I really dislike the quirkiness of the quote system on this site.Mods feel free to squash this post i goofed.
Spudgutter said: tiomono said: Spudgutter said:The perfect solution for every player, in my opinion, is several tokens, each with a set number of certain covers, so that you could more easily target who you want. But i doubt we will ever see that. That's still not a perfect solution. Imagine how many complaint threads there would be if someone wanted a specific character and in its token pool were several characters they don't want.If you ever collect any kind of trading card it's the same basic premise. Collectors can either buy packs with random chances at what they want, or they can shell out extra money to get specifically what they want. I realize this is not an exact apples to apples example but the general concept is there. I didn't mean perfect in the most literal sense, just the best solution to help everyone. And if they did adjust it that way, and someone complained, i would be in that thread, too.The cards is a better example for me, i would think. Every pack has a set of cards that it is drawing from. If i wanted the best card from 2016, i would not be able to go to the store and buy a pack off the shelf today in the hopes of getting it. All they are selling today are the current sets.
tiomono said: Spudgutter said:The perfect solution for every player, in my opinion, is several tokens, each with a set number of certain covers, so that you could more easily target who you want. But i doubt we will ever see that. That's still not a perfect solution. Imagine how many complaint threads there would be if someone wanted a specific character and in its token pool were several characters they don't want.If you ever collect any kind of trading card it's the same basic premise. Collectors can either buy packs with random chances at what they want, or they can shell out extra money to get specifically what they want. I realize this is not an exact apples to apples example but the general concept is there.
Spudgutter said:The perfect solution for every player, in my opinion, is several tokens, each with a set number of certain covers, so that you could more easily target who you want. But i doubt we will ever see that.
tiomono said:Vaulting was an absurdly poor fix to the problem of dillution.
ZootSax said:I would agree with you that vaulting was an absurdly poor solution to the general problem of token dillution, however I haven't seen any argument that the current system is a better one, except for a more veteran player who doesn't need as many covers for the older characters the begin with...and thus, may have been better off with vaulting. For a player just starting the transition into 4*'s...I just don't see how the current tokens are any less disheartening than we saw prior to vaulting.
tiomono said:And that "useless" 1 cover cloak and dagger that your kid pulled is called progress. If they can roster it they would have access to playing essential nodes featuring that character. Deadpool daily burrito just became an option as well. If cloak and dagger were vaulted your child would be at the mercy of the bonus hero system to get them. Or they would be denied a chance of competing at higher levels because of lack of roster diversity. Now times that by 45. That's how many characters would be vaulted right now.
ZootSax said: tiomono said:Vaulting was an absurdly poor fix to the problem of dillution. I clipped almost all of your text because I see this as the crux of the vaulting debate. I believe there is a fairly universal concensus that dillution was a serious problem. Vaulting, while it did't address that at all in a general sense, did help with a narrow progression to the 4* tier at the expense of ~75% of the available characters. Whether or not you liked vaulting, the current system only helps with dilution for a very narrow range of characters and leaves the dillution problem for older characters worse than ever. If you opened a legendary token last year during the Anniversary event, your odds of getting a particular 4* (say, Jean Grey, for argument's sake) were more than twice as good as if you did the same thing today. Every new 4* character release puts a new 4* in the non-12, which make up a fixed 42.5% of the tokens. Therefore character dillution is happening at the same rate, but now older characters are half as likely as they used to be in the tokens. Bonus heroes can help you with this, but that's only good for one character at a time. 3* champ rewards can also help for older 4*'s, but again, that's only three covers and not every older 4* has a 3* feeding it.I would agree with you that vaulting was an absurdly poor solution to the general problem of token dillution, however I haven't seen any argument that the current system is a better one, except for a more veteran player who doesn't need as many covers for the older characters the begin with...and thus, may have been better off with vaulting. For a player just starting the transition into 4*'s...I just don't see how the current tokens are any less disheartening than we saw prior to my current 12 vaulting.
DStrange4Life said: "The only way that Hulkbuster, Teen Jean, PX Nick fury, etc become relevant is after they reach 370, their mere presence on your team gives you a 2x iso bonus, or so amazing farming perk."Can someone confirm/clarify this? You get 2x ISO when a character reaches 370?
Phumade said: DStrange4Life said: "The only way that Hulkbuster, Teen Jean, PX Nick fury, etc become relevant is after they reach 370, their mere presence on your team gives you a 2x iso bonus, or so amazing farming perk."Can someone confirm/clarify this? You get 2x ISO when a character reaches 370? No, nothing magical happens when a 4* gets to 370. That is my point, a 370 Hulkbuster is pretty much garbage when compared to a 370 carol.Instead of worrying about champing an older 4*, focus on max champing the latest 4*. In almost every head to head comparison, an older 4* loses very badly to an equivalent level latest 4*.The only way adding a cover to an older 4* like HB, teen jean, PX, Nick Fury etc adds value is IF and ONLY IF D3 gives us some perk for actually using that char. Otherwise, you will almost inevitably always use a more recent 4* because of power creep.
BigMike182 said: The question about War Machine (who I have champed but almost never use) made me realize that the best solution to repetitive gameplay and devalued veteran characters is to buff older characters on a regular basis. If they can fix Mordo, Invisible Woman, Carnage, and other underwhelming 4*s, they can fix anything. We'd see more teams made up of different opponents and the need to get the latest 4* champed ASAP might diminish (beyond gotta-catch-'em-all-ism).I have 10 fully covered 4*s waiting to be champed (Cyclops, PX, Kingpin, Vulture, Miles, Chulk, Yondu, Quake, Drax, & Moon Knight). Some of these characters are very useful and some aren't. Obviously, I'd love to champ them all, not to mention the 4*s w/ < 13 covers (especially Peggy). The current meta makes Vulture the best candidate, but Moon Knight is way more fun and I'd like to see how effective Quake's passive would be against some recent 4*s.I have a lot of toys in this game and I want to play with them!
DAZ0273 said: Yeah - this is what I was getting at. A bunch of the older characters ARE great fun (I really like Moon Knight and will definitely pursue champing him) but we hardly ever see them. If I DID see a War Machine and he wasn't like 50 levels above my roster I would be happy to fight against him to see what it was like. I have plenty of experience battling Medusa/C4rol/Etc and when they boost R&G and Gamora in the same week, Lol! Anyway, carry on MPQing!
Ruinate said: For some people simply champing a character is enough. For others it is only the beginning. A character with only 13/130 covers is nowhere near being finished. So no, it is not the same general progress as vaulting. It's not "pretty much the same" It's not even close.