Daredevil217 said: Fightmastermpq said: Daredevil217 said: As for the answers you provided, I am glad you were able to see at least some of the drawbacks to vaulting (very cool you called it what it is too), are well aware of the negative feedback with regards to vaulting, and SAY you are open to change/willing to listen to players feedback in making changes. I think most players can agree that dilution was a problem. So you pointing out the ways in which vaulting helped with dilution is kind of a no-brainer. Just like people don't have a problem with Bonus Heroes, people don't have a problem with you tackling dilution. Our problems lie in the heavy-handed way in which dilution was "fixed" and all of the negative side-effects that go along with your solution. You acknowledge some of these, others not so much, but they are indeed there. For example, there is no acknowledgement that dilution is far, FAR worse for any cover not in the latest 12. And that there are some of us who want those older characters for a variety of reasons (maybe I am just a big fan of the Fantastic 4?), not to mention all characters are necessary. You also do not acknowledge how hoarding has seen a serious increase with this change almost universally (I'm sure there are some exceptions). I think the biggest problem with vaulting is that people seem to near universally agree that dilution is bad without really having a clue what dilution really is, or comprehend how bad it would have gotten had there been no change.Statements like "dilution is far far worse for vaulted characters" are good indicators of this. Another common complaint I see is "their solution to dilution doesn't allow me to progress on all characters at once!" No, dilution itself is what prevents you from progressing on everything at once.Dilution is best represented in average covers per character per pull. This number was very low and getting lower (1/43 I think when vaulting began) which means you would need an average of 559 pulls to cover a 4*, and if we measure success in # of champed 4*s it means that someone who earns 2 LTs/day needs nearly a years worth of pulls to cover a 4*. The bigger problem though is if you started at Day 1 over the course of that year something like 17 more characters would be added to the pool lowering your 1/43 dilution rate to 1/60 and so the time required to make any progress just keeps getting longer and longer and longer. I think most people get that but it's important to note that progress was taking a REALLY long time under the old system.Now. One way to raise the number of covers people are able to earn is to just award more covers. Obviously this is not in the devs best interest as it would upset the game economy, so if we are holding total number of pulls close to constant, and continually releasing new characters - how do we prevent the average number of covers/pull (the dilution) from decreasing with every new release. You do it by limiting the number of characters available to be pulled from the tokens - by vaulting all but the newest 12 you fix the dilution at 1/12. So given no change to pull rate the average number of characters per pull increases nearly 4x with vaulting today, and 5x what it would have been a year from now. To do this requires sacrifice. By necessity.They gave us BH to partially help address the issue of accessing older characters, but to claim that not having access to ALL of the older characters is some massive failure of vaulting doesn't make any sense. Having access to ALL of the other characters IS dilution - the very thing vaulting was trying to fix. You assume everyone wants to play like you and fast track to 5* land. That's not the end goal for everyone. I want to collect everyone. I want all characters usable because aside from just liking certain characters, the game also tells us that it is beneficial to have all characters usable. No one is debating that we can't level certain characters faster, but older ones (that we still need) became much much harder.You can't imagine what it must have been like for a new player under the old system? Imagine starting under this new system and wanting all characters. Well... bonus heroes. So I tag them all. Under this new system, dilution is way worse for older characters (given your definition), because 19/20 will be the newest. To cover my oldest I have a 1/20 shot at an old toon and then that one cover could be one of 30-40 characters. Way way more diluted.So let me ask you, since a developer won't answer, what would be wrong with having a separate token that has all older 4s in it? I'm guessing you'll say something like "people will still complain" or "you re-introduce dilution". The first is a really shaky argument that is easily destroyed and the second isn't true. Like I said in my last post, adding a completely different diluted token does not undo the fact that we have plenty of non-diluted options to pull from. They are mutually exclusive. So again, why wouldn't this work and allow the large majority who are outraged (and were happy with the old system) one avenue to pull old toons from?
Fightmastermpq said: Daredevil217 said: As for the answers you provided, I am glad you were able to see at least some of the drawbacks to vaulting (very cool you called it what it is too), are well aware of the negative feedback with regards to vaulting, and SAY you are open to change/willing to listen to players feedback in making changes. I think most players can agree that dilution was a problem. So you pointing out the ways in which vaulting helped with dilution is kind of a no-brainer. Just like people don't have a problem with Bonus Heroes, people don't have a problem with you tackling dilution. Our problems lie in the heavy-handed way in which dilution was "fixed" and all of the negative side-effects that go along with your solution. You acknowledge some of these, others not so much, but they are indeed there. For example, there is no acknowledgement that dilution is far, FAR worse for any cover not in the latest 12. And that there are some of us who want those older characters for a variety of reasons (maybe I am just a big fan of the Fantastic 4?), not to mention all characters are necessary. You also do not acknowledge how hoarding has seen a serious increase with this change almost universally (I'm sure there are some exceptions). I think the biggest problem with vaulting is that people seem to near universally agree that dilution is bad without really having a clue what dilution really is, or comprehend how bad it would have gotten had there been no change.Statements like "dilution is far far worse for vaulted characters" are good indicators of this. Another common complaint I see is "their solution to dilution doesn't allow me to progress on all characters at once!" No, dilution itself is what prevents you from progressing on everything at once.Dilution is best represented in average covers per character per pull. This number was very low and getting lower (1/43 I think when vaulting began) which means you would need an average of 559 pulls to cover a 4*, and if we measure success in # of champed 4*s it means that someone who earns 2 LTs/day needs nearly a years worth of pulls to cover a 4*. The bigger problem though is if you started at Day 1 over the course of that year something like 17 more characters would be added to the pool lowering your 1/43 dilution rate to 1/60 and so the time required to make any progress just keeps getting longer and longer and longer. I think most people get that but it's important to note that progress was taking a REALLY long time under the old system.Now. One way to raise the number of covers people are able to earn is to just award more covers. Obviously this is not in the devs best interest as it would upset the game economy, so if we are holding total number of pulls close to constant, and continually releasing new characters - how do we prevent the average number of covers/pull (the dilution) from decreasing with every new release. You do it by limiting the number of characters available to be pulled from the tokens - by vaulting all but the newest 12 you fix the dilution at 1/12. So given no change to pull rate the average number of characters per pull increases nearly 4x with vaulting today, and 5x what it would have been a year from now. To do this requires sacrifice. By necessity.They gave us BH to partially help address the issue of accessing older characters, but to claim that not having access to ALL of the older characters is some massive failure of vaulting doesn't make any sense. Having access to ALL of the other characters IS dilution - the very thing vaulting was trying to fix.
Daredevil217 said: As for the answers you provided, I am glad you were able to see at least some of the drawbacks to vaulting (very cool you called it what it is too), are well aware of the negative feedback with regards to vaulting, and SAY you are open to change/willing to listen to players feedback in making changes. I think most players can agree that dilution was a problem. So you pointing out the ways in which vaulting helped with dilution is kind of a no-brainer. Just like people don't have a problem with Bonus Heroes, people don't have a problem with you tackling dilution. Our problems lie in the heavy-handed way in which dilution was "fixed" and all of the negative side-effects that go along with your solution. You acknowledge some of these, others not so much, but they are indeed there. For example, there is no acknowledgement that dilution is far, FAR worse for any cover not in the latest 12. And that there are some of us who want those older characters for a variety of reasons (maybe I am just a big fan of the Fantastic 4?), not to mention all characters are necessary. You also do not acknowledge how hoarding has seen a serious increase with this change almost universally (I'm sure there are some exceptions).
Starfury said: Fightmastermpq said: They gave us BH to partially help address the issue of accessing older characters, but to claim that not having access to ALL of the older characters is some massive failure of vaulting doesn't make any sense. Having access to ALL of the other characters IS dilution - the very thing vaulting was trying to fix. No, it's choice.You'd be free to continue to pull from the latest 12, while we'd be free to pull from the entire pool, like the morons you keep telling us we are.
Fightmastermpq said: They gave us BH to partially help address the issue of accessing older characters, but to claim that not having access to ALL of the older characters is some massive failure of vaulting doesn't make any sense. Having access to ALL of the other characters IS dilution - the very thing vaulting was trying to fix.
Fightmastermpq said: Daredevil217 said: Fightmastermpq said: Daredevil217 said: As for the answers you provided, I am glad you were able to see at least some of the drawbacks to vaulting (very cool you called it what it is too), are well aware of the negative feedback with regards to vaulting, and SAY you are open to change/willing to listen to players feedback in making changes. I think most players can agree that dilution was a problem. So you pointing out the ways in which vaulting helped with dilution is kind of a no-brainer. Just like people don't have a problem with Bonus Heroes, people don't have a problem with you tackling dilution. Our problems lie in the heavy-handed way in which dilution was "fixed" and all of the negative side-effects that go along with your solution. You acknowledge some of these, others not so much, but they are indeed there. For example, there is no acknowledgement that dilution is far, FAR worse for any cover not in the latest 12. And that there are some of us who want those older characters for a variety of reasons (maybe I am just a big fan of the Fantastic 4?), not to mention all characters are necessary. You also do not acknowledge how hoarding has seen a serious increase with this change almost universally (I'm sure there are some exceptions). I think the biggest problem with vaulting is that people seem to near universally agree that dilution is bad without really having a clue what dilution really is, or comprehend how bad it would have gotten had there been no change.Statements like "dilution is far far worse for vaulted characters" are good indicators of this. Another common complaint I see is "their solution to dilution doesn't allow me to progress on all characters at once!" No, dilution itself is what prevents you from progressing on everything at once.Dilution is best represented in average covers per character per pull. This number was very low and getting lower (1/43 I think when vaulting began) which means you would need an average of 559 pulls to cover a 4*, and if we measure success in # of champed 4*s it means that someone who earns 2 LTs/day needs nearly a years worth of pulls to cover a 4*. The bigger problem though is if you started at Day 1 over the course of that year something like 17 more characters would be added to the pool lowering your 1/43 dilution rate to 1/60 and so the time required to make any progress just keeps getting longer and longer and longer. I think most people get that but it's important to note that progress was taking a REALLY long time under the old system.Now. One way to raise the number of covers people are able to earn is to just award more covers. Obviously this is not in the devs best interest as it would upset the game economy, so if we are holding total number of pulls close to constant, and continually releasing new characters - how do we prevent the average number of covers/pull (the dilution) from decreasing with every new release. You do it by limiting the number of characters available to be pulled from the tokens - by vaulting all but the newest 12 you fix the dilution at 1/12. So given no change to pull rate the average number of characters per pull increases nearly 4x with vaulting today, and 5x what it would have been a year from now. To do this requires sacrifice. By necessity.They gave us BH to partially help address the issue of accessing older characters, but to claim that not having access to ALL of the older characters is some massive failure of vaulting doesn't make any sense. Having access to ALL of the other characters IS dilution - the very thing vaulting was trying to fix. You assume everyone wants to play like you and fast track to 5* land. That's not the end goal for everyone. I want to collect everyone. I want all characters usable because aside from just liking certain characters, the game also tells us that it is beneficial to have all characters usable. No one is debating that we can't level certain characters faster, but older ones (that we still need) became much much harder.You can't imagine what it must have been like for a new player under the old system? Imagine starting under this new system and wanting all characters. Well... bonus heroes. So I tag them all. Under this new system, dilution is way worse for older characters (given your definition), because 19/20 will be the newest. To cover my oldest I have a 1/20 shot at an old toon and then that one cover could be one of 30-40 characters. Way way more diluted.So let me ask you, since a developer won't answer, what would be wrong with having a separate token that has all older 4s in it? I'm guessing you'll say something like "people will still complain" or "you re-introduce dilution". The first is a really shaky argument that is easily destroyed and the second isn't true. Like I said in my last post, adding a completely different diluted token does not undo the fact that we have plenty of non-diluted options to pull from. They are mutually exclusive. So again, why wouldn't this work and allow the large majority who are outraged (and were happy with the old system) one avenue to pull old toons from? Your issue isn't with vaulting, it's with the premise of "dilution is bad." It isn't for you. You'd rather slowly cover all characters starting a year from now, than quickly cover the newest characters starting 3 months from now.
MarkersMake said: Fightmastermpq said: Daredevil217 said: Fightmastermpq said: Daredevil217 said: As for the answers you provided, I am glad you were able to see at least some of the drawbacks to vaulting (very cool you called it what it is too), are well aware of the negative feedback with regards to vaulting, and SAY you are open to change/willing to listen to players feedback in making changes. I think most players can agree that dilution was a problem. So you pointing out the ways in which vaulting helped with dilution is kind of a no-brainer. Just like people don't have a problem with Bonus Heroes, people don't have a problem with you tackling dilution. Our problems lie in the heavy-handed way in which dilution was "fixed" and all of the negative side-effects that go along with your solution. You acknowledge some of these, others not so much, but they are indeed there. For example, there is no acknowledgement that dilution is far, FAR worse for any cover not in the latest 12. And that there are some of us who want those older characters for a variety of reasons (maybe I am just a big fan of the Fantastic 4?), not to mention all characters are necessary. You also do not acknowledge how hoarding has seen a serious increase with this change almost universally (I'm sure there are some exceptions). I think the biggest problem with vaulting is that people seem to near universally agree that dilution is bad without really having a clue what dilution really is, or comprehend how bad it would have gotten had there been no change.Statements like "dilution is far far worse for vaulted characters" are good indicators of this. Another common complaint I see is "their solution to dilution doesn't allow me to progress on all characters at once!" No, dilution itself is what prevents you from progressing on everything at once.Dilution is best represented in average covers per character per pull. This number was very low and getting lower (1/43 I think when vaulting began) which means you would need an average of 559 pulls to cover a 4*, and if we measure success in # of champed 4*s it means that someone who earns 2 LTs/day needs nearly a years worth of pulls to cover a 4*. The bigger problem though is if you started at Day 1 over the course of that year something like 17 more characters would be added to the pool lowering your 1/43 dilution rate to 1/60 and so the time required to make any progress just keeps getting longer and longer and longer. I think most people get that but it's important to note that progress was taking a REALLY long time under the old system.Now. One way to raise the number of covers people are able to earn is to just award more covers. Obviously this is not in the devs best interest as it would upset the game economy, so if we are holding total number of pulls close to constant, and continually releasing new characters - how do we prevent the average number of covers/pull (the dilution) from decreasing with every new release. You do it by limiting the number of characters available to be pulled from the tokens - by vaulting all but the newest 12 you fix the dilution at 1/12. So given no change to pull rate the average number of characters per pull increases nearly 4x with vaulting today, and 5x what it would have been a year from now. To do this requires sacrifice. By necessity.They gave us BH to partially help address the issue of accessing older characters, but to claim that not having access to ALL of the older characters is some massive failure of vaulting doesn't make any sense. Having access to ALL of the other characters IS dilution - the very thing vaulting was trying to fix. You assume everyone wants to play like you and fast track to 5* land. That's not the end goal for everyone. I want to collect everyone. I want all characters usable because aside from just liking certain characters, the game also tells us that it is beneficial to have all characters usable. No one is debating that we can't level certain characters faster, but older ones (that we still need) became much much harder.You can't imagine what it must have been like for a new player under the old system? Imagine starting under this new system and wanting all characters. Well... bonus heroes. So I tag them all. Under this new system, dilution is way worse for older characters (given your definition), because 19/20 will be the newest. To cover my oldest I have a 1/20 shot at an old toon and then that one cover could be one of 30-40 characters. Way way more diluted.So let me ask you, since a developer won't answer, what would be wrong with having a separate token that has all older 4s in it? I'm guessing you'll say something like "people will still complain" or "you re-introduce dilution". The first is a really shaky argument that is easily destroyed and the second isn't true. Like I said in my last post, adding a completely different diluted token does not undo the fact that we have plenty of non-diluted options to pull from. They are mutually exclusive. So again, why wouldn't this work and allow the large majority who are outraged (and were happy with the old system) one avenue to pull old toons from? Your issue isn't with vaulting, it's with the premise of "dilution is bad." It isn't for you. You'd rather slowly cover all characters starting a year from now, than quickly cover the newest characters starting 3 months from now. What if he wants to do both? Cover the latest 12 until they are cover maxed to the limits of his iso, and then put his remaining cp to use working on some older characters?
Fightmastermpq said: broll said: Fightmastermpq said:I have a dozen older 4s that are max covered but need about 3 months of ISO - similar to your older 3s. So what is the solution? You forget about the vaulted characters. Those older 4s aren't going to add hardly any value to my roster, just like older 3s won't for you. That's easy to say when those dozen are probably bottom of the barrel 4*s like Mr. F, Venom, Spider-Gwen, etc. For those of us who are struggling go get the covers for Iceman, Teen Jean, Thoress, etc. those characters will make a very big difference. No, they really won't. There are plenty of characters in the newest pool that are as good or better than the vaulted characters. Maybe there are 1 or 2 vaulted characters that actually would make a "very big difference" in your ability to compete, but BH can take care of that. For the most part though the newest crop is good enough to get the job done.
broll said: Fightmastermpq said:I have a dozen older 4s that are max covered but need about 3 months of ISO - similar to your older 3s. So what is the solution? You forget about the vaulted characters. Those older 4s aren't going to add hardly any value to my roster, just like older 3s won't for you. That's easy to say when those dozen are probably bottom of the barrel 4*s like Mr. F, Venom, Spider-Gwen, etc. For those of us who are struggling go get the covers for Iceman, Teen Jean, Thoress, etc. those characters will make a very big difference.
Fightmastermpq said:I have a dozen older 4s that are max covered but need about 3 months of ISO - similar to your older 3s. So what is the solution? You forget about the vaulted characters. Those older 4s aren't going to add hardly any value to my roster, just like older 3s won't for you.
broll said: Fightmastermpq said: broll said: Fightmastermpq said:I have a dozen older 4s that are max covered but need about 3 months of ISO - similar to your older 3s. So what is the solution? You forget about the vaulted characters. Those older 4s aren't going to add hardly any value to my roster, just like older 3s won't for you. That's easy to say when those dozen are probably bottom of the barrel 4*s like Mr. F, Venom, Spider-Gwen, etc. For those of us who are struggling go get the covers for Iceman, Teen Jean, Thoress, etc. those characters will make a very big difference. No, they really won't. There are plenty of characters in the newest pool that are as good or better than the vaulted characters. Maybe there are 1 or 2 vaulted characters that actually would make a "very big difference" in your ability to compete, but BH can take care of that. For the most part though the newest crop is good enough to get the job done. Sure there are. But when Iceman is boosted and those newer characters aren't, I get a handicap vs vets who already leveled him because he's great character i can't level effectively because the devs hate us and love money.
BoyWonder1914 said: Fightmastermpq said: broll said: Fightmastermpq said:I have a dozen older 4s that are max covered but need about 3 months of ISO - similar to your older 3s. So what is the solution? You forget about the vaulted characters. Those older 4s aren't going to add hardly any value to my roster, just like older 3s won't for you. That's easy to say when those dozen are probably bottom of the barrel 4*s like Mr. F, Venom, Spider-Gwen, etc. For those of us who are struggling go get the covers for Iceman, Teen Jean, Thoress, etc. those characters will make a very big difference. No, they really won't. There are plenty of characters in the newest pool that are as good or better than the vaulted characters. Maybe there are 1 or 2 vaulted characters that actually would make a "very big difference" in your ability to compete, but BH can take care of that. For the most part though the newest crop is good enough to get the job done. LMFAO @ you thinking YOU can tell someone else that upper-top tier 4-star characters won't impact their roster. This has got to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard anyone say about vaulted characters.
Said no one ever.......
Fightmastermpq said: broll said: Fightmastermpq said: broll said: Fightmastermpq said:I have a dozen older 4s that are max covered but need about 3 months of ISO - similar to your older 3s. So what is the solution? You forget about the vaulted characters. Those older 4s aren't going to add hardly any value to my roster, just like older 3s won't for you. That's easy to say when those dozen are probably bottom of the barrel 4*s like Mr. F, Venom, Spider-Gwen, etc. For those of us who are struggling go get the covers for Iceman, Teen Jean, Thoress, etc. those characters will make a very big difference. No, they really won't. There are plenty of characters in the newest pool that are as good or better than the vaulted characters. Maybe there are 1 or 2 vaulted characters that actually would make a "very big difference" in your ability to compete, but BH can take care of that. For the most part though the newest crop is good enough to get the job done. Sure there are. But when Iceman is boosted and those newer characters aren't, I get a handicap vs vets who already leveled him because he's great character i can't level effectively because the devs hate us and love money. So what? You are ALWAYS going to get handicapped vs. vets that have had more time to level more characters. Vaulting doesn't make that any worse.
Well, it does make that worse, before vaulting the 4* characters a vet had were available to the new player without penalty, the day after vaulting happened the new player was forced to get these characters solely through the bonus hero mechanism, which massively handicaps the ability to go after more than one character at a time...
Vaulting absolutely makes getting older characters harder, vets have these characters developed already, new players don't, new players have a harder time getting these characters developed. Any advantages of vaulting are shared equally by new players and vets, its not like new players get a special intro vault or intro sale on tokens...
Theres a legitimate argument for the advantages of vaulting, getting annoyed and making nonsensical statements just hurts your case...
MissChinch said: With 49 heroes in the 4* tier:no vaulting, no bonus heroes: 637 pullsno vaulting, WITH bonus heros: 260 pullsWITH vaulting and WITH bonus heroes: 156 pulls
With 49 heroes in the 4* tier:
no vaulting, no bonus heroes: 637 pullsno vaulting, WITH bonus heros: 260 pullsWITH vaulting and WITH bonus heroes: 156 pulls
The 260 number seems to be assuming that all 13 covers came from bonus heroes. If so, then the actual situation for "no vaulting with bonus heroes" is actually a bit better: it would take 185 pulls to cover a character with 49 in the pool and 200 with 66 in the pool.
Another missing factor is the effect that covering heroes has on how many pulls you get. If you were starting from scratch, getting your first 4*s more quickly could result in your getting more LTs and CP, which could accelerate your pull rate. I don't think this increase would be significant however.
OTOH, being able to reach 900 in PvP and top 10 in PvE more often would significantly increase the # of 4* covers you earn. That is the thing I like about vaulting (though I may well find out that having a few 4*s won't result in me reaching those goals). It is true that BH without vaulting would allow to get a single 4* covered almost as fast as I can with vaulting , but I think I will need at least 3 or 4, if not more, to be at all competitive and, with vaulting, 156 perfect pulls would get me 12 of them. And aside from the effect on competiveness, I would also like to have multiple playable 4*s just to stave off the boredom of playing the same 3*s over and over .
I totally agree, however, that some pro-vaulting advocates have severely overestimated how long it would take to cover a character without vaulting (and even more so by having bonus heroes without vaulting).
Another issue with the 637 pulls is how many players would have been willing to keep playing long enough to get there. I suspect that my current pull rate (1.65/day) is high compared to the average player, and I might very well have quit playing before I got to 637 pulls. Whether that was a factor in D3's decision or not, I don't know.
And to reiterate what I've said elsewhere (and what I would hope would be obvious), yes, I strongly support, and very much prefer, the addition of a third legends store with the vaulted characters and would love for D3 to tell us why they rejected this option (though I don't expect they will tell us).
Daredevil217 said: Fightmastermpq said: Daredevil217 said: Fightmastermpq said: Daredevil217 said: As for the answers you provided, I am glad you were able to see at least some of the drawbacks to vaulting (very cool you called it what it is too), are well aware of the negative feedback with regards to vaulting, and SAY you are open to change/willing to listen to players feedback in making changes. I think most players can agree that dilution was a problem. So you pointing out the ways in which vaulting helped with dilution is kind of a no-brainer. Just like people don't have a problem with Bonus Heroes, people don't have a problem with you tackling dilution. Our problems lie in the heavy-handed way in which dilution was "fixed" and all of the negative side-effects that go along with your solution. You acknowledge some of these, others not so much, but they are indeed there. For example, there is no acknowledgement that dilution is far, FAR worse for any cover not in the latest 12. And that there are some of us who want those older characters for a variety of reasons (maybe I am just a big fan of the Fantastic 4?), not to mention all characters are necessary. You also do not acknowledge how hoarding has seen a serious increase with this change almost universally (I'm sure there are some exceptions). I think the biggest problem with vaulting is that people seem to near universally agree that dilution is bad without really having a clue what dilution really is, or comprehend how bad it would have gotten had there been no change.Statements like "dilution is far far worse for vaulted characters" are good indicators of this. Another common complaint I see is "their solution to dilution doesn't allow me to progress on all characters at once!" No, dilution itself is what prevents you from progressing on everything at once.Dilution is best represented in average covers per character per pull. This number was very low and getting lower (1/43 I think when vaulting began) which means you would need an average of 559 pulls to cover a 4*, and if we measure success in # of champed 4*s it means that someone who earns 2 LTs/day needs nearly a years worth of pulls to cover a 4*. The bigger problem though is if you started at Day 1 over the course of that year something like 17 more characters would be added to the pool lowering your 1/43 dilution rate to 1/60 and so the time required to make any progress just keeps getting longer and longer and longer. I think most people get that but it's important to note that progress was taking a REALLY long time under the old system.Now. One way to raise the number of covers people are able to earn is to just award more covers. Obviously this is not in the devs best interest as it would upset the game economy, so if we are holding total number of pulls close to constant, and continually releasing new characters - how do we prevent the average number of covers/pull (the dilution) from decreasing with every new release. You do it by limiting the number of characters available to be pulled from the tokens - by vaulting all but the newest 12 you fix the dilution at 1/12. So given no change to pull rate the average number of characters per pull increases nearly 4x with vaulting today, and 5x what it would have been a year from now. To do this requires sacrifice. By necessity.They gave us BH to partially help address the issue of accessing older characters, but to claim that not having access to ALL of the older characters is some massive failure of vaulting doesn't make any sense. Having access to ALL of the other characters IS dilution - the very thing vaulting was trying to fix. You assume everyone wants to play like you and fast track to 5* land. That's not the end goal for everyone. I want to collect everyone. I want all characters usable because aside from just liking certain characters, the game also tells us that it is beneficial to have all characters usable. No one is debating that we can't level certain characters faster, but older ones (that we still need) became much much harder.You can't imagine what it must have been like for a new player under the old system? Imagine starting under this new system and wanting all characters. Well... bonus heroes. So I tag them all. Under this new system, dilution is way worse for older characters (given your definition), because 19/20 will be the newest. To cover my oldest I have a 1/20 shot at an old toon and then that one cover could be one of 30-40 characters. Way way more diluted.So let me ask you, since a developer won't answer, what would be wrong with having a separate token that has all older 4s in it? I'm guessing you'll say something like "people will still complain" or "you re-introduce dilution". The first is a really shaky argument that is easily destroyed and the second isn't true. Like I said in my last post, adding a completely different diluted token does not undo the fact that we have plenty of non-diluted options to pull from. They are mutually exclusive. So again, why wouldn't this work and allow the large majority who are outraged (and were happy with the old system) one avenue to pull old toons from? Your issue isn't with vaulting, it's with the premise of "dilution is bad." It isn't for you. You'd rather slowly cover all characters starting a year from now, than quickly cover the newest characters starting 3 months from now. As much I love being told what MY issue is, I just have to say "duh?". Yes, I want to cover all characters slowly rather than the newest 12 quickly (actually, I'd like the option to do both... hence my solution). You must be really good at reading, because you know, I have said as much multiple times. Vaulting does not allow me to progress older characters and bonus heroes is not enough to make up for it. So, I absolutely have an issue with vaulting (despite you telling me otherwise).You also conveniently didn't answer my question at all. So again:"So let me ask you, since a developer won't answer, what would be wrong with having a separate token that has all older 4s in it? I'm guessing you'll say something like "people will still complain" or "you re-introduce dilution". The first is a really shaky argument that is easily destroyed and the second isn't true. Like I said in my last post, adding a completely different diluted token does not undo the fact that we have plenty of non-diluted options to pull from. They are mutually exclusive. So again, why wouldn't this work and allow the large majority who are outraged (and were happy with the old system) one avenue to pull old toons from?"
astrp3 said: MissChinch said: With 49 heroes in the 4* tier:no vaulting, no bonus heroes: 637 pullsno vaulting, WITH bonus heros: 260 pullsWITH vaulting and WITH bonus heroes: 156 pulls The 260 number seems to be assuming that all 13 covers came from bonus heroes. If so, then the actual situation for "no vaulting with bonus heroes" is actually a bit better: it would take 185 pulls to cover a character with 49 in the pool and 200 with 66 in the pool. Another missing factor is the effect that covering heroes has on how many pulls you get. If you were starting from scratch, getting your first 4*s more quickly could result in your getting more LTs and CP, which could accelerate your pull rate. I don't think this increase would be significant however. OTOH, being able to reach 900 in PvP and top 10 in PvE more often would significantly increase the # of 4* covers you earn. That is the thing I like about vaulting (though I may well find out that having a few 4*s won't result in me reaching those goals). It is true that BH without vaulting would allow to get a single 4* covered almost as fast as I can with vaulting , but I think I will need at least 3 or 4, if not more, to be at all competitive and, with vaulting, 156 perfect pulls would get me all 12 covered. And aside from the effect on competiveness, I would also like to have multiple playable 4*s just to stave off the boredom of playing the same 3*s over and over . I totally agree, however, that some pro-vaulting advocates have severely overestimated how long it would take to cover a character without vaulting (and even more so by having bonus heroes without vaulting).Another issue with the 637 pulls, however, is how many players would have been willing to keep playing long enough to get there. I suspect that my current pull rate (1.65/day) is high compared to the average player, and I might very well have quit playing before I got to 637 pulls. Whether that was a factor in D3's decision or not, I don't know. And to reiterate what I've said elsewhere, yes, I strongly support, and very much prefer, the addition of a third legends store with the vaulted characters and would love for D3 to tell us why they rejected this option (though I don't expect they will tell us).
OTOH, being able to reach 900 in PvP and top 10 in PvE more often would significantly increase the # of 4* covers you earn. That is the thing I like about vaulting (though I may well find out that having a few 4*s won't result in me reaching those goals). It is true that BH without vaulting would allow to get a single 4* covered almost as fast as I can with vaulting , but I think I will need at least 3 or 4, if not more, to be at all competitive and, with vaulting, 156 perfect pulls would get me all 12 covered. And aside from the effect on competiveness, I would also like to have multiple playable 4*s just to stave off the boredom of playing the same 3*s over and over .
Another issue with the 637 pulls, however, is how many players would have been willing to keep playing long enough to get there. I suspect that my current pull rate (1.65/day) is high compared to the average player, and I might very well have quit playing before I got to 637 pulls. Whether that was a factor in D3's decision or not, I don't know.
And to reiterate what I've said elsewhere, yes, I strongly support, and very much prefer, the addition of a third legends store with the vaulted characters and would love for D3 to tell us why they rejected this option (though I don't expect they will tell us).
I did the same thing not counting the case where you make one of the 12 your bonus hero in the vaulting scenario, the exact numbers weren't nearly as useful in this examination as the growth rates. Bonus heroes will cause the rate of acquisition to be constant, not in any way dependent on pool size, solving the "dilution problem". The addition of vaulting is clearly not necessary to let new players cover the characters they want (using the exact same argument pro-vaulting uses in the ability to pick specific characters that are retired and cover them)
The "dilution problem" isn't growing at a rate to warrant any concern, so rate of change is whats important (its slow)
In depth arguments have been created when projecting what will happen with the game using recent history, but its very incomplete because the only thing that's taken into account is the recent rate of coming out with new heroes not the rate at which we're getting more and more iso and CP.
The number of covers required to champion a hero is less likely to change than the amount of CP we get per unit time, likewise the cost to level a 4* is less likely to increase than the amount of iso we get per unit time. Many factors point to covering 4*s getting easier that are not being considered at all in pro-vaulting arguments. The rate of new 4*s is cherry picked for the argument and all else is ignored.
More and more people were transitioning successfully into the 4*s last year at the same time more characters were being added to the tier, we weren't on some sort of precipice where progress was about to fall off into the abyss if vaulting hadn't come along to save us...
Fightmastermpq said: Sorry, I thought your question was rhetorical. No one has any issue adding a token to give players more options. If you want to subject yourself to the snails pace of progress that dilution brings then I'm not here to stop you. But I think the community as a whole would be better keeping the current vaulting mechanic in place.
Fightmastermpq said: BoyWonder1914 said: Fightmastermpq said: broll said: Fightmastermpq said:I have a dozen older 4s that are max covered but need about 3 months of ISO - similar to your older 3s. So what is the solution? You forget about the vaulted characters. Those older 4s aren't going to add hardly any value to my roster, just like older 3s won't for you. That's easy to say when those dozen are probably bottom of the barrel 4*s like Mr. F, Venom, Spider-Gwen, etc. For those of us who are struggling go get the covers for Iceman, Teen Jean, Thoress, etc. those characters will make a very big difference. No, they really won't. There are plenty of characters in the newest pool that are as good or better than the vaulted characters. Maybe there are 1 or 2 vaulted characters that actually would make a "very big difference" in your ability to compete, but BH can take care of that. For the most part though the newest crop is good enough to get the job done. LMFAO @ you thinking YOU can tell someone else that upper-top tier 4-star characters won't impact their roster. This has got to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard anyone say about vaulted characters. This is only because you are ignorant of upper tier play. I have all the top tier 4*s champed. I also have all but 2 of the newest 4*s champed. So I am qualified to speak on how competitive you can be with them, and I can confirm that when boosted the newest 4*s have enough synergies and strong mechanics to be successful in both competitive PvE and PvP.I didn't say they wouldn't impact your roster. I said that won't "make a very big difference." Because they simply won't. I know they won't because I have just about all of them and use them all regularly and my success is dependent on which ones are boosted, not which ones are "top tier"
Daredevil217 said: Fightmastermpq said: Sorry, I thought your question was rhetorical. No one has any issue adding a token to give players more options. If you want to subject yourself to the snails pace of progress that dilution brings then I'm not here to stop you. But I think the community as a whole would be better keeping the current vaulting mechanic in place. And there we are. Even the biggest supporter of vaulting can't find an issue with the most oft-proposed solution. Developers... are you listening?All the rest of your essays don't really matter to me, because all the rest are just stylistic differences in what we deem as "progression" or the most enjoyable way to play the game. You want to keep things the way they are because they benefit how you enjoy playing the game. Others don't want to take that away from you, they just want to add a way to progress in the way they would like as well (I believe you called it "subjecting ourselves to a snails pace"). So if these proposed solutions don't really effect you, I don't understand why you are getting so up in arms and debating so vehemently. Though a lot of us have said we'd love it if they ended vaulting that has never really been offered as a real solution because we know the developers won't undo it and it would undo the dilution fix (for those who saw it as a problem). All the realistic options would only benefit you (increased iso, colorless covers, etc.) or have no impact on you (a separate token store).I think you need to find something else to rage against.
Brigby said: Hi Marvel Puzzle Quest! I’m Dave Guskin, the lead designer...#8 - If enough people voice concern, would you be willing to end vaulting?Yes.
Hi Marvel Puzzle Quest!
I’m Dave Guskin, the lead designer...
#8 - If enough people voice concern, would you be willing to end vaulting?
Yes.
Daredevil217 said: Fightmastermpq said: Sorry, I thought your question was rhetorical. No one has any issue adding a token to give players more options. If you want to subject yourself to the snails pace of progress that dilution brings then I'm not here to stop you. But I think the community as a whole would be better keeping the current vaulting mechanic in place. Developers... are you listening?
Was that a serious question?
The only reason to post is if its cathartic... he didn't even say "We'd entertain changing things" he flat out said they'd end it lol... massive red flag that hes only interested in saying what you want to hear.
That said, everyone has been nice about it. The simple fact is this is a way to make more money and that's what the game is about (see the thread of super annoyed people seemingly flabbergasted that long time spenders wont be banned)
The game can still be fun and make money, I just want them to find a way to monetize these retired characters yet also provide a non-pay way to get it for those that are patient (but not as patient as waiting on a 5% bonus hero draw) I'm perfectly OK letting the compulsive buyers subsidize the game I'm playing...
BoyWonder1914 said: Fightmastermpq said: BoyWonder1914 said: Fightmastermpq said: broll said: Fightmastermpq said:I have a dozen older 4s that are max covered but need about 3 months of ISO - similar to your older 3s. So what is the solution? You forget about the vaulted characters. Those older 4s aren't going to add hardly any value to my roster, just like older 3s won't for you. That's easy to say when those dozen are probably bottom of the barrel 4*s like Mr. F, Venom, Spider-Gwen, etc. For those of us who are struggling go get the covers for Iceman, Teen Jean, Thoress, etc. those characters will make a very big difference. No, they really won't. There are plenty of characters in the newest pool that are as good or better than the vaulted characters. Maybe there are 1 or 2 vaulted characters that actually would make a "very big difference" in your ability to compete, but BH can take care of that. For the most part though the newest crop is good enough to get the job done. LMFAO @ you thinking YOU can tell someone else that upper-top tier 4-star characters won't impact their roster. This has got to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard anyone say about vaulted characters. This is only because you are ignorant of upper tier play. I have all the top tier 4*s champed. I also have all but 2 of the newest 4*s champed. So I am qualified to speak on how competitive you can be with them, and I can confirm that when boosted the newest 4*s have enough synergies and strong mechanics to be successful in both competitive PvE and PvP.I didn't say they wouldn't impact your roster. I said that won't "make a very big difference." Because they simply won't. I know they won't because I have just about all of them and use them all regularly and my success is dependent on which ones are boosted, not which ones are "top tier" First of all, let's get this out of the way: Regular use of a new character = big difference to your roster. With me so far on that super basic concept? Because if not, then you should really take some time to learn what the words "impact" and "difference" mean. Secondly, I love how you seem to think getting on your high horse of "having x amount of 4s champed" somehow makes your viewpoint on this absolute in some kind of way. If anything, you're only making your viewpoints LESS valid because so few people actually identify with where your roster is. A new 4-star champ is nothing but a new toy to you that you might play with when you get around to feeling like it. Since you've been so removed from this point in the game for so long, let me remind you that to MOST PEOPLE, a newly champed IceMan, Hulkbuster, or Peggy is a big tinykitty deal. YOU don't get to tell someone else what that's SUPPOSED to mean to their roster. I also love how my supposed "ignorance of top tier play" somehow means that I don't understand that top tier characters aren't always boosted. Once again you somehow fail to realize that "competitive" doesn't mean the same thing for someone with your roster as someone who hasn't whaled their way into 5-star land. If someone is all of a sudden able to make 900 regularly in PVP or t10 in PVE because they now have a top tier character at their disposal, that's called a BIG DIFFERENCE.
Brigby said: #7 - Is this change meant to slow (or in some cases eliminate) champing?We had, perhaps incorrectly, felt that we had provided enough opportunities to continue to collect covers for older (out of packs) 4-stars via event rewards. We’re evaluating this assumption and are open to feedback - we don’t think we’ve gotten it quite right yet. We’ve already been trying to find limited ways to make these characters more available, such as the off-season Vintage Heroic store. We’ve got more work to do here, so stay tuned.
#7 - Is this change meant to slow (or in some cases eliminate) champing?
We had, perhaps incorrectly, felt that we had provided enough opportunities to continue to collect covers for older (out of packs) 4-stars via event rewards. We’re evaluating this assumption and are open to feedback - we don’t think we’ve gotten it quite right yet. We’ve already been trying to find limited ways to make these characters more available, such as the off-season Vintage Heroic store. We’ve got more work to do here, so stay tuned.