Daredevil217 said: Again we get this dropped on us with zero communication. Again some insight into why they are returning to dilution when no one asked for it would be nice. Mark my words, the next 4* release will be meta-defining/super great. They are going to to use it to see if people will spend or bust their hoards chasing a character they won’t otherwise get their hands on for probably over a year or two. As someone noted above, without taking bonus heroes into account; it now takes about 1200 pulls or 30,000 CP to max a 4*. Mind you, on the way to max-covering the next 4* you should have pulled enough to max-cover TWELVE 5*.
Daredevil217 said: Question 3: What is in place for those who want to level evenly? What if there are people like me who aren’t trying to race to 5* land and are fine with their roster getting better slowly but evenly over time?
PenniesForEveryone said: Daredevil217 said: Again we get this dropped on us with zero communication. Again some insight into why they are returning to dilution when no one asked for it would be nice. Mark my words, the next 4* release will be meta-defining/super great. They are going to to use it to see if people will spend or bust their hoards chasing a character they won’t otherwise get their hands on for probably over a year or two. As someone noted above, without taking bonus heroes into account; it now takes about 1200 pulls or 30,000 CP to max a 4*. Mind you, on the way to max-covering the next 4* you should have pulled enough to max-cover TWELVE 5*. By "no one" do you mean you? Because you specifically asked for this, and were perhaps the largest advocate for this exact change. It's Question #3 in your thread whining about vaulting: Daredevil217 said: Question 3: What is in place for those who want to level evenly? What if there are people like me who aren’t trying to race to 5* land and are fine with their roster getting better slowly but evenly over time? Now you have it. All the characters are in there, you can continue to grow your rosters slowly but evenly over time.
justsing said: I ran a quick and dirty simulation of how many legendary pulls are needed to fully cover a specific Latest 4*, assuming that you're starting with 0 covers: Odds for Latest 4* in LTs Mean Pulls Needed (SD) Median Pulls Needed (P25, P75) Current odds (no BH) 434 (135) 416 (338, 509) Current odds (with BH*) 197 (62) 189 (154, 232) Updated odds (no BH) 1177 (369) 1128 (916, 1382) Updated odds (with BH*) 276 (86) 265 (215, 324) * Assumes you only have one Latest 4* BH-ed.What this suggests is that BHs are definitely very helpful in covering 4*s since they greatly reduce the number of pulls needed to cover one specific 4*. However, while you're focusing on covering one specific 4*, the remaining (non-BH) Latest 4*s will not be getting covered as fast.Simulation code can be found here: https://pastebin.com/r81fQaze When I have some more time, I'll write up a more complex simulation that looks at how well-covered the other 4*s get in the process of covering one specific 4*.
Current odds (no BH)
416 (338, 509)
Current odds (with BH*)
197 (62)
189 (154, 232)
Updated odds (no BH)
1177 (369)
1128 (916, 1382)
Updated odds (with BH*)
276 (86)
265 (215, 324)
Daredevil217 said: PenniesForEveryone said: Daredevil217 said: Again we get this dropped on us with zero communication. Again some insight into why they are returning to dilution when no one asked for it would be nice. Mark my words, the next 4* release will be meta-defining/super great. They are going to to use it to see if people will spend or bust their hoards chasing a character they won’t otherwise get their hands on for probably over a year or two. As someone noted above, without taking bonus heroes into account; it now takes about 1200 pulls or 30,000 CP to max a 4*. Mind you, on the way to max-covering the next 4* you should have pulled enough to max-cover TWELVE 5*. By "no one" do you mean you? Because you specifically asked for this, and were perhaps the largest advocate for this exact change. It's Question #3 in your thread whining about vaulting: Daredevil217 said: Question 3: What is in place for those who want to level evenly? What if there are people like me who aren’t trying to race to 5* land and are fine with their roster getting better slowly but evenly over time? Now you have it. All the characters are in there, you can continue to grow your rosters slowly but evenly over time. I’ve never hid that I was vaulting’s biggest detractor. I hated it. And would honestly take THIS solution over vaulting. There were MANY like me who hated vaulting. There were MANY who loved it. The increase to Latests odds was a GREAT compromise that appeased both sides. Regardless of which side of the coin you were on, aside from maybe some early rumblings, there has not been an inkling of a peep of people being upset about the way they handled Classics/Latests since that system had been implemented. If you’re going to quote me at least use proper context and know that what I wrote was when the two options we had were vaulting and dilution. I did not write that when our current system was even on the table for discussion. Good try though. Edit: pretty much everything @Blindman13 wrote. Also, weirdly under the system we are currently in (until the data push goes through) I find it much easier to build evenly. My Latests tend to “catch up” with the increased odds and then rotate out around the same level as my vintages give or take. Obviously there’s some outliers with 64 champs. But definitely better than dilution and WAY better than vaulting in terms of even building.
HoundofShadow said: Let's wait for July? Brigby mentioned somewhere in this forum that new feature(s) might coming next month(?) if things go as planned. Probably, this is just Phase 1, like Dr Ock's Cunning Scheme?
Dragon_Nexus said: Was anyone complaining about the current 4* setup in legendaries?Pretty sure the complaints people had were with 5*s. I have an amazing ability to champ a 5* now right as they're going out of packs. Worse since Okoye and Captain America charged in super fast before I could get a Ghost Rider cover to make champing him worth it.Now I fear Jessica Jones is going to get bumped out before I get the chance for 13 covers for her. And good luck getting covers when she's one of twenty two possible characters in an already reduced change to get a 5* cover at all.
Spudgutter said: Daredevil217 said: PenniesForEveryone said: Daredevil217 said: Again we get this dropped on us with zero communication. Again some insight into why they are returning to dilution when no one asked for it would be nice. Mark my words, the next 4* release will be meta-defining/super great. They are going to to use it to see if people will spend or bust their hoards chasing a character they won’t otherwise get their hands on for probably over a year or two. As someone noted above, without taking bonus heroes into account; it now takes about 1200 pulls or 30,000 CP to max a 4*. Mind you, on the way to max-covering the next 4* you should have pulled enough to max-cover TWELVE 5*. By "no one" do you mean you? Because you specifically asked for this, and were perhaps the largest advocate for this exact change. It's Question #3 in your thread whining about vaulting: Daredevil217 said: Question 3: What is in place for those who want to level evenly? What if there are people like me who aren’t trying to race to 5* land and are fine with their roster getting better slowly but evenly over time? Now you have it. All the characters are in there, you can continue to grow your rosters slowly but evenly over time. I’ve never hid that I was vaulting’s biggest detractor. I hated it. And would honestly take THIS solution over vaulting. There were MANY like me who hated vaulting. There were MANY who loved it. The increase to Latests odds was a GREAT compromise that appeased both sides. Regardless of which side of the coin you were on, aside from maybe some early rumblings, there has not been an inkling of a peep of people being upset about the way they handled Classics/Latests since that system had been implemented. If you’re going to quote me at least use proper context and know that what I wrote was when the two options we had were vaulting and dilution. I did not write that when our current system was even on the table for discussion. Good try though. Edit: pretty much everything @Blindman13 wrote. Also, weirdly under the system we are currently in (until the data push goes through) I find it much easier to build evenly. My Latests tend to “catch up” with the increased odds and then rotate out around the same level as my vintages give or take. Obviously there’s some outliers with 64 champs. But definitely better than dilution and WAY better than vaulting in terms of even building. Lets not completely revise history, here is your quote from that thread"There has been a small percentage of players (about the same percentage as me pulling my fifth Red Hulk Red as a “bonus cover” when he’s 2/5/5) in support of this but it’s shocking to see almost all players except those in niche situations in support of this."My point of bringing it up is that regardless of when you make your point, it just goes to show that they will make changes that you agree with, some that you dont, and others that you dont care about at all. Just like vaulting led to the compromise most seemed to enjoy, perhaps this is a precursor to something else? My fingers are crossed for a daily 4* DDQ, but I'm not holding my breath.
Daredevil217 said: Spudgutter said:ght Daredevil217 said: PenniesForEveryone said: Daredevil217 said: Again we get this dropped on us with zero communication. Again some insight into why they are returning to dilution when no one asked for it would be nice. Mark my words, the next 4* release will be meta-defining/super great. They are going to to use it to see if people will spend or bust their hoards chasing a character they won’t otherwise get their hands on for probably over a year or two. As someone noted above, without taking bonus heroes into account; it now takes about 1200 pulls or 30,000 CP to max a 4*. Mind you, on the way to max-covering the next 4* you should have pulled enough to max-cover TWELVE 5*. By "no one" do you mean you? Because you specifically asked for this, and were perhaps the largest advocate for this exact change. It's Question #3 in your thread whining about vaulting: Daredevil217 said: Question 3: What is in place for those who want to level evenly? What if there are people like me who aren’t trying to race to 5* land and are fine with their roster getting better slowly but evenly over time? Now you have it. All the characters are in there, you can continue to grow your rosters slowly but evenly over time. I’ve never hid that I was vaulting’s biggest detractor. I hated it. And would honestly take THIS solution over vaulting. There were MANY like me who hated vaulting. There were MANY who loved it. The increase to Latests odds was a GREAT compromise that appeased both sides. Regardless of which side of the coin you were on, aside from maybe some early rumblings, there has not been an inkling of a peep of people being upset about the way they handled Classics/Latests since that system had been implemented. If you’re going to quote me at least use proper context and know that what I wrote was when the two options we had were vaulting and dilution. I did not write that when our current system was even on the table for discussion. Good try though. Edit: pretty much everything @Blindman13 wrote. Also, weirdly under the system we are currently in (until the data push goes through) I find it much easier to build evenly. My Latests tend to “catch up” with the increased odds and then rotate out around the same level as my vintages give or take. Obviously there’s some outliers with 64 champs. But definitely better than dilution and WAY better than vaulting in terms of even building. Lets not completely revise history, here is your quote from that thread"There has been a small percentage of players (about the same percentage as me pulling my fifth Red Hulk Red as a “bonus cover” when he’s 2/5/5) in support of this but it’s shocking to see almost all players except those in niche situations in support of this."My point of bringing it up is that regardless of when you make your point, it just goes to show that they will make changes that you agree with, some that you dont, and others that you dont care about at all. Just like vaulting led to the compromise most seemed to enjoy, perhaps this is a precursor to something else? My fingers are crossed for a daily 4* DDQ, but I'm not holding my breath. When vaulting happened initially most people were anti. There was a vocal minority that was pro. As time went on the ratio shifted and I’d say there were more people pro than anti as they realized “wow I can cover new characters fast, and they are better than the old ones”. As someone who wants to play all my characters I did not like the idea of 80% of them locked away (vaulted). I never wavered in that. That’s not rewriting history. This is all weirdly off-topic honestly since people are bringing up something I wrote a year and a half ago about my love of dilution over vaulting. It has nothing to do with the current topic of dilution vs. 50/50 split. If you want me simplify it, then here...In my opinion: Latest/Classic split > Dilution > Vaulting. What I wrote then is still true (Dilution > Vaulting) and what I’m writing now is true (Latest/Classic Split > dilution).Does that help?
Spudgutter said:ght Daredevil217 said: PenniesForEveryone said: Daredevil217 said: Again we get this dropped on us with zero communication. Again some insight into why they are returning to dilution when no one asked for it would be nice. Mark my words, the next 4* release will be meta-defining/super great. They are going to to use it to see if people will spend or bust their hoards chasing a character they won’t otherwise get their hands on for probably over a year or two. As someone noted above, without taking bonus heroes into account; it now takes about 1200 pulls or 30,000 CP to max a 4*. Mind you, on the way to max-covering the next 4* you should have pulled enough to max-cover TWELVE 5*. By "no one" do you mean you? Because you specifically asked for this, and were perhaps the largest advocate for this exact change. It's Question #3 in your thread whining about vaulting: Daredevil217 said: Question 3: What is in place for those who want to level evenly? What if there are people like me who aren’t trying to race to 5* land and are fine with their roster getting better slowly but evenly over time? Now you have it. All the characters are in there, you can continue to grow your rosters slowly but evenly over time. I’ve never hid that I was vaulting’s biggest detractor. I hated it. And would honestly take THIS solution over vaulting. There were MANY like me who hated vaulting. There were MANY who loved it. The increase to Latests odds was a GREAT compromise that appeased both sides. Regardless of which side of the coin you were on, aside from maybe some early rumblings, there has not been an inkling of a peep of people being upset about the way they handled Classics/Latests since that system had been implemented. If you’re going to quote me at least use proper context and know that what I wrote was when the two options we had were vaulting and dilution. I did not write that when our current system was even on the table for discussion. Good try though. Edit: pretty much everything @Blindman13 wrote. Also, weirdly under the system we are currently in (until the data push goes through) I find it much easier to build evenly. My Latests tend to “catch up” with the increased odds and then rotate out around the same level as my vintages give or take. Obviously there’s some outliers with 64 champs. But definitely better than dilution and WAY better than vaulting in terms of even building. Lets not completely revise history, here is your quote from that thread"There has been a small percentage of players (about the same percentage as me pulling my fifth Red Hulk Red as a “bonus cover” when he’s 2/5/5) in support of this but it’s shocking to see almost all players except those in niche situations in support of this."My point of bringing it up is that regardless of when you make your point, it just goes to show that they will make changes that you agree with, some that you dont, and others that you dont care about at all. Just like vaulting led to the compromise most seemed to enjoy, perhaps this is a precursor to something else? My fingers are crossed for a daily 4* DDQ, but I'm not holding my breath.
Daredevil217 said: justsing said: I ran a quick and dirty simulation of how many legendary pulls are needed to fully cover a specific Latest 4*, assuming that you're starting with 0 covers: Odds for Latest 4* in LTs Mean Pulls Needed (SD) Median Pulls Needed (P25, P75) Current odds (no BH) 434 (135) 416 (338, 509) Current odds (with BH*) 197 (62) 189 (154, 232) Updated odds (no BH) 1177 (369) 1128 (916, 1382) Updated odds (with BH*) 276 (86) 265 (215, 324) * Assumes you only have one Latest 4* BH-ed.What this suggests is that BHs are definitely very helpful in covering 4*s since they greatly reduce the number of pulls needed to cover one specific 4*. However, while you're focusing on covering one specific 4*, the remaining (non-BH) Latest 4*s will not be getting covered as fast.Simulation code can be found here: https://pastebin.com/r81fQaze When I have some more time, I'll write up a more complex simulation that looks at how well-covered the other 4*s get in the process of covering one specific 4*. This is amazing. So if you BH only a single 4 you can get one maxed in the amount of pulls it takes to get three 5s maxed. Yikes...
bluewolf said: Finally: When vaulting was introduced, there were 44 4*'s in the game (late Feb '17) which translated to a 1.932% chance of getting a specific 4 from one Legendary pull. Now we are at 1.308% with 65 in tokens.