BoyWonder1914 said: Fightmastermpq said: MarkersMake said: I have them. But you said you could take im40/peggy to 900. If that's not what you meant then that's not my problem. I wish you would rather just read the discussion before you jump in to make some irrelevant point.The claim was that people need vaulted characters to hit 900 in PvP or T10 PvE, and my response was that no you really don't - and maybe you could make a case for 1 or 2 characters that someone could pick up (e.g. Peggy w/IM40) that would actually make a big difference, but by and large you can get there with the newer characters (e.g. Carol/Medusa/Wasp/Coulson/Blade), and/or set those 1 or 2 characters as BH and get them even quicker. No, see YOUR argument was that having these characters wouldn't have a huge impact on someone's roster, which is complete and utter ****. No one ever said specifically that they NEED them for 900 in PVP or t10 PVE, don't try to switch it up to fit your argument. I was merely citing examples of what most people would consider "huge impact", and if people like Peggy or Iceman can help someone get there, that's a huge impact. You said that there are people in the newer 12 that are comparable/better in terms of strength, and thus having these vaulted people won't have an impact. Just because someone switched to the new Meta of CM4/Wasp/Medusa or whatever the combination is these days doesn't mean that people won't still find value in Peggy, Thoress, RHulk, etc. You honestly think you can sit here and tell me that people using a boosted RHulk isn't going to make a difference in these current PVE/PVP events? There is still clear value in people that are vaulted, and they still clearly have the ability to improve someone's roster. It makes ZERO sense that you would call these current 12 and vaulted people comparable in terms of strength, but then try to downplay the impact that the latter group would have.
Fightmastermpq said: MarkersMake said: I have them. But you said you could take im40/peggy to 900. If that's not what you meant then that's not my problem. I wish you would rather just read the discussion before you jump in to make some irrelevant point.The claim was that people need vaulted characters to hit 900 in PvP or T10 PvE, and my response was that no you really don't - and maybe you could make a case for 1 or 2 characters that someone could pick up (e.g. Peggy w/IM40) that would actually make a big difference, but by and large you can get there with the newer characters (e.g. Carol/Medusa/Wasp/Coulson/Blade), and/or set those 1 or 2 characters as BH and get them even quicker.
MarkersMake said: I have them. But you said you could take im40/peggy to 900. If that's not what you meant then that's not my problem.
Fightmastermpq said: JVReal said: I honestly wouldn't object to vaulting so much, if I had access to a larger flow of Iso to level the characters to minimize wasted covers. It feels terrible having to sell covers of 4* characters that I know will eventually end up vaulted around the time I can afford to champ them.Buying Iso is not a solution, and with getting 3 intercepts a week... that is not feasible option. I just don't think this is a real problem. Now you only need ISO for 12 characters and you have 8 months to get it before they get vaulted. There is no way it takes you that long to get the ISO you need. I can see you have 20 champed 4s, which means that under the old system you needed ISO for 23 characters to minimize wasted covers. Vaulting has actually helped your ISO needs, not hurt them.
JVReal said: I honestly wouldn't object to vaulting so much, if I had access to a larger flow of Iso to level the characters to minimize wasted covers. It feels terrible having to sell covers of 4* characters that I know will eventually end up vaulted around the time I can afford to champ them.Buying Iso is not a solution, and with getting 3 intercepts a week... that is not feasible option.
Wjohnson992 said: Fightmastermpq said: JVReal said: I honestly wouldn't object to vaulting so much, if I had access to a larger flow of Iso to level the characters to minimize wasted covers. It feels terrible having to sell covers of 4* characters that I know will eventually end up vaulted around the time I can afford to champ them.Buying Iso is not a solution, and with getting 3 intercepts a week... that is not feasible option. I just don't think this is a real problem. Now you only need ISO for 12 characters and you have 8 months to get it before they get vaulted. There is no way it takes you that long to get the ISO you need. I can see you have 20 champed 4s, which means that under the old system you needed ISO for 23 characters to minimize wasted covers. Vaulting has actually helped your ISO needs, not hurt them.The iso shortage is worse now. The excuse of "less characters need iso" is irrelevant since the levels of those characters gets more expensive much faster. Any of the theoretical benefit of a reduced character pool is cancelled by the speed of the cost per level increasing.
Fightmastermpq said: Wjohnson992 said: Fightmastermpq said: JVReal said: I honestly wouldn't object to vaulting so much, if I had access to a larger flow of Iso to level the characters to minimize wasted covers. It feels terrible having to sell covers of 4* characters that I know will eventually end up vaulted around the time I can afford to champ them.Buying Iso is not a solution, and with getting 3 intercepts a week... that is not feasible option. I just don't think this is a real problem. Now you only need ISO for 12 characters and you have 8 months to get it before they get vaulted. There is no way it takes you that long to get the ISO you need. I can see you have 20 champed 4s, which means that under the old system you needed ISO for 23 characters to minimize wasted covers. Vaulting has actually helped your ISO needs, not hurt them.The iso shortage is worse now. The excuse of "less characters need iso" is irrelevant since the levels of those characters gets more expensive much faster. Any of the theoretical benefit of a reduced character pool is cancelled by the speed of the cost per level increasing. Oh, my bad. I didn't realize it cost more to level the newer characters, I thought all 4*s had the same leveling costs.
Milk Jugz said: All the characters have a huge impact on your roster as the way the game is setup you need to roster EVERYONE to be competitive. The weekly boost list is not regulated to only include the latest 12, the behemoth burrito doesn't only include the latest 12, the 4* essential characters for PVE are not limited to only the latest 12. So to be truely competitive consistently you need to roster ALL the characters- latest and vaulted. This does make it harder to get the vaulted characters. Please read my idea a few posts up!!!! I think the solution to this problem is at our finger tips, just poorly implemented. AND vaulting needs to go!!! The only place I really see token dilution as a problem is with the 5* tier in the classic vault- easily solved by giving us a 5* only vault, albeit I think it should be expensive- around 100 cp or something. Other than that I think dilution can be solved with opening clearance levels 9 and 10, and making the reward structure appropriate for a 4* roster
Milk Jugz said: All the characters have a huge impact on your roster as the way the game is setup you need to roster EVERYONE to be competitive. The weekly boost list is not regulated to only include the latest 12, the behemoth burrito doesn't only include the latest 12, the 4* essential characters for PVE are not limited to only the latest 12. So to be truely competitive consistently you need to roster ALL the characters- latest and vaulted.
Fightmastermpq said: Milk Jugz said: All the characters have a huge impact on your roster as the way the game is setup you need to roster EVERYONE to be competitive. The weekly boost list is not regulated to only include the latest 12, the behemoth burrito doesn't only include the latest 12, the 4* essential characters for PVE are not limited to only the latest 12. So to be truely competitive consistently you need to roster ALL the characters- latest and vaulted. Time out. Under the old system weren't the newest 12 included in the subset of "ALL the characters"? So didn't you need to champ them anyway? All vaulting does in this regard is change the order with which you champ the characters. Oh and it has the added benefit of bonus heroes allowing you to hand pick the order of the vaulted characters when you have the spare ISO to go back and work on them.
Wjohnson992 said: Fightmastermpq said: Wjohnson992 said: Fightmastermpq said: JVReal said: I honestly wouldn't object to vaulting so much, if I had access to a larger flow of Iso to level the characters to minimize wasted covers. It feels terrible having to sell covers of 4* characters that I know will eventually end up vaulted around the time I can afford to champ them.Buying Iso is not a solution, and with getting 3 intercepts a week... that is not feasible option. I just don't think this is a real problem. Now you only need ISO for 12 characters and you have 8 months to get it before they get vaulted. There is no way it takes you that long to get the ISO you need. I can see you have 20 champed 4s, which means that under the old system you needed ISO for 23 characters to minimize wasted covers. Vaulting has actually helped your ISO needs, not hurt them.The iso shortage is worse now. The excuse of "less characters need iso" is irrelevant since the levels of those characters gets more expensive much faster. Any of the theoretical benefit of a reduced character pool is cancelled by the speed of the cost per level increasing. Oh, my bad. I didn't realize it cost more to level the newer characters, I thought all 4*s had the same leveling costs. Do you make a special effort to miss as many points as possible?
Wjohnson992 said: He firmly believes that its only the latest 12 that matter engaging him on vaulting is pointless he believes it is faultless.
Wjohnson992 said: I guess every other mpq player is wrong.
Fightmastermpq said: Wjohnson992 said: Fightmastermpq said: Wjohnson992 said: Fightmastermpq said: JVReal said: I honestly wouldn't object to vaulting so much, if I had access to a larger flow of Iso to level the characters to minimize wasted covers. It feels terrible having to sell covers of 4* characters that I know will eventually end up vaulted around the time I can afford to champ them.Buying Iso is not a solution, and with getting 3 intercepts a week... that is not feasible option. I just don't think this is a real problem. Now you only need ISO for 12 characters and you have 8 months to get it before they get vaulted. There is no way it takes you that long to get the ISO you need. I can see you have 20 champed 4s, which means that under the old system you needed ISO for 23 characters to minimize wasted covers. Vaulting has actually helped your ISO needs, not hurt them.The iso shortage is worse now. The excuse of "less characters need iso" is irrelevant since the levels of those characters gets more expensive much faster. Any of the theoretical benefit of a reduced character pool is cancelled by the speed of the cost per level increasing. Oh, my bad. I didn't realize it cost more to level the newer characters, I thought all 4*s had the same leveling costs. Do you make a special effort to miss as many points as possible? Do you? The only way your point makes sense is if the ISO costs for newer characters is greater than older ones. It isn't. The total amount of ISO you need to champ all the characters is exactly the same now as it was before. So any claims of needing "additional" ISO are simply false as over time they will average out to exactly the same number. If you were swimming in ISO because you were only applying early levels it just means that later on you were going to have a massive shortage as all characters approached the last few covers at the same time. Vaulting does did not create any sort of long term ISO problem. Wjohnson992 said: He firmly believes that its only the latest 12 that matter engaging him on vaulting is pointless he believes it is faultless.
Wjohnson992 said: Fightmastermpq said: Wjohnson992 said: Fightmastermpq said: Wjohnson992 said: Fightmastermpq said: JVReal said: I honestly wouldn't object to vaulting so much, if I had access to a larger flow of Iso to level the characters to minimize wasted covers. It feels terrible having to sell covers of 4* characters that I know will eventually end up vaulted around the time I can afford to champ them.Buying Iso is not a solution, and with getting 3 intercepts a week... that is not feasible option. I just don't think this is a real problem. Now you only need ISO for 12 characters and you have 8 months to get it before they get vaulted. There is no way it takes you that long to get the ISO you need. I can see you have 20 champed 4s, which means that under the old system you needed ISO for 23 characters to minimize wasted covers. Vaulting has actually helped your ISO needs, not hurt them.The iso shortage is worse now. The excuse of "less characters need iso" is irrelevant since the levels of those characters gets more expensive much faster. Any of the theoretical benefit of a reduced character pool is cancelled by the speed of the cost per level increasing. Oh, my bad. I didn't realize it cost more to level the newer characters, I thought all 4*s had the same leveling costs. Do you make a special effort to miss as many points as possible? Do you? The only way your point makes sense is if the ISO costs for newer characters is greater than older ones. It isn't. The total amount of ISO you need to champ all the characters is exactly the same now as it was before. So any claims of needing "additional" ISO are simply false as over time they will average out to exactly the same number. If you were swimming in ISO because you were only applying early levels it just means that later on you were going to have a massive shortage as all characters approached the last few covers at the same time. Vaulting does did not create any sort of long term ISO problem. Wjohnson992 said: He firmly believes that its only the latest 12 that matter engaging him on vaulting is pointless he believes it is faultless. I never said only the newest 12 matter. And I never said that vaulting is without fault. Wjohnson992 said: I guess every other mpq player is wrong. Just about. 1. Its just reading comprehension. The speed of getting the latest 12 to 13 covers has increased rapidly now (YOU happily preach that) so can you really not understand that the rate of covers has increased since vaulting BUT the rate of iso has been unchanged since vaulting. What part of this is too complicated? The 14 day expiry hasn't changed either so wasting covers is made worse now. You get covers far quicker than iso.2. You have regularly jumped to the defence of vaulting and repeatedly preached about latest 12 being sufficient so you clearly do.3. That just about covers it.
broll said: MissChinch said: Average pulls to cover a specific character: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 pullswith 66 heroes in the 4* tier (approximately 1 year from now):no vaulting, no bonus heroes: 858 pullsno vaulting, WITH bonus heros: 260 pullsWITH vaulting and WITH bonus heroes: 156 pullswith 134 heroes in the 4* tier (approximately 5 years from now):no vaulting, no bonus heroes: 1742 pullsno vaulting, WITH bonus heros: 260 pullsWITH vaulting and WITH bonus heroes: 156 pull Talk about bad math...With 49 heroes in the 4* tier:no vaulting, no bonus heroes: 637 pulls (to cover all 49 to 13 assuming no overlap I'm guessing since 637/49 is 13)no vaulting, WITH bonus heros: 260 pulls (to cover 1 character with BH only assuming you always get 5% and no 5* and no color overlap because 260/20 = 13, 5% = 1/20)WITH vaulting and WITH bonus heroes: 156 pulls (to cover all latest 12 I'm guessing because 156/12 = 13)These numbers make no sense, apples to oranges comparisons all over over the place, no factoring in for the multiple layers of RNG.
MissChinch said: Average pulls to cover a specific character: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 pullswith 66 heroes in the 4* tier (approximately 1 year from now):no vaulting, no bonus heroes: 858 pullsno vaulting, WITH bonus heros: 260 pullsWITH vaulting and WITH bonus heroes: 156 pullswith 134 heroes in the 4* tier (approximately 5 years from now):no vaulting, no bonus heroes: 1742 pullsno vaulting, WITH bonus heros: 260 pullsWITH vaulting and WITH bonus heroes: 156 pull
Average pulls to cover a specific character:
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 66 heroes in the 4* tier (approximately 1 year from now):
no vaulting, no bonus heroes: 858 pullsno vaulting, WITH bonus heros: 260 pullsWITH vaulting and WITH bonus heroes: 156 pulls
with 134 heroes in the 4* tier (approximately 5 years from now):
no vaulting, no bonus heroes: 1742 pullsno vaulting, WITH bonus heros: 260 pullsWITH vaulting and WITH bonus heroes: 156 pull
no vaulting, no bonus heroes: 637 pulls (to cover all 49 to 13 assuming no overlap I'm guessing since 637/49 is 13)no vaulting, WITH bonus heros: 260 pulls (to cover 1 character with BH only assuming you always get 5% and no 5* and no color overlap because 260/20 = 13, 5% = 1/20)WITH vaulting and WITH bonus heroes: 156 pulls (to cover all latest 12 I'm guessing because 156/12 = 13)
These numbers make no sense, apples to oranges comparisons all over over the place, no factoring in for the multiple layers of RNG.
chances to select X from a field of N given a constant distribution is 1/N
predetermine the character you want to draw a cover for and your odds of getting one cover is 1/N, in N rolls you are likely to get one instance of the X you're looking for... If the scaling doesn't make sense think of a six sided die, each number is equally likely, so in 6 rolls you're likely to have one of the specific number you're looking for, in 600 rolls you've likely seen that specific number 100 times (it cant be more because the number is equally likely and you've only made 600 rolls, and it cant be less because the number is equally likely and you've made 600 rolls)
ASSUMING no coverage distribution with colors (you get to 13 covers before 6 in any one color) the odds are very simple:
X = 13(pool size)
How this scales as pool size increases is the much touted "dilution problem"
Bonus Heroes fixes the odds of pulling a predetermined targeted character to 1 in 20 (100 *5%)
Again ASSUMING no coverage distribution with colors (you get to 13 covers before 6 in any one color) AND discounting the case where they may be double pulled (which gets more rare as pool increases) the odds are very simple:
X = 13(20)
This is not a factor of pool size, or how many characters get added to the 4* tier, adding more character to the 4* tier does not impact the fact that bonus heroes are pulled at a 5% rate
Vaulting fixes the odds of pulling a predetermined targeted character to 1 in 12 (12 is the maximum number of 4*s currently allowed to be pulled)
Again ASSUMING no coverage distribution with colors (you get to 13 covers before 6 in any one color) AND that you're not crazy enough to use a bonus hero on a currently available hero, the odds are very simple:
X = 13(12)
This is not a factor of pool size, or how many characters get added to the 4* tier, adding more character to the 4* tier does not impact the fact that vaulting is only allowing 12 4*s to be chosen.
What this shows is NOT how many covered characters you can expect, its the exact case you will see in pro vault arguments when discussing the ability to target a retired character, predetermining that character and then determining chances to get it.
It does NOT show the value in all the rest of the heroes that are picked but are not the single predetermined target (in the case without vaulting this is how people are stating they can work on multiple heroes in parallel, its a very important point that's ignored in the pro-vaulting stance on using the bonus hero mechanic to cover what you want)
It does NOT show any guarantee, you can't do that with this type of problem, the best you can get in confidence intervals before you would hit your goal condition X % of the time.
The math is absolutely correct, its extremely simple and shows that dilution (in the case that is being applied to bonus heroes selected from retired characters that comes up in all rebuttals to "its harder for me to cover the character I want now" arguments) is fixed by the bonus hero mechanism, vaulting is not required if we're going to define bonus heroes as an acceptable means of covering a retired character.
Its more an illustration of how poor an argument relying on bonus heroes is as an effective means of covering retired characters, at the same time pointing out that dilution is not the massive problem its being made out to be, it was a knee jerk reaction to people being annoyed that they cant have their new character feasible immediately. It would take years for the dilution issue to grow to the point where new characters would be twice as scarce as characters now, and in those years token availability has grown much faster.
Fightmastermpq said: BoyWonder1914 said: Fightmastermpq said: MarkersMake said: I have them. But you said you could take im40/peggy to 900. If that's not what you meant then that's not my problem. I wish you would rather just read the discussion before you jump in to make some irrelevant point.The claim was that people need vaulted characters to hit 900 in PvP or T10 PvE, and my response was that no you really don't - and maybe you could make a case for 1 or 2 characters that someone could pick up (e.g. Peggy w/IM40) that would actually make a big difference, but by and large you can get there with the newer characters (e.g. Carol/Medusa/Wasp/Coulson/Blade), and/or set those 1 or 2 characters as BH and get them even quicker. No, see YOUR argument was that having these characters wouldn't have a huge impact on someone's roster, which is complete and utter ****. No one ever said specifically that they NEED them for 900 in PVP or t10 PVE, don't try to switch it up to fit your argument. I was merely citing examples of what most people would consider "huge impact", and if people like Peggy or Iceman can help someone get there, that's a huge impact. You said that there are people in the newer 12 that are comparable/better in terms of strength, and thus having these vaulted people won't have an impact. Just because someone switched to the new Meta of CM4/Wasp/Medusa or whatever the combination is these days doesn't mean that people won't still find value in Peggy, Thoress, RHulk, etc. You honestly think you can sit here and tell me that people using a boosted RHulk isn't going to make a difference in these current PVE/PVP events? There is still clear value in people that are vaulted, and they still clearly have the ability to improve someone's roster. It makes ZERO sense that you would call these current 12 and vaulted people comparable in terms of strength, but then try to downplay the impact that the latter group would have. I'm sorry, but no - that's not how it went.My response to "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." was..."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."YOU were the one who defined progress when you said "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."And I simply maintained that this can be done with the newest crop of 4s + 1 or 2 BH just as easily as with the vaulted 4s. I never said that having more champed 4s doesn't make any difference at all, or that the vaulted 4s have no value. I'm simply saying that they don't make a "big" difference. Or put another way, there is very little incremental value in having more vaulted 4s champed over the newest ones.
I don't like vaulting, but what it doesn't do is change the amount of iso you need to spend to max out a 4*. How much iso you need is determined by character release frequency, not vaulting. if it takes 360k some iso to champ a 4* and we get a new 4* on average every 3 weeks then you need 360k/21 ISO per day, less than that and you're falling behind regardless of scheme, more than that and youre making progress, regardless of scheme.
I have several issues that I believe are really due to vaulting:
It changes the optimal way to spend my CP, I'm forced to spend CP so as to get covers for 4*s before they leave the vault, this is in direct conflict with how to best spend CP to get usable 5*s. I'm mortgaging my future progress in order to progress in the 4* tier. (I can either choose to only hoard for 5*s in latest legends when I've fully covered the next 4* heroes to retire, or I can just hoard enough to champion the future set of 12 4*s I'll be pulling from when I've amassed enough CP, both situations suck worse than what we could do before vaulting)
It prevents my ability to keep an evenly leveled roster. Why 3*s were included with this vaulting plan I'll never really know (OK I can understand the impetus could be a misguided thought to help people break into the 3* tier regardless of the fact that they're vomiting epic and heroic tokens at us now) But what that does is skew the non-retired group of 3*s levels much higher than the retired ones, and since some feed the 4*s the long term impact (insignificant now) would be that the retired feeders are not feeding the retired 4*s so THEY will lag behind.
In the short term, adapting to this completely changes a play style I enjoyed (staying fairly softcapped and trying to utilize scaling mechanics most efficiently) In the long term is wrecks my goals of breaking into the 5* tier and making progress in the 4* tier concurrently as well as the time it will take me to cover all the 4* characters (the featured 12 will be covered FAR sooner than the plethora of retired 4*s I have to grow using bonus heros)
That said, my iso intake is over 17.5K per day, so I'm not falling behind on iso, I'm just not able to use it how I want to now.
Milk Jugz said: What I don't really understand is when I was making the 2*-3* transition there were almost as many 3* characters then as there are 4* characters now (maybe 10 less). But token dilution wasn't a problem then mainly because 3* covers come from many different places (I've pretty much always finished t50 in pve). I think the best answer to token dilution in the 4* tier is not to remove characters from the vaults but OPEN UP CLEARANCE LEVELS 9 AND FREAKING 10 ALREADY AND HAVE THE REWARDS STRUCTURE BE NOT INSULTING TO A 4* ROSTER, I. E. GIVE 4* COVERS PAST T10 ON PVE AND PAST T5 ON PVP. IDK MAYBE T100-250!!! MAYBE EVEN GIVE 5* COVERS FOR T1-5-10!! 4* AND 5* COVERS ARE NOT WHAT THEY USED TO BE!!!When I started playing there were only 2 5* characters and a handful of 4*s, the covers were hard to come by but they should have been there really weren't that many characters on those tiers. But now 4*s are more numerous than 3*s and there are 15 5*s. Rather than taking characters out of tokens, give more away in progression and placement. And what is really irritating is the problem was *almost* solved with clearance levels, but for whatever reason you only went halfway. AGAIN GIVE US CLEARANCE LEVELS 9 AND 10 AND MAKE THE REWARD STRUCTURE APPROPRIATE FOR OUR ROSTER!!!! Then token dilution won't be a problem for us, just as it wasn't when we were making the 3* transition. As far as the new player goes, it should take time to get to 4* land!!! It took me a year and a half, this game is a commitment to build your roster up and people that don't want to put the effort or time in to build up shouldn't be catered to. You can't hit 4* overnight (unless you whale, I guess), you can't even hit 3* overnight. This talk about vaulting helping newer people "catch up" is ridiculous. It only helps them get the new characters faster, it doesn't help them catch up to more developed rosters because they don't have reasonable access to a large number of the characters. In summary I think a better option to vaulting is mostly in place already with clearance levels just improperly implemented. With the number of 4* characters out now they should be given out the way 3*s are, but only to the people with a developed enough roster by using the clearance levels system already in place. Why is that so hard?!?
Milk Jugz said: Milk Jugz said: What I don't really understand is when I was making the 2*-3* transition there were almost as many 3* characters then as there are 4* characters now (maybe 10 less). But token dilution wasn't a problem then mainly because 3* covers come from many different places (I've pretty much always finished t50 in pve). I think the best answer to token dilution in the 4* tier is not to remove characters from the vaults but OPEN UP CLEARANCE LEVELS 9 AND FREAKING 10 ALREADY AND HAVE THE REWARDS STRUCTURE BE NOT INSULTING TO A 4* ROSTER, I. E. GIVE 4* COVERS PAST T10 ON PVE AND PAST T5 ON PVP. IDK MAYBE T100-250!!! MAYBE EVEN GIVE 5* COVERS FOR T1-5-10!! 4* AND 5* COVERS ARE NOT WHAT THEY USED TO BE!!!When I started playing there were only 2 5* characters and a handful of 4*s, the covers were hard to come by but they should have been there really weren't that many characters on those tiers. But now 4*s are more numerous than 3*s and there are 15 5*s. Rather than taking characters out of tokens, give more away in progression and placement. And what is really irritating is the problem was *almost* solved with clearance levels, but for whatever reason you only went halfway. AGAIN GIVE US CLEARANCE LEVELS 9 AND 10 AND MAKE THE REWARD STRUCTURE APPROPRIATE FOR OUR ROSTER!!!! Then token dilution won't be a problem for us, just as it wasn't when we were making the 3* transition. As far as the new player goes, it should take time to get to 4* land!!! It took me a year and a half, this game is a commitment to build your roster up and people that don't want to put the effort or time in to build up shouldn't be catered to. You can't hit 4* overnight (unless you whale, I guess), you can't even hit 3* overnight. This talk about vaulting helping newer people "catch up" is ridiculous. It only helps them get the new characters faster, it doesn't help them catch up to more developed rosters because they don't have reasonable access to a large number of the characters. In summary I think a better option to vaulting is mostly in place already with clearance levels just improperly implemented. With the number of 4* characters out now they should be given out the way 3*s are, but only to the people with a developed enough roster by using the clearance levels system already in place. Why is that so hard?!? I'm quoting myself again to bring this to the bottom so people will read it. I know it's a little long but I truly believe this is the best answer to all problems. All this thread has turned into is an argument over the strength of the latest 12 vs. the original 35 (leaving Dino and Duck out). That's not the issue 4* characters are all strong in their own right (with maybe a couple exceptions) so ALL will have a huge impact on your roster. But to be truly consistently competitive you NEED to roster EVERYONE. Again- behemoth burrito, 4* essential node in PVE, and weekly boost list, none of those are limited to just the latest 12.If CL9 and 10 gave out 4* and 5* covers the way 7 and 8 give out 3* and 4* covers dilution is not a problem!!
Opportunities at 4* covers were becoming easier and easier to come by, in the past two years they have given out more and more CP, put opportunities for 4* covers in progression rewards, added daily CP, came out with better rewards etc. People complained at new character release because the new 4* wasn't immediately viable, despite 4*s in general becoming more and more accessible.
If we've got a pool of close to 50 4*s now, and are getting new 4*s at a reat of 2 every 6 weeks it would be 3 years (3 YEARS!) before 4*s got twice as rare, in three years our opportunity to get more 4* pulls would go up drastically following the same course we've been on and that's assuming we just stagnate for 3 years in the 4* tier without moving along.
I agree that providing more opportunity for 4* pulls is a far better solution.
Quebbster said: kyo28 said: When vaulting was first introduced, a table was drawn up and it turned out that only 2 or 3 of the 20 latest were in the top 10 of all available 4*s. That means the other 7 or 8 were virtually unavailable to beginners.So how exactly are they able to build a competitve roster? Source please. How were the top 10 determined?
kyo28 said: When vaulting was first introduced, a table was drawn up and it turned out that only 2 or 3 of the 20 latest were in the top 10 of all available 4*s. That means the other 7 or 8 were virtually unavailable to beginners.So how exactly are they able to build a competitve roster?
When vaulting was first introduced, a table was drawn up and it turned out that only 2 or 3 of the 20 latest were in the top 10 of all available 4*s. That means the other 7 or 8 were virtually unavailable to beginners.
So how exactly are they able to build a competitve roster?
Vhailorx said:Focusing on the particular merits or flaws with any group of current 12 is a mistake. By definition the group will always be in flux. The best way to evaluate this concern is to ask "At any given time, can a player be competitive with a random selection of 8-12 out of all 4*s in the game?" (And again, it's really important to define "competitive." For this post I will use the term to mean able to grind 6/6 on all available PVE nodes and hit 900 in PVP. That's the level of play that will allow anyone to get 4* progression rewards in CL 7+.). I would say yes in PVE and possibly in PVP. In pve having some random 4*s is likely good enough to play all available nodes (it will be impossible to play all essential nodes with just 12, but that is an unavoidable problem for everyone but dedicated vets with every character rostered). Some weeks will boost the right characters and will be easy. Other weeks will with offer no boosted 4*s and things will be more challenging, but should still be possible. On the PVP side of things, 900 is still doable with im40 + a good boosted 4*. But it's very hard to get 900 with IM40 + an unboosted champ (even peggy or Ice). Two characters with less than 15k health in high score pvp means lots of attacks coming in very fast. So when a player has a single, decent 4* boosted they can probably hit 900 without too much trouble. But if a player only has 8-12 4*s champed, then weeks without any boosted 4*s will be very rough in high score PVP.
GrumpySmurf1002 said: Vhailorx said:Focusing on the particular merits or flaws with any group of current 12 is a mistake. By definition the group will always be in flux. The best way to evaluate this concern is to ask "At any given time, can a player be competitive with a random selection of 8-12 out of all 4*s in the game?" (And again, it's really important to define "competitive." For this post I will use the term to mean able to grind 6/6 on all available PVE nodes and hit 900 in PVP. That's the level of play that will allow anyone to get 4* progression rewards in CL 7+.). I would say yes in PVE and possibly in PVP. In pve having some random 4*s is likely good enough to play all available nodes (it will be impossible to play all essential nodes with just 12, but that is an unavoidable problem for everyone but dedicated vets with every character rostered). Some weeks will boost the right characters and will be easy. Other weeks will with offer no boosted 4*s and things will be more challenging, but should still be possible. On the PVP side of things, 900 is still doable with im40 + a good boosted 4*. But it's very hard to get 900 with IM40 + an unboosted champ (even peggy or Ice). Two characters with less than 15k health in high score pvp means lots of attacks coming in very fast. So when a player has a single, decent 4* boosted they can probably hit 900 without too much trouble. But if a player only has 8-12 4*s champed, then weeks without any boosted 4*s will be very rough in high score PVP. Fair enough, but with Medusa/Carol in the tokens until likely late August if not late September, we're looking at a lengthy amount of time where the current set has multiple viable groups that can be obtained quickly.PvP is always going to be the strain, simply because 5*s are rampant enough now that anything short of a boosted 4* team is going to get creamed. At least in this current set, players (in theory) should be able to ramp up faster and get to a point where they have the options to try for 900. With 50 characters and counting, that transition was (if not already is) going to be overwhelming without doing something to streamline it.The people that got caught mid-transition are obviously the ones that lost the most in the deal, as they had to change directions/targets. How many people that was and whether the masses behind them benefit more from this is something only Demi can really answer.