Update to 4-Star Pack Odds (6/4/18)

GrimSkald

The new odds are in.  We're back to full dilution.  >sigh<

TeamStewie

Yuck. So much for champing any of the newbies any time soon. I wonder if this affects the PVE rotation.

PenniesForEveryone

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.

Blindman13

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.

In fairness to @Daredevil217, that  was written in the brief dark time when we were subjected to Vaulting.
When Dilution first because a problem and people complained, the solution was Vaulting.
Vaulting was an over correction, so people still complained. Then they gave us the hybrid system that has been working fine for well over a year (not sure when the change was exactly).  It was during this time that virtually no one was asking for a change.  There are dozens of other changes that are constantly rehashed, but 4* access  wasn't one of them.  That is the frustration here. 
Why make the change now? And why does the official announcement mask the dilution problem with this claim of 200% increased odds on classics?

Daredevil217

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...

Arix90

They need to rebalance all the old 4s that have fallen behind the power inflation

Dormammu

Isn't this just a ploy to motivate players to spend more in event vaults? For a year+ we've all been going hog wild, covering and getting multiple champ levels for new 4-stars, off our free LT and CP income.

Now, if new characters are back to being lost in the dilution mire, here is a nice solution... +200% chance of getting that new character in this special limited-time vault right here!

Um, what's that? +200% from what? Well, technically that figure is a little misleading but we don't like to bog our players down with a bunch of useless math.

Daredevil217

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

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?

Spudgutter

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.

Punter1

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?

The problem with this analogy is that no-one willingly plays Dr Ock and everyone gives up after phase 1 on his cunning scheme even if they do...

justsing

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?

If that’s the case, I don’t understand why these things need to happen in different phases. The previous system was working fine for the most part, so why not delay this change until the next phase is ready? 

Dragon_Nexus

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.

Arix90

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.

You mean 23

Daredevil217

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.

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

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?

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

You missed my point.  No matter what your opinion is, when you had it, when you changed it, it doesn't matter.  They will make changes regardless, with little to no indication.

If anything, reading your new stance, we can infer that as soon as a majority of people start to like something, they will change it.  Maybe you should post about how everybody loves dilution, and then they will change it?

ZeiramMR

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...

If LTs were the only way to get 4* covers, sure. But between methods like progression covers, placement covers for those who pull that off, and even lucky Heroic tokens, there are other things that can also contribute to 4* coverage that are not available for boosting 5* coverage.

It's still slow, but a bit better when looking at more of the picture.

Brigby

*I can tell there are some very passionate contributors in this conversation, but just as a friendly reminder to everyone, please make sure all criticism is constructive and not used to attack others. Thank you!

ursopro

wew lad, good thing I finished full covering every 4* bar blonde window before this change.

Straycat

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.

If there were 44 when vaulting was introduced, that means 32 were vaulted. Now that we have 65 in tokens, that means 21 have existed only in vaulting or 3X odds. Adding the original vaulted 12, that means there have been 33 4*s that have had vaulting or latest. So basically, the number of 4*s that had better odds (33) equals the amount that had worse odds (32).

I dunno if that's part of the reason, but if vaulting was always meant to be temporary, it would make sense they reverted back to even odds now.