Does Vaulting solve the problem of all types of dilution?

Jaedenkaal

Yes

zodiac339 said:

I'll start with changes I'd like.
1. Stop calling it "vaulting": The game already has vaults. Any non-release PVE, along with Tacos, are Vaults. If anything is vaulted, it's the contents of a vault. The characters taken out of rotation have been "archived" by the developers, taken out of the primary rotation and put into less frequently used storage. (I know, I know. This was the community's fault, not the developers).
2. Offer the Vintage Legendary store: Many have asked for this. Bonus Heroes is only a partial solution for players needing to build old characters. And archiving means that adding Champion Levels for the archived heroes becomes glacially slow. It doesn't have to be a different price from Classic Legendary. We just need the option.
3. Archive the oldest Epic heroes: Legendary characters aren't the only ones feeling dilution. Archiving Epics would also require the Vintage Legendaries from point 2.

Now, all that aside, archiving has been fantastic for me. With many of my Legendaries already built up and Championed, the number no longer readily available hasn't been an issue. There are some I didn't get to finish yet, but with ISO rate meaning 10 to 14 days to Champ a given Legendary, I couldn't deal with all of them anyway. But the biggest benefit is:
I can make a plan. If pulling from the legendary store meant "1 of 50 different characters", I'm almost guaranteed to not build someone newer. Now, I can have the older characters sit back and wait for events to finish them up while the ISO trickles in. Meanwhile, Cloak and Dagger is at 5 covers, but Hobofist is already at 10, and Mordo is at 12. Everyone else is at 13 covers. Now I can wait for the ISO to get all the ones art 13 covers Champed before making another pull. I could then have a cycle of saving ISO for 2 weeks, then pulling Legendary store until I reach 13 covers on someone, then saving up for 2 more weeks. I also have a current plan of "at least wait for Agent Venom to retire." Doesn't that sound like a nice plan?

I agree with all of this, except for the implication that AV isn't worth champing

JHawkInc

No

New McG said:

JHawkInc said:

Jaedenkaal said:

JHawkInc said:

Short answer is No.

Long answer is that Vaulting was a group of solutions to fix a group of problems, a system overhaul instead of a point-to-point fix.

Reality is, Vaulting was a paper-pushing fix. We had a cluttered desk, we just rearranged the papers all over it, and declared it done. What we have is just a new mess, with new problems.

There are many benefits to vaulting, but those benefits are watered down by all the new problems it brings, and right now, we need the opposite of dilution. We drastically need a way to acquire older 4*s. (I'm going to ignore the 3*s because the gameplan seems to be to shuffle people into 4* territory faster, rather than fixing the problems in the 3* section of the game, like the dozen plus characters that need a buff).

Sadly, this just brings us to the point of "How about old Classic Legends that only have the vaulted characters?" But we've been saying that for so long that I think if we painted it on bricks, stood in the Dev's offices, and LITERALLY THREW BRICKS AT THEM they still wouldn't take a freaking hint.

"Yes, but it also had a lot of other implications, many of which I don't like" is still "Yes" for the poll, it is not "No"

Odds used to be really really low for every character. Now they are decent for 12 characters, and ZERO for over three times as many others.

Vaulting did not fix the dilution problem. So the answer is "No."

Again, what you refer to has nothing to do with actual "dilution". Dilution is about spreading odds thin across a token. If you have a 1 gallon container that is 50% alcohol and add 3 gallon of water to it, you are diluting it. The relevant portion to the discussion becomes significantly thinner. Taking characters out of tokens helps with dilution, the same way that removing the water from that solution makes the alcohol portion stronger.

What you refer to is "character availability", which is a whole other discussion.

The dilution problem IS an issue of character availability. Vaulting didn't fix the issue, it just changed it. Or, like I said back at the top of my first post, the papers were pushed around the desk.

Answer is still "No."

zodiac339

Yes

Jaedenkaal said:

zodiac339 said:

I'll start with changes I'd like.
1. Stop calling it "vaulting": The game already has vaults. Any non-release PVE, along with Tacos, are Vaults. If anything is vaulted, it's the contents of a vault. The characters taken out of rotation have been "archived" by the developers, taken out of the primary rotation and put into less frequently used storage. (I know, I know. This was the community's fault, not the developers).
2. Offer the Vintage Legendary store: Many have asked for this. Bonus Heroes is only a partial solution for players needing to build old characters. And archiving means that adding Champion Levels for the archived heroes becomes glacially slow. It doesn't have to be a different price from Classic Legendary. We just need the option.
3. Archive the oldest Epic heroes: Legendary characters aren't the only ones feeling dilution. Archiving Epics would also require the Vintage Legendaries from point 2.

Now, all that aside, archiving has been fantastic for me. With many of my Legendaries already built up and Championed, the number no longer readily available hasn't been an issue. There are some I didn't get to finish yet, but with ISO rate meaning 10 to 14 days to Champ a given Legendary, I couldn't deal with all of them anyway. But the biggest benefit is:
I can make a plan. If pulling from the legendary store meant "1 of 50 different characters", I'm almost guaranteed to not build someone newer. Now, I can have the older characters sit back and wait for events to finish them up while the ISO trickles in. Meanwhile, Cloak and Dagger is at 5 covers, but Hobofist is already at 10, and Mordo is at 12. Everyone else is at 13 covers. Now I can wait for the ISO to get all the ones art 13 covers Champed before making another pull. I could then have a cycle of saving ISO for 2 weeks, then pulling Legendary store until I reach 13 covers on someone, then saving up for 2 more weeks. I also have a current plan of "at least wait for Agent Venom to retire." Doesn't that sound like a nice plan?

I agree with all of this, except for the implication that AV isn't worth champing

It's not that he's not worth Champing. Every hero is worth Champing eventually. It means having an easier time when they're required and getting Champion rewards. It's really just a matter of priority, and AV is on the bottom of the priority list. That includes the 12 archived characters I haven't gotten Champed yet, because I far prefer Devil Dinosaur waving her tiny arms or Eddie Venom slashing the screen to Flash's AP management mini game.
(The winky face indicated sarcasm, right?)

Stax the Foyer

Sure, it solves it, in the same way that cutting off a toe solves the problem of outgrowing a pair of shoes.

Wumpushunter

No

*checks my roster*  looks like I don't have 18+ vaulted champed 4 stars, didn't help me one hecking  darn. 

Fightmastermpq

Yes

Wumpushunter said:

*checks my roster*  looks like I don't have 18+ vaulted champed 4 stars, didn't help me one hecking  darn. 

Is there something significant about having 18+ vaulted 4s or is that number as arbitrary as your opinion on vaulting?

Beer40

No

Jaedenkaal said:

MissChinch said:

Does it solve the problem of people complaining at a new character release about being able to use them in a year or so?  Yup, that problem is solved

Does it solve the problem of dilution? Seems almost laughable, before I had increasingly bad odds on covering a 4* character, now I am unable to pull the vast majority of the tier...  Adding more characters dilutes the tier, restricting me from pulling most of them doesn't "un-dilute" the tier.

"Yes, but it also had a lot of other implications, many of which I don't like" is still "Yes" for the poll, it is not "No"

Sure, I can vote any way I like on a poll, as long as I scratch out the question and substitute my own. 

For reference, the "dilution" that is being discussed that may or may not have been "solved" by vaulting, is the dilution explicitly described in Dave's answer here:

Pack dilution is the fact that since comic packs contain ALL characters ever released, each new character release “dilutes” the chance of drawing a given character of that rarity.

That's the problem. Tokens (not the tier) contain too many characters, so drawing a specific character available in that token is extremely unlikely.

Has vaulting solved this? Yes, yes it has. Did it have other effects that you may or may not  enjoy? Sure. Is the poll question and available answer list about those other effects? No. 

For your reference, the dilution being discussed, since I'm the one that created this thread, is simple dilution by definition. Meaning the "weakening or watering down" of: packs AND rosters AND anything else affected by vaulting. It's fair to state your opinion and keep your focus on the packs. And reasonable too. But there is dilution of rosters created by this vaulting mechanism for some and their opinions should not just be brushed aside, but considered as well. 

This is a very divided issue, and maybe with more attempted understanding of both sides, we could work to figure out something that's better for more than 42% or 58% of users (current results)

Wumpushunter

No

Fightmastermpq said:

Wumpushunter said:

*checks my roster*  looks like I don't have 18+ vaulted champed 4 stars, didn't help me one hecking  darn. 

Is there something significant about having 18+ vaulted 4s or is that number as arbitrary as your opinion on vaulting?


Basically the people not **** about vaulting have all or most of those 4 stars safe and champed. Every time I hear people condescendingly mention that other people are arbitrary, wrong, or stupid all I here is "Let the peasants eat cake,  I got mine already"  So keep it up you arent changing anyone's opinions.

Fightmastermpq

Yes

Beer40 said:

Jaedenkaal said:

MissChinch said:

Does it solve the problem of people complaining at a new character release about being able to use them in a year or so?  Yup, that problem is solved

Does it solve the problem of dilution? Seems almost laughable, before I had increasingly bad odds on covering a 4* character, now I am unable to pull the vast majority of the tier...  Adding more characters dilutes the tier, restricting me from pulling most of them doesn't "un-dilute" the tier.

"Yes, but it also had a lot of other implications, many of which I don't like" is still "Yes" for the poll, it is not "No"

Sure, I can vote any way I like on a poll, as long as I scratch out the question and substitute my own. 

For reference, the "dilution" that is being discussed that may or may not have been "solved" by vaulting, is the dilution explicitly described in Dave's answer here:

Pack dilution is the fact that since comic packs contain ALL characters ever released, each new character release “dilutes” the chance of drawing a given character of that rarity.

That's the problem. Tokens (not the tier) contain too many characters, so drawing a specific character available in that token is extremely unlikely.

Has vaulting solved this? Yes, yes it has. Did it have other effects that you may or may not  enjoy? Sure. Is the poll question and available answer list about those other effects? No. 

For your reference, the dilution being discussed, since I'm the one that created this thread, is simple dilution by definition. Meaning the "weakening or watering down" of: packs AND rosters AND anything else affected by vaulting. It's fair to state your opinion and keep your focus on the packs. And reasonable too. But there is dilution of rosters created by this vaulting mechanism for some and their opinions should not just be brushed aside, but considered as well. 

This is a very divided issue, and maybe with more attempted understanding of both sides, we could work to figure out something that's better for more than 42% or 58% of users (current results)

I'm sorry, but that just isn't what dilution means.  When you dilute, or water down something you don't weaken it in the sense that you are making it physically not as strong, you weaken it in the sense that you are making it less concentrated.  So if your packs/roster/game have a large concentration of 4* characters, and you add more 4* characters to those packs/rosters/game then you have weakened or watered down or diluted that concentration of 4* characters.  That's what was happening.  Every new release meant that each individual 4* was diluted in the sense that they represented a smaller portion of the total 4* pool in packs/rosters/game.

Vaulting however has by definition solved that problem in packs as now the addition of a new 4* means the removal of an old 4* and so the concentration of 4*s in packs remains fixed at 1/12.  They are not diluted at all.

The same could be argued for "dilution of rosters" (which is not even a real thing that anyone has ever discussed ever, but let's just roll with it since you are deadset on trying to equate your distaste for vaulting to a failure of vaulting to address dilution....)  Under the old system rosters had a tendency to kind of level pretty evenly, and if you made a graph of character level vs. time owned it would probably form a nice little line with levels steadily increasing with time owned.  Now with vaulting (or at least a couple months from now after it's been in full swing for a while) that graph would more likely resemble a step with all the old vaulted characters being low and all the newer characters being at about the exact same level between 270 and 370 depending on your level of play.  You might describe this roster as being concentrated with newer characters as they will by and large represent the largest portion of your roster.  For others that voted "no" - concentrated is the exact opposite of diluted.

If you don't think that vaulting solved dilution because you liked being able to slowly acquire covers for all characters that just means that you liked dilution.  And that's OK, but it's really important that you understand that for the purposes of all of these debates.

Beer40

No

Fightmastermpq said:

Beer40 said:

Jaedenkaal said:

MissChinch said:

Does it solve the problem of people complaining at a new character release about being able to use them in a year or so?  Yup, that problem is solved

Does it solve the problem of dilution? Seems almost laughable, before I had increasingly bad odds on covering a 4* character, now I am unable to pull the vast majority of the tier...  Adding more characters dilutes the tier, restricting me from pulling most of them doesn't "un-dilute" the tier.

"Yes, but it also had a lot of other implications, many of which I don't like" is still "Yes" for the poll, it is not "No"

Sure, I can vote any way I like on a poll, as long as I scratch out the question and substitute my own. 

For reference, the "dilution" that is being discussed that may or may not have been "solved" by vaulting, is the dilution explicitly described in Dave's answer here:

Pack dilution is the fact that since comic packs contain ALL characters ever released, each new character release “dilutes” the chance of drawing a given character of that rarity.

That's the problem. Tokens (not the tier) contain too many characters, so drawing a specific character available in that token is extremely unlikely.

Has vaulting solved this? Yes, yes it has. Did it have other effects that you may or may not  enjoy? Sure. Is the poll question and available answer list about those other effects? No. 

For your reference, the dilution being discussed, since I'm the one that created this thread, is simple dilution by definition. Meaning the "weakening or watering down" of: packs AND rosters AND anything else affected by vaulting. It's fair to state your opinion and keep your focus on the packs. And reasonable too. But there is dilution of rosters created by this vaulting mechanism for some and their opinions should not just be brushed aside, but considered as well. 

This is a very divided issue, and maybe with more attempted understanding of both sides, we could work to figure out something that's better for more than 42% or 58% of users (current results)

I'm sorry, but that just isn't what dilution means.  When you dilute, or water down something you don't weaken it in the sense that you are making it physically not as strong, you weaken it in the sense that you are making it less concentrated.  So if your packs/roster/game have a large concentration of 4* characters, and you add more 4* characters to those packs/rosters/game then you have weakened or watered down or diluted that concentration of 4* characters.  That's what was happening.  Every new release meant that each individual 4* was diluted in the sense that they represented a smaller portion of the total 4* pool in packs/rosters/game.

Vaulting however has by definition solved that problem in packs as now the addition of a new 4* means the removal of an old 4* and so the concentration of 4*s in packs remains fixed at 1/12.  They are not diluted at all.

The same could be argued for "dilution of rosters" (which is not even a real thing that anyone has ever discussed ever, but let's just roll with it since you are deadset on trying to equate your distaste for vaulting to a failure of vaulting to address dilution....)  Under the old system rosters had a tendency to kind of level pretty evenly, and if you made a graph of character level vs. time owned it would probably form a nice little line with levels steadily increasing with time owned.  Now with vaulting (or at least a couple months from now after it's been in full swing for a while) that graph would more likely resemble a step with all the old vaulted characters being low and all the newer characters being at about the exact same level between 270 and 370 depending on your level of play.  You might describe this roster as being concentrated with newer characters as they will by and large represent the largest portion of your roster.  For others that voted "no" - concentrated is the exact opposite of diluted.

If you don't think that vaulting solved dilution because you liked being able to slowly acquire covers for all characters that just means that you liked dilution.  And that's OK, but it's really important that you understand that for the purposes of all of these debates.

I understand dilution. Was the old system dilution? Yes. Adding characters without increasing odds leads to dilution. Obvious. Is the new system dilution? Yes. Keeping already low odds + lack of choice amongst the 12 = not getting the best characters covered = watered down roster(weakened = dilution). Sure, I'd love to bring my AV and RiRi against your Iceman and Rulk...or whatever. 

RNG is the true enemy here, because even tho Carol (and others) is available, not everyone is pulling her. And those people getting the AVs (and others) are suffering from a weakened pool of characters (dilution). 

Dilution isn't JUST watering down the pool of characters by pumping out another every 2 weeks. It's watering down roster strength by low capping champ levels (for all but the hardcore) while also adding characters that aren't very helpful. Some characters are more or less duds, hate to say it.

Very few are in your position. Please understand that. Many more are trying to get 12 characters champed without the benefit of vaulted champs to fall back on. Those that are lucky end up with 280 Carols (concentrated). Those that are unlucky end up with 280 AVs (diluted).  Those that refuse bad characters are worse off, because they have only I SO and no champs to compete with because of selling off "bad" characters.

Since you presumed to know my playstyle earlier, I will tell it to you so there are no misunderstandings. I roster everyone, as they come in, champ them as they become available to be champed. 

I am currently getting the "bottom" of the 12 frequently. I get plenty of pulls. But I get the worst from them. So that's diluting my roster strength from what it could be. Now there are plenty of people in my shoes. There are also plenty of people who are getting the "top" of the 12 from their pulls. They are concentrating their roster strength. 

Vaulting isn't helping my group. It helps theirs. I want something that works for more than 50% (less if you count the poll/numerous threads) of the playerbase. I want something that works for someone in your spot, someone in mine, and someone different than us both. The more people pleased, the longer this game lasts.

Fightmastermpq

Yes

Please just stop.  Dilution has nothing to do with strength of characters.  You are using the word improperly.  And pulling AV over Carol has as much to do with vaulting as pulling Elektra over Iceman did pre-vaulting.  Poor RNG exists equally in both systems and has nothing to do with dilution.

NewMcG

Yes

Beer40 said:

Fightmastermpq said:

Beer40 said:

Jaedenkaal said:

MissChinch said:

Does it solve the problem of people complaining at a new character release about being able to use them in a year or so?  Yup, that problem is solved

Does it solve the problem of dilution? Seems almost laughable, before I had increasingly bad odds on covering a 4* character, now I am unable to pull the vast majority of the tier...  Adding more characters dilutes the tier, restricting me from pulling most of them doesn't "un-dilute" the tier.

"Yes, but it also had a lot of other implications, many of which I don't like" is still "Yes" for the poll, it is not "No"

Sure, I can vote any way I like on a poll, as long as I scratch out the question and substitute my own. 

For reference, the "dilution" that is being discussed that may or may not have been "solved" by vaulting, is the dilution explicitly described in Dave's answer here:

Pack dilution is the fact that since comic packs contain ALL characters ever released, each new character release “dilutes” the chance of drawing a given character of that rarity.

That's the problem. Tokens (not the tier) contain too many characters, so drawing a specific character available in that token is extremely unlikely.

Has vaulting solved this? Yes, yes it has. Did it have other effects that you may or may not  enjoy? Sure. Is the poll question and available answer list about those other effects? No. 

For your reference, the dilution being discussed, since I'm the one that created this thread, is simple dilution by definition. Meaning the "weakening or watering down" of: packs AND rosters AND anything else affected by vaulting. It's fair to state your opinion and keep your focus on the packs. And reasonable too. But there is dilution of rosters created by this vaulting mechanism for some and their opinions should not just be brushed aside, but considered as well. 

This is a very divided issue, and maybe with more attempted understanding of both sides, we could work to figure out something that's better for more than 42% or 58% of users (current results)

I'm sorry, but that just isn't what dilution means.  When you dilute, or water down something you don't weaken it in the sense that you are making it physically not as strong, you weaken it in the sense that you are making it less concentrated.  So if your packs/roster/game have a large concentration of 4* characters, and you add more 4* characters to those packs/rosters/game then you have weakened or watered down or diluted that concentration of 4* characters.  That's what was happening.  Every new release meant that each individual 4* was diluted in the sense that they represented a smaller portion of the total 4* pool in packs/rosters/game.

Vaulting however has by definition solved that problem in packs as now the addition of a new 4* means the removal of an old 4* and so the concentration of 4*s in packs remains fixed at 1/12.  They are not diluted at all.

The same could be argued for "dilution of rosters" (which is not even a real thing that anyone has ever discussed ever, but let's just roll with it since you are deadset on trying to equate your distaste for vaulting to a failure of vaulting to address dilution....)  Under the old system rosters had a tendency to kind of level pretty evenly, and if you made a graph of character level vs. time owned it would probably form a nice little line with levels steadily increasing with time owned.  Now with vaulting (or at least a couple months from now after it's been in full swing for a while) that graph would more likely resemble a step with all the old vaulted characters being low and all the newer characters being at about the exact same level between 270 and 370 depending on your level of play.  You might describe this roster as being concentrated with newer characters as they will by and large represent the largest portion of your roster.  For others that voted "no" - concentrated is the exact opposite of diluted.

If you don't think that vaulting solved dilution because you liked being able to slowly acquire covers for all characters that just means that you liked dilution.  And that's OK, but it's really important that you understand that for the purposes of all of these debates.

I understand dilution. Was the old system dilution? Yes. Adding characters without increasing odds leads to dilution. Obvious. Is the new system dilution? Yes. Keeping already low odds + lack of choice amongst the 12 = not getting the best characters covered = watered down roster(weakened = dilution). Sure, I'd love to bring my AV and RiRi against your Iceman and Rulk...or whatever. 

RNG is the true enemy here, because even tho Carol (and others) is available, not everyone is pulling her. And those people getting the AVs (and others) are suffering from a weakened pool of characters (dilution). 

Dilution isn't JUST watering down the pool of characters by pumping out another every 2 weeks. It's watering down roster strength by low capping champ levels (for all but the hardcore) while also adding characters that aren't very helpful. Some characters are more or less duds, hate to say it.

Very few are in your position. Please understand that. Many more are trying to get 12 characters champed without the benefit of vaulted champs to fall back on. Those that are lucky end up with 280 Carols (concentrated). Those that are unlucky end up with 280 AVs (diluted).  Those that refuse bad characters are worse off, because they have only I SO and no champs to compete with because of selling off "bad" characters.

Since you presumed to know my playstyle earlier, I will tell it to you so there are no misunderstandings. I roster everyone, as they come in, champ them as they become available to be champed. 

I am currently getting the "bottom" of the 12 frequently. I get plenty of pulls. But I get the worst from them. So that's diluting my roster strength from what it could be. Now there are plenty of people in my shoes. There are also plenty of people who are getting the "top" of the 12 from their pulls. They are concentrating their roster strength. 

Vaulting isn't helping my group. It helps theirs. I want something that works for more than 50% (less if you count the poll/numerous threads) of the playerbase. I want something that works for someone in your spot, someone in mine, and someone different than us both. The more people pleased, the longer this game lasts.

You are expanding "dilution" well beyond any stretch of the meaning of the word as it relates to MPQ and the character pool. What you're talking about is not dilution.

Ducky

Yes

Dilution as stated by the devs was in reference to the number of characters in the token pool. This is the only form of dilution that matter since it is what the devs base their development on.

So yes, by taking out a large portion of the characters it fixed said problem of dilution.

Now does that necessarily help you improve your roster? No, but that wasn't the question that was asked.

Nick441234

No

Is it really fixing a problem if its stopping you getting other characters instead? 

Starfury

Yes

Of course vaulting solved token dilution. Amputating your hands will solve ingrown fingernails 100% of the time as well.

Has it also created a new problem, many people mind far more than they minded vaulting? Yes, but that's not an option in the poll.

Perfect example for a biased poll with completely balanced poll options.

Fightmastermpq

Yes

nick_chicane said:

Is it really fixing a problem if its stopping you getting other characters instead? 

Yes?  One of the biggest problems I see with dilution is that so many people can't even comprehend what dilution even is.  Asking if it fixes the problem by stopping you from getting other characters is asking if vaulting fixes dilution because it doesn't allow further dilution.  Of course.  The ability to get all the characters from a single token IS dilution.  That is the problem.  But so many also want it to be the solution.

jredd

technically it does. but it creates 5 different problems in the process. needs to be changed. sooner the better.

veny

Turning servers off also solve dilution problem - your poll is vague and its result may lead to horrific interpretations.
My answer will be more complex - Vaulting decreased the amount of 4*s actually available, which increased the chance of picking one specific cover, but this came with huge (for me unacceptable) cost - non-vaulted 4*s are de facto unavailable (yeah, basically they are gone, impossible to be farmed, rr upgraded up to point useful in fight and DDQ titan node)

Brendover

No

Vaulting didn't solve the dilution problem. I'm basically just going through the motions for this game now. The excitement of opening packs has been replaced with watching a number in the upper right slowly go insignificantly up as it slowly approaches an imaginary number where I hope rngesus doesn't screw me over and I get 3 fully covered 5*s.

Pylgrim

Yes

Beer40 said:

It hasn't helped me at all. I was just starting in the 4* transition so I didn't have much waste at all. Now I have enough (plus lack of ISO) that I had to stop pulling and start hoarding.

Then you don't understand the term "dilution". Dilution doesn't mean waste or avoiding it. Dilution is having 46 4*s with 1-4 covers and taking years to reach 13 in one or more. Under that light, vaulting DID solve dilution.