Do you think vaulting is a good system?

revskip

The system is good - it actually allows me to cover characters in a reasonable time and has benefited my roster. (This option doens't preclude minor tweaks to the system.)

The vaulting system works perfectly for me.  I'd like to see more ways to earn vaulted 4* covers but otherwise it fits my play style exactly.  

optimus2861

Vaulting of some kind should be done, but this particular system needs some major changes to work.

I kind of reluctantly agree that something had to happen to end the dilution problem in tokens. However, they threw the baby out with the bathwater when they effectively decreed that "all vaulted characters shall not be available in any token PERIOD." Not all players hit every single 4* progression target, every single CP progression target, or even play every day. Such players are left with a range of poor choices (hoard for weeks or months; draw tokens as they come knowing that <13 4* will result; resign to their fate; quit).

I know I'm kind of burned out again and think I'm going to scale back to DDQ only for a while again. So my 4* roster will freeze in place, again, only this time some characters may never get unstuck.. I probably should just call it quits.

Beer40

I don't think vaulting is the solution to character dillution - it has hindered my progress in the game. The Devs should persue a completely different solution.

Dormammu said:

I didn't participate in the poll because if you're going to ask a YES or NO question, you should have YES or NO choices for answers. Let people elaborate in their comments. With the answers provided in the poll, your question should have been 'does vaulting solve dilution?'

Do I think vaulting is a good system? No. It drastically cuts my progress from 75% of the 4-star covers.

Do I think vaulting solves character dilution? No. It drastically cuts my progress from 75% of the 4-star covers.

None of the things implemented since vaulting, which were meant to solve my issue, are helping - classic heroic tokens have pitiful odds, bonus heroes have pitiful odds, and heroes for hire is too expensive.

Heads up, I'm stealing your idea for a poll! 

broll

I don't think vaulting is the solution to character dillution - it has hindered my progress in the game. The Devs should persue a completely different solution.

Beer40 said:

Dormammu said:

I didn't participate in the poll because if you're going to ask a YES or NO question, you should have YES or NO choices for answers. Let people elaborate in their comments. With the answers provided in the poll, your question should have been 'does vaulting solve dilution?'

Do I think vaulting is a good system? No. It drastically cuts my progress from 75% of the 4-star covers.

Do I think vaulting solves character dilution? No. It drastically cuts my progress from 75% of the 4-star covers.

None of the things implemented since vaulting, which were meant to solve my issue, are helping - classic heroic tokens have pitiful odds, bonus heroes have pitiful odds, and heroes for hire is too expensive.

Heads up, I'm stealing your idea for a poll! 

Much better.  Let people explain the why yes or no in the comments rather than having the poller put their own two cents on why you might like it or not.

Jarvind

I don't think vaulting is the solution to character dillution - it has hindered my progress in the game. The Devs should persue a completely different solution.

It's a great solution for the difficulty of covering new characters, no argument there.

It eats butt if you have old champions that you want to continue growing in power instead of having everyone stuck in the 280s-290s for eternity. I've got a 311 Red Hulk that is approaching the ability to go toe-to-toe with 5*s when he's boosted, but now he's stuck where he is except once every few months when he's available as a progression reward. I'm not even counting "vintage tokens" because those are a joke-bordering-on-insulting as a solution.

I've posted my proposed solution elsewhere but I'll repeat it here: make tokens contain the six newest characters, and let us choose the other 6 that appear in tokens out of the same pool that are eligible to be bonus heroes. New characters are still locked in there for about 3 months, which is plenty of time to cover them, and it lets us continue to grow a handful of characters of our choosing.

I guess I should've chosen the middle option. Oops.

Jaedenkaal

The system is good - it actually allows me to cover characters in a reasonable time and has benefited my roster. (This option doens't preclude minor tweaks to the system.)

Sounds like we're coming to the conclusion that it's harder to decide what to ask in a poll like this than it is to come up with answers.

SnowcaTT

I don't think vaulting is the solution to character dillution - it has hindered my progress in the game. The Devs should persue a completely different solution.

Increased rewards instead of vaulting would have:

Let the vets continue their progress of older characters.
Let new players start their progress of older characters.

Let vets and new players alike cover the newer characters more quickly (as they do now)

Let (D3) sell more roster slots more quickly, since everyone will have all the characters more quickly.


Looks like everyone wins if they had simply used the TRUE solution to dilution.

Jaedenkaal

The system is good - it actually allows me to cover characters in a reasonable time and has benefited my roster. (This option doens't preclude minor tweaks to the system.)

SnowcaTT said:

Looks like everyone wins if they had simply used the TRUE solution to dilution.

Increased rewards is not a solution, it's a band-aid. Obviously, it would be an amazingly popular band-aid (among players), but it is emphatically NOT the solution.

Yes, doubling the number of tokens you get (as an arbitrary example) doubles the number of covers you get for your characters (on average). It does not address the problem that, to fully cover a new character (or any character you don't have, for that matter) you will need to pull enough 4*s so that, on average, you get 13 covers for every 4* currently in the game. 

You want to cover Gamora as soon as she gets into tokens? Nowadays that'll take about 156 4* draws, or about 183.5 legendary tokens. 

No vaulting? You'd be looking at 749.4 tokens on average. That's 4 times as many tokens. Doubling the rewards wouldn't have come close (well, it'd be halfway).

broll

I don't think vaulting is the solution to character dillution - it has hindered my progress in the game. The Devs should persue a completely different solution.

Jaedenkaal said:

SnowcaTT said:

Looks like everyone wins if they had simply used the TRUE solution to dilution.

Increased rewards is not a solution, it's a band-aid. Obviously, it would be an amazingly popular band-aid (among players), but it is emphatically NOT the solution.

...

No vaulting? You'd be looking at 749.4 tokens on average. That's 4 times as many tokens. Doubling the rewards wouldn't have come close (well, it'd be halfway).

Does it make sense to apply supply and demand here?  As a tier get's more dilluted, the cost (both in resources and time) to get it should decrease.  If they kept up on this I don't see why this couldn't be THE solution.

Flipside of the coin, slowing down releases and/or doing less copying of characters would help with dillusion, just a thought.

Jaedenkaal

The system is good - it actually allows me to cover characters in a reasonable time and has benefited my roster. (This option doens't preclude minor tweaks to the system.)

broll said:

Does it make sense to apply supply and demand here?  As a tier get's more dilluted, the cost (both in resources and time) to get it should decrease.  If they kept up on this I don't see why this couldn't be THE solution.

Making the tokens cost half as much is the same as handing out twice as many of them (or the resources to buy them).

Also, I'm not sure that's how supply and demand would apply here. If anything, the supply has gone down (fewer covers of character X available for a fixed number of N draws) and the demand has either stayed the same or gone up, so presumably that would make the cost go up, not down.

Of course that doesn't make sense either (add more characters to the poll, and then raise the price?) so the only sensible thing is to keep the price (and, on average, the value) the same. 

And adjusting the price downwards over time doesn't help with hoarding, either. All those CP you've spent champing 4*s? Well we've halved the cost of legendary tokens now, so if you'd waited, you could have championed twice as many 4*s for the same cost. You think the forum gets upset when champ rewards are changed, oh man. 

veny

Vaulting of some kind should be done, but this particular system needs some major changes to work.

Vaulting would be pretty good, IF:
1st - Titan DDQ was on daily basis with mandatory 4* given as a reward for the node, OR/AND
2nd - there were legendary token with all 4*s except the 12 newest.

Argument that vaulting is way how to solve 4* dillution is pure lie (otherwise i would be worried about the mental health of the author of this statement). The only thing vaulting does is preventing 4*s to farmed for promoting rewards... briefly said, it is pointless to upgrade 4*s - just own them for missions where they are mandatory, but forget about farming them for championing rewards (less rewards from 4*s = less LTs/CPs = less 4*s and 5*s). 

Beer40

I don't think vaulting is the solution to character dillution - it has hindered my progress in the game. The Devs should persue a completely different solution.

Jaedenkaal said:

SnowcaTT said:

Looks like everyone wins if they had simply used the TRUE solution to dilution.

Increased rewards is not a solution, it's a band-aid. Obviously, it would be an amazingly popular band-aid (among players), but it is emphatically NOT the solution.

Yes, doubling the number of tokens you get (as an arbitrary example) doubles the number of covers you get for your characters (on average). It does not address the problem that, to fully cover a new character (or any character you don't have, for that matter) you will need to pull enough 4*s so that, on average, you get 13 covers for every 4* currently in the game. 

You want to cover Gamora as soon as she gets into tokens? Nowadays that'll take about 156 4* draws, or about 183.5 legendary tokens. 

No vaulting? You'd be looking at 749.4 tokens on average. That's 4 times as many tokens. Doubling the rewards wouldn't have come close (well, it'd be halfway).

Can I ask a serious question here? And I'll put it out there for everyone, not just the person I quoted. Why is there this assumption that everyone wants to cover characters as fast as possible? And why is there an assumption that the player base is more interested in new characters vs old? Is MPQ that big of a competitive scene? I mean, they don't even give away real prizes. I just don't get the rush. Especially since the only way to level up characters is thru ISO, which is always seemingly in short supply. I just feel like this game company never had a long term plan for this game and lucked into a goldmine. They want to keep it running but have no idea how, and the stuff they're throwing against the wall isn't sticking very well.

Fightmastermpq

The system is good - it actually allows me to cover characters in a reasonable time and has benefited my roster. (This option doens't preclude minor tweaks to the system.)

Beer40 said:

Jaedenkaal said:

SnowcaTT said:

Looks like everyone wins if they had simply used the TRUE solution to dilution.

Increased rewards is not a solution, it's a band-aid. Obviously, it would be an amazingly popular band-aid (among players), but it is emphatically NOT the solution.

Yes, doubling the number of tokens you get (as an arbitrary example) doubles the number of covers you get for your characters (on average). It does not address the problem that, to fully cover a new character (or any character you don't have, for that matter) you will need to pull enough 4*s so that, on average, you get 13 covers for every 4* currently in the game. 

You want to cover Gamora as soon as she gets into tokens? Nowadays that'll take about 156 4* draws, or about 183.5 legendary tokens. 

No vaulting? You'd be looking at 749.4 tokens on average. That's 4 times as many tokens. Doubling the rewards wouldn't have come close (well, it'd be halfway).

Can I ask a serious question here? And I'll put it out there for everyone, not just the person I quoted. Why is there this assumption that everyone wants to cover characters as fast as possible? And why is there an assumption that the player base is more interested in new characters vs old? Is MPQ that big of a competitive scene? I mean, they don't even give away real prizes. I just don't get the rush. Especially since the only way to level up characters is thru ISO, which is always seemingly in short supply. I just feel like this game company never had a long term plan for this game and lucked into a goldmine. They want to keep it running but have no idea how, and the stuff they're throwing against the wall isn't sticking very well.

Their metrics show that people pay money for shiny things.  People like to play with their shiny new toys, and so getting them covered more quickly is preferable.  This is what the metrics that the devs have are telling them.  Additionally, newer players (players with few or no maxed 4s) benefit from champing 4s sooner so that they can compete at a higher level earlier.

People play because it's fun.  Winning is also fun, and so people are naturally competitive - even if there are no real prizes offered beyond in-game rewards.

drayviper32

New topics please! Why keep dwelling on this subject? Move on people!

Steellatch

Vaulting of some kind should be done, but this particular system needs some major changes to work.

There are many ways to play this game and enjoy it. Im in social groups that have people that just got their first 4* cover (not first champed character, first cover ever) and they are just finding out about the vaulting situation and are upset because they have a very small chance of ever getting the hero they love. 

Just because any of our styles of play our best to us doesn't make others styles irrelevant. Most of the people that are pro-vault, anit-any changes show the opinion of "this is the way I play, and its the way you must play too." Thats not the correct way to view the situation. 

Beer40

I don't think vaulting is the solution to character dillution - it has hindered my progress in the game. The Devs should persue a completely different solution.

Fightmastermpq said:

Beer40 said:

Jaedenkaal said:

SnowcaTT said:

Looks like everyone wins if they had simply used the TRUE solution to dilution.

Increased rewards is not a solution, it's a band-aid. Obviously, it would be an amazingly popular band-aid (among players), but it is emphatically NOT the solution.

Yes, doubling the number of tokens you get (as an arbitrary example) doubles the number of covers you get for your characters (on average). It does not address the problem that, to fully cover a new character (or any character you don't have, for that matter) you will need to pull enough 4*s so that, on average, you get 13 covers for every 4* currently in the game. 

You want to cover Gamora as soon as she gets into tokens? Nowadays that'll take about 156 4* draws, or about 183.5 legendary tokens. 

No vaulting? You'd be looking at 749.4 tokens on average. That's 4 times as many tokens. Doubling the rewards wouldn't have come close (well, it'd be halfway).

Can I ask a serious question here? And I'll put it out there for everyone, not just the person I quoted. Why is there this assumption that everyone wants to cover characters as fast as possible? And why is there an assumption that the player base is more interested in new characters vs old? Is MPQ that big of a competitive scene? I mean, they don't even give away real prizes. I just don't get the rush. Especially since the only way to level up characters is thru ISO, which is always seemingly in short supply. I just feel like this game company never had a long term plan for this game and lucked into a goldmine. They want to keep it running but have no idea how, and the stuff they're throwing against the wall isn't sticking very well.

Their metrics show that people pay money for shiny things.  People like to play with their shiny new toys, and so getting them covered more quickly is preferable.  This is what the metrics that the devs have are telling them.  Additionally, newer players (players with few or no maxed 4s) benefit from champing 4s sooner so that they can compete at a higher level earlier.

People play because it's fun.  Winning is also fun, and so people are naturally competitive - even if there are no real prizes offered beyond in-game rewards.

Ok, so I get the "shiny new toys" aspect. But if you have New Character at 0 covers and Old Character at 0 covers...aren't they both "shiny new toys" to someone? So why push one over the other instead of offering choice? That question has never been answered by anyone as far as I can tell. Granted, I don't have access to the same info as the game company. But I would think the metrics would show by giving people choice, they'll drastically increase their revenue. Like I said, I don't know, but it seems like common sense to me. 

As for the winning/fun part, you're right and I should have thought about that a little more.

MissChinch

I don't think vaulting is the solution to character dillution - it has hindered my progress in the game. The Devs should persue a completely different solution.

drayviper32 said:

New topics please! Why keep dwelling on this subject? Move on people!

We were trolled by the devs, the lead designer posted a response that was stickied for a while saying that if there is enough feedback they'll change it...   So its pretty much dominated the boards for months now and most of the threads get twisted around into a referendum on vaulting...  

MissChinch

I don't think vaulting is the solution to character dillution - it has hindered my progress in the game. The Devs should persue a completely different solution.

Beer40 said:

Fightmastermpq said:

Beer40 said:

Jaedenkaal said:

SnowcaTT said:

Looks like everyone wins if they had simply used the TRUE solution to dilution.

Increased rewards is not a solution, it's a band-aid. Obviously, it would be an amazingly popular band-aid (among players), but it is emphatically NOT the solution.

Yes, doubling the number of tokens you get (as an arbitrary example) doubles the number of covers you get for your characters (on average). It does not address the problem that, to fully cover a new character (or any character you don't have, for that matter) you will need to pull enough 4*s so that, on average, you get 13 covers for every 4* currently in the game. 

You want to cover Gamora as soon as she gets into tokens? Nowadays that'll take about 156 4* draws, or about 183.5 legendary tokens. 

No vaulting? You'd be looking at 749.4 tokens on average. That's 4 times as many tokens. Doubling the rewards wouldn't have come close (well, it'd be halfway).

Can I ask a serious question here? And I'll put it out there for everyone, not just the person I quoted. Why is there this assumption that everyone wants to cover characters as fast as possible? And why is there an assumption that the player base is more interested in new characters vs old? Is MPQ that big of a competitive scene? I mean, they don't even give away real prizes. I just don't get the rush. Especially since the only way to level up characters is thru ISO, which is always seemingly in short supply. I just feel like this game company never had a long term plan for this game and lucked into a goldmine. They want to keep it running but have no idea how, and the stuff they're throwing against the wall isn't sticking very well.

Their metrics show that people pay money for shiny things.  People like to play with their shiny new toys, and so getting them covered more quickly is preferable.  This is what the metrics that the devs have are telling them.  Additionally, newer players (players with few or no maxed 4s) benefit from champing 4s sooner so that they can compete at a higher level earlier.

People play because it's fun.  Winning is also fun, and so people are naturally competitive - even if there are no real prizes offered beyond in-game rewards.

Ok, so I get the "shiny new toys" aspect. But if you have New Character at 0 covers and Old Character at 0 covers...aren't they both "shiny new toys" to someone? So why push one over the other instead of offering choice? That question has never been answered by anyone as far as I can tell. Granted, I don't have access to the same info as the game company. But I would think the metrics would show by giving people choice, they'll drastically increase their revenue. Like I said, I don't know, but it seems like common sense to me. 

As for the winning/fun part, you're right and I should have thought about that a little more.

If it were just that then D3/Demi would give us options on how to spend the CP or open more stores so I can spend more money on what I actually want...   Theres something more sinister or ignorant going on, I am still up in the air as to which it is...

Fightmastermpq

The system is good - it actually allows me to cover characters in a reasonable time and has benefited my roster. (This option doens't preclude minor tweaks to the system.)

MissChinch said:

Beer40 said:

Fightmastermpq said:

Beer40 said:

Jaedenkaal said:

SnowcaTT said:

Looks like everyone wins if they had simply used the TRUE solution to dilution.

Increased rewards is not a solution, it's a band-aid. Obviously, it would be an amazingly popular band-aid (among players), but it is emphatically NOT the solution.

Yes, doubling the number of tokens you get (as an arbitrary example) doubles the number of covers you get for your characters (on average). It does not address the problem that, to fully cover a new character (or any character you don't have, for that matter) you will need to pull enough 4*s so that, on average, you get 13 covers for every 4* currently in the game. 

You want to cover Gamora as soon as she gets into tokens? Nowadays that'll take about 156 4* draws, or about 183.5 legendary tokens. 

No vaulting? You'd be looking at 749.4 tokens on average. That's 4 times as many tokens. Doubling the rewards wouldn't have come close (well, it'd be halfway).

Can I ask a serious question here? And I'll put it out there for everyone, not just the person I quoted. Why is there this assumption that everyone wants to cover characters as fast as possible? And why is there an assumption that the player base is more interested in new characters vs old? Is MPQ that big of a competitive scene? I mean, they don't even give away real prizes. I just don't get the rush. Especially since the only way to level up characters is thru ISO, which is always seemingly in short supply. I just feel like this game company never had a long term plan for this game and lucked into a goldmine. They want to keep it running but have no idea how, and the stuff they're throwing against the wall isn't sticking very well.

Their metrics show that people pay money for shiny things.  People like to play with their shiny new toys, and so getting them covered more quickly is preferable.  This is what the metrics that the devs have are telling them.  Additionally, newer players (players with few or no maxed 4s) benefit from champing 4s sooner so that they can compete at a higher level earlier.

People play because it's fun.  Winning is also fun, and so people are naturally competitive - even if there are no real prizes offered beyond in-game rewards.

Ok, so I get the "shiny new toys" aspect. But if you have New Character at 0 covers and Old Character at 0 covers...aren't they both "shiny new toys" to someone? So why push one over the other instead of offering choice? That question has never been answered by anyone as far as I can tell. Granted, I don't have access to the same info as the game company. But I would think the metrics would show by giving people choice, they'll drastically increase their revenue. Like I said, I don't know, but it seems like common sense to me. 

As for the winning/fun part, you're right and I should have thought about that a little more.

If it were just that then D3/Demi would give us options on how to spend the CP or open more stores so I can spend more money on what I actually want...   Theres something more sinister or ignorant going on, I am still up in the air as to which it is...

By limiting choice they create an urgency that encourages spending to obtain things before they are no longer attainable.  You can see this in the 2 week cover expiration period, their refusal to announce sales ahead of time, etc.  This has been their MO for quote some time now - always seeming to favor mechanics that encourage people to spend before they can't anymore.  If you have a choice in rewards you have a choice on spending now or later.  They don't want you to have that choice.  They want you to spend now before you lose that ability forever.  It's not ignorant, it's purposeful.  I won't comment on whether or not it is sinister.

Jaedenkaal

The system is good - it actually allows me to cover characters in a reasonable time and has benefited my roster. (This option doens't preclude minor tweaks to the system.)

Fightmastermpq said:  
I won't comment on whether or not it is sinister.

Just business, I'd imagine. The business of deliberately manipulating the human condition for monetary gain, certainly, but they're hardly alone here; it's the entire free-to-play/microtransaction model and wasn't even new then.

It's ludicrous to think that they're deliberately attempting to alienate their player base.