Posts: 995 Critical Contributor
    DaveR4470 said:

    Ultimately, I'm not arguing with those who are saying "vaulting sucks; I hate it".  It's fine to not like something.  I'm arguing with the people who are saying "this breaks the game" or "now players can never cover vaulted characters". 

    This has been my soap box recently.  The vast majority of complaints are "vaulting sucks because [bad math]...." and I really think that people would be a lot more open to it if they understand the math and what it really means for their rosters.  Hell just today in this thread I thought a little deeper on the very long term and realized that vaulting might actually be better for me than I originally thought.
  • WelcomeDeath
    WelcomeDeath Posts: 349 Mover and Shaker
    Lots to respond to.  Dave, I got my rate based on the 85% pull rate of 4s in the LT store with a 5% BH rate, about a 4.25% shot, or 1 for every 24 tokens pulled.
     Beyond that...in regards to my position on vaulting, which has nothing to do with the math I put down, I actually don't mind it 100%.  It gives players the choice to shut off 4s (or 3s) forever, which is a good thing. Bonus Heroes only came out as a bandaid for vaulting, and i like extra rewards, so that's good, too.  Also, I do realize that players can get 4s from resupply, progression, placement and champ rewards, but I didn't include those, because otherwise the answer would be that you could cover every 4* with 0 pulls.  Just hit progression in pve for the next 5 years or so.  Besides, those aren't exactly consistent, are they?

    The other issue I have doesnt really have to do with vaulting at all, but everything to do with the way 4* are treated for placement (3* as well).  Pve isnt too far off. T300 in cl8 getting a 3* makes sense, but limiting a 4* to t10 doesnt.  We get a 4* for being t100 in a new 4* event, why not make it that way for every event? That would be meaningful progression from placement rewards, not just the crazy 0.001% that place t10 in cl7 and cl8. Pvp has gotten better for top 5 and top 25, but thats where it ends.  We haven't even gotten back to a system of t100 getting a 3* (like the old system).  If youre level 65+, you likely dont even need 3*, nevermind 2* you get for being 51st in the highest CL in the game right now.  That's just silly, especially since you have to at least get the 3* in progression to get there.  News flash!  Theres a whole tier above the 4* tier!  Stop treating them like the crown jewels in regards to placement.
  • nickaraxnos
    nickaraxnos Posts: 46 Just Dropped In
    All those maths cant give the answer to a simple question. 
    Why arent they giving us a third lt with all vaulted heroes and let everyone decide his faith?
    Math aldo cant answer why we dont have even a responce for the reason this is not happening
  • GurlBYE
    GurlBYE Posts: 1,218 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited April 2017
    Mixing odds and possibility.

    Also mixing the usefulness up.

    i've already hit multiple 4 covers I can't use on characters no where near useable or champable

    where as before that happened maybe a handful of times during a year of collection (i believe around 2 hulkbuster red, and about 3 green carnage) 4 covers. This is mainly excluding things like champ levels, which I occasionally just took the loss on, (like carnage green from doc oc)

    No matter how much math you do, the overall transition was less about covering x quickly and more about going with as many usable 4 covers at once to slowly but surely fill out a stable of 4's. Which is a why a ton of people always went on and on about the 4 transition being a landslide in which you needed iso ASAP because you eventually got to a ton of characters with 13 covers around the same time.

    You can compare it to the odds of drawing one specific X cover from X pack, except that wasn't the expectation, switching to bonus heros' its not just the expectation, it's the singular path at the moment, barring the vaults which are unrelated. 

    We are collectively aware of the positives and negatives of both bonus heros AND vaulting. now we are awaiting solutions. 
  • n25philly
    n25philly Posts: 426 Mover and Shaker
    Jexman said:
    Have the developers themselves explained to us what *they* thought vaulting would accomplish for their game?
    $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
  • astrp3
    astrp3 Posts: 367 Mover and Shaker
    edited April 2017
     GurlBYE said:
    You can compare it to the odds of drawing one specific X cover from X pack, except that wasn't the expectation, switching to bonus heros' its not just the expectation, it's the singular path at the moment, barring the vaults which are unrelated. . 
    Maybe, but it seems to me there was a singular path before too (unless you were willing to spend a small fortune). Under the previous system, you had to build up 4*s slowly but steadily, but when you finally got there, you championed a bunch at once. Which is fine, but one problem for me was that until you got there, you weren't going to be competitive with the 4*s. The bigger problem for me, however, was the time. Once you champed your 3s,, during that long wait to get to 4* land, it seems like you would have been stuck doing the same thing over, and over, and over, and over...for 6-12 months or longer. Same teams, same events. Same unusable 4*s on your roster. And that's not even counting new releases. There is more than enough mindless grinding and repetition in this game (probably my biggest gripe) without adding more.  I know, I know...the game is a marathon, not a sprint, and hats off to those who like marathons, but I don't and don't know if I would have made it to the promised land without getting bored and quitting. If you started playing early on, when the pool wasn't so diluted, it probably wasn't so bad (plus, you had all those character introduction events).


    With vaulting, expectations may have to change and the 4* game is a different one (and perhaps more of a sprint than it used to be).  That may not be so great for someone who played under a previous set of expectations, but there it is. New players, however, may find that they can become at least somewhat competitive with 4*s shortly after leaving 3* land instead of months later, which I think is as it should be, but maybe that's just me.

    Sure, I think it would be much better if they had multiple stores and let people pick which style they wanted, but I'm not expecting that to happen any time soon.

  • Starfury
    Starfury Posts: 719 Critical Contributor
    Fightmastermpq said:
    DaveR4470 said:

    Ultimately, I'm not arguing with those who are saying "vaulting sucks; I hate it".  It's fine to not like something.  I'm arguing with the people who are saying "this breaks the game" or "now players can never cover vaulted characters". 

    This has been my soap box recently.  The vast majority of complaints are "vaulting sucks because [bad math]...." and I really think that people would be a lot more open to it if they understand the math and what it really means for their rosters.  tinykitty just today in this thread I thought a little deeper on the very long term and realized that vaulting might actually be better for me than I originally thought.
    Vaulting sucks because my draw rate of vaulted characters dropped from ~75% to 5%.

    Not sure if that qualifies as bad math but it sure as hell qualifies as a bad change for me.
  • Starfury
    Starfury Posts: 719 Critical Contributor
    sh81 said:

    I cannot get 4* from progression.  It literally never happens, unless its a giveaway on a boss event.  Im a regular top 50 finisher, literally every event, and occasional top 10.

    On the back of Prodigal sun Ill likely get 3 Storm Mohawk, which will amount to 2000 iso.  Which in the context of the time put into the event and my top 50 finish, is meaningless.  And quite frankly demoralising.

    If it was a 4*?  That would be AWESOME!  Especially if it was also multiple covers (or even single covers for 2 or 3 characters).

    What SCL are you playing at? You should easily get 2 4* covers from progression in a 7 day event (or 1 in 3/4 day events) when you place top 50.
  • Fightmastermpq
    Fightmastermpq Posts: 995 Critical Contributor
    Starfury said:
    Fightmastermpq said:
    DaveR4470 said:

    Ultimately, I'm not arguing with those who are saying "vaulting sucks; I hate it".  It's fine to not like something.  I'm arguing with the people who are saying "this breaks the game" or "now players can never cover vaulted characters". 

    This has been my soap box recently.  The vast majority of complaints are "vaulting sucks because [bad math]...." and I really think that people would be a lot more open to it if they understand the math and what it really means for their rosters.  tinykitty just today in this thread I thought a little deeper on the very long term and realized that vaulting might actually be better for me than I originally thought.
    Vaulting sucks because my draw rate of vaulted characters dropped from ~75% to 5%.

    Not sure if that qualifies as bad math but it sure as tinykitty qualifies as a bad change for me.
    Does it? Your draw rate of new characters went from 25% to 100%.  Don't know what your roster looks like, but I would wager that your path to success is better under the new system than the old.
  • Starfury
    Starfury Posts: 719 Critical Contributor
    Fightmastermpq said:
    Does it? Your draw rate of new characters went from 25% to 100%.  Don't know what your roster looks like, but I would wager that your path to success is better under the new system than the old.
    I have around 15 vaulted 4* champs which in all likelyhood won't get past 300 (or 280 for some of the recent ones) under the current system.

    What's that path to success supposed to be? Have a moving window of 12 relevant 4* with an expiry date of 6 months each?
  • broll
    broll Posts: 4,732 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited April 2017
    Fightmastermpq said:
    Starfury said:
    Fightmastermpq said:
    DaveR4470 said:

    Ultimately, I'm not arguing with those who are saying "vaulting sucks; I hate it".  It's fine to not like something.  I'm arguing with the people who are saying "this breaks the game" or "now players can never cover vaulted characters". 

    This has been my soap box recently.  The vast majority of complaints are "vaulting sucks because [bad math]...." and I really think that people would be a lot more open to it if they understand the math and what it really means for their rosters.  tinykitty just today in this thread I thought a little deeper on the very long term and realized that vaulting might actually be better for me than I originally thought.
    Vaulting sucks because my draw rate of vaulted characters dropped from ~75% to 5%.

    Not sure if that qualifies as bad math but it sure as tinykitty qualifies as a bad change for me.
    Does it? Your draw rate of new characters went from 25% to 100%.  Don't know what your roster looks like, but I would wager that your path to success is better under the new system than the old.
    Yes it does.  My rate of getting champions increased, but I will never max champ anything.  Now instead of slowly building vaulted top 10s like Red Hulk and Peggy they will be stuck sub 280 and I'll be PvPing people who have much higher level ones when they are boosted.  I've got a permanent glass ceiling keeping from playing at a high level in 4* tier and that won't go away unless vaulting does.
  • Fightmastermpq
    Fightmastermpq Posts: 995 Critical Contributor
    Starfury said:
    Fightmastermpq said:
    Does it? Your draw rate of new characters went from 25% to 100%.  Don't know what your roster looks like, but I would wager that your path to success is better under the new system than the old.
    I have around 15 vaulted 4* champs which in all likelyhood won't get past 300 (or 280 for some of the recent ones) under the current system.

    What's that path to success supposed to be? Have a moving window of 12 relevant 4* with an expiry date of 6 months each?
    You define your own success, but for me it's a roster that makes it easier for me to be as competitive as possible.  Our rosters aren't much different, when vaulting went live I had a few more 4*s, but they all topped out around 300 as well.  I've now got a level 350 Iceman.  When he is boosted I am much more competitive than previously.  I also no longer have to care about the bottom tier vaulted 4*s and can focus only on the 12 newest ones selling off fewer covers.  That makes me more competitive.
  • astrp3
    astrp3 Posts: 367 Mover and Shaker
    sh81 said:
    Welcome Death said:

    If youre level 65+, you likely dont even need 3*

    And coming by 4* covers is HARD.

    I can buy an LT once or twice a week through CP I accrue.  This is a slow process.



    sh81, I am curious as to why you are only getting one or two legendary pulls a week. Have you actually tracked your resource usage or are you just guesstimating? It sounds like you are at a VERY similar spot to me, but a little bit ahead (I have no champed 4*s and have never finished top 10 in a PvP). Since I started tracking my usage a month and a half ago, I've gotten 1.65 legendary pulls a day. I would have guesstimated a much lower number before. And I certainly don't find ISO useless. I have a half dozen 4*s close to being champed and will need all of it I can get. Are you getting top 50 in PvE? (I know you said you were in PvP, which is usually where I end up).

    I also don't understand why y'all are saying that 3* covers are near useless after championing or after you reach 65. I am at SHIELD rank 66 and still find the rewards quite useful (I'm nowhere close to max championing any of my 3*s). With 43 3* champs (I'm not quite there yet), that ISO, HP, and XP (which turns into ISO) add up quick. Don't forget about the three 4* covers you get from 3* champ levels - that's currently 129 covers total, which is nothing to sneeze at.

    Also, how long have you been playing? I suspect it's probably only a bit longer than me (ca 160 days). If so, don't forget about the 4* covers from SHIELD resupply. It's not a huge source, but I think you get about 50-60 total.


     

Categories