abmoraz said: Don't let the player choose. Just offer the packs based on when they were released. Have a "First grouping" pack, which has the first 6x 5* and the first 15x 4*. Then offer a "second grouping" that has the 7th released 5* thru the 12th released one (and the 16th - 30th 4*), and so on.keep the latest 3x 5* and 8x 4* in a "latest pack". This might mean that some of them are doubled up, so be it. The odds will be slightly different between the 2 packs as will the other rewards.
bbigler said: abmoraz said: Don't let the player choose. Just offer the packs based on when they were released. Have a "First grouping" pack, which has the first 6x 5* and the first 15x 4*. Then offer a "second grouping" that has the 7th released 5* thru the 12th released one (and the 16th - 30th 4*), and so on.keep the latest 3x 5* and 8x 4* in a "latest pack". This might mean that some of them are doubled up, so be it. The odds will be slightly different between the 2 packs as will the other rewards. I originally thought of suggesting it the way you said here, but how do you handle the most recent grouping if it's not an even 6 x 5*s and 15 x 4*s? Will the latest group grow to double size and then get split? If so, it would be "diluted" most of the time compared to the other groups. Even having a latest 21 characters group wouldn't fix the problem of some characters being in a diluted group:Group 1: 4*s #1 - 15 + 5*s #1 - 6Group 2: 4*s #16 - 30 + 5*s #7 - 12Group 3: 4*s #31 - 45 + 5*s #13 - 18Group 4: 4*s #46 - 60 + 5*s #19 - 24Group 5: 4*s #61 - 69 + 5*s #25 - 26 - the problem, group is too small
broll said: bbigler said: abmoraz said: Don't let the player choose. Just offer the packs based on when they were released. Have a "First grouping" pack, which has the first 6x 5* and the first 15x 4*. Then offer a "second grouping" that has the 7th released 5* thru the 12th released one (and the 16th - 30th 4*), and so on.keep the latest 3x 5* and 8x 4* in a "latest pack". This might mean that some of them are doubled up, so be it. The odds will be slightly different between the 2 packs as will the other rewards. I originally thought of suggesting it the way you said here, but how do you handle the most recent grouping if it's not an even 6 x 5*s and 15 x 4*s? Will the latest group grow to double size and then get split? If so, it would be "diluted" most of the time compared to the other groups. Even having a latest 21 characters group wouldn't fix the problem of some characters being in a diluted group:Group 1: 4*s #1 - 15 + 5*s #1 - 6Group 2: 4*s #16 - 30 + 5*s #7 - 12Group 3: 4*s #31 - 45 + 5*s #13 - 18Group 4: 4*s #46 - 60 + 5*s #19 - 24Group 5: 4*s #61 - 69 + 5*s #25 - 26 - the problem, group is too small Solution to that is simple. The final group is almost always diluted. Group 1: 4*s #1 - 15 + 5*s #1 - 6Group 2: 4*s #16 - 30 + 5*s #7 - 12Group 3: 4*s #31 - 45 + 5*s #13 - 18Group 4: 4*s #46 - 71 + 5*s #19 - 26When both 4*s and 5*s are double or more the other groups (15 4*s & 6 5*s from your example) then split off a new group. Rinse and repeat ad infinum. PS - You keep quoting 69 5*s there are currently 71, Nebula will be 72.
Bowgentle said: I don't want my 5s tied to 4s.I draw Latest based on what 5s are in there, I don't care about the 4s.Unless the current tokens stay in addition to extra types of tokens, I'm not interested.
bbigler said: Bowgentle said: I don't want my 5s tied to 4s.I draw Latest based on what 5s are in there, I don't care about the 4s.Unless the current tokens stay in addition to extra types of tokens, I'm not interested. Not everyone thinks that way. I think a grouping would add more strategy to the game, making you decide which pool you want to go after, weighing the pros and cons of the best available 4*s or 5*s in it. Currently, it's extremely difficult to fully cover Classic 5*s.
bbigler said: broll said: bbigler said: abmoraz said: Don't let the player choose. Just offer the packs based on when they were released. Have a "First grouping" pack, which has the first 6x 5* and the first 15x 4*. Then offer a "second grouping" that has the 7th released 5* thru the 12th released one (and the 16th - 30th 4*), and so on.keep the latest 3x 5* and 8x 4* in a "latest pack". This might mean that some of them are doubled up, so be it. The odds will be slightly different between the 2 packs as will the other rewards. I originally thought of suggesting it the way you said here, but how do you handle the most recent grouping if it's not an even 6 x 5*s and 15 x 4*s? Will the latest group grow to double size and then get split? If so, it would be "diluted" most of the time compared to the other groups. Even having a latest 21 characters group wouldn't fix the problem of some characters being in a diluted group:Group 1: 4*s #1 - 15 + 5*s #1 - 6Group 2: 4*s #16 - 30 + 5*s #7 - 12Group 3: 4*s #31 - 45 + 5*s #13 - 18Group 4: 4*s #46 - 60 + 5*s #19 - 24Group 5: 4*s #61 - 69 + 5*s #25 - 26 - the problem, group is too small Solution to that is simple. The final group is almost always diluted. Group 1: 4*s #1 - 15 + 5*s #1 - 6Group 2: 4*s #16 - 30 + 5*s #7 - 12Group 3: 4*s #31 - 45 + 5*s #13 - 18Group 4: 4*s #46 - 71 + 5*s #19 - 26When both 4*s and 5*s are double or more the other groups (15 4*s & 6 5*s from your example) then split off a new group. Rinse and repeat ad infinum. PS - You keep quoting 69 5*s there are currently 71, Nebula will be 72. Currently, there are 68 x 4*s in the Legendary Token pool. Limited characters, being Devil Dino and Howard don't count because they're not in packs. Emma Frost was #69, which is why I used that number. Nebula would be #70.Also, having the final group grow until double size and then split, being diluted most of the time, I already commented on and said that's a bad idea too, especially since that group would contain the newest and thus least covered characters. Nevertheless, any kind of grouping, whether pre-defined or user-defined would be better than what we have now.
broll said: Another alternative to doubling would be to add each new character to a vault round robin style. This would also to some extent help with Bow's concern as to stay current you'd have to pull from different groups and not just live in one forever (the newest). So in your example:Group 1: 4*s #1 - 18 + 5*s #1 - 7 Group 2: 4*s #18 - 34 + 5*s #7 - 12Group 3: 4*s #35 - 51 + 5*s #13 - 18Group 4: 4*s #53 - 68 + 5*s #19 - 25Releases going forward would go:4* release - added to Group 24* release - added to Group 35* release - added to Group 24* release - added to Group 44* release - added to Group 15* release - added to Group 3Then once a critical mass reaches they add a new group and reshuffle (potentially even randomly) to create 5 groups.
bbigler said: broll said: Another alternative to doubling would be to add each new character to a vault round robin style. This would also to some extent help with Bow's concern as to stay current you'd have to pull from different groups and not just live in one forever (the newest). So in your example:Group 1: 4*s #1 - 18 + 5*s #1 - 7 Group 2: 4*s #18 - 34 + 5*s #7 - 12Group 3: 4*s #35 - 51 + 5*s #13 - 18Group 4: 4*s #53 - 68 + 5*s #19 - 25Releases going forward would go:4* release - added to Group 24* release - added to Group 35* release - added to Group 24* release - added to Group 44* release - added to Group 15* release - added to Group 3Then once a critical mass reaches they add a new group and reshuffle (potentially even randomly) to create 5 groups. Hmmm.....not a bad idea but when a group is shuffled, players in the middle of covering those characters will get mad I think. Honestly, I just want the devs to give us any kind of grouping so that we can pick what group to go after and cover those characters reasonably quickly. This would also make Classic 5*s obtainable.
bbigler said: abmoraz said: Don't let the player choose. Just offer the packs based on when they were released. Have a "First grouping" pack, which has the first 6x 5* and the first 15x 4*. Then offer a "second grouping" that has the 7th released 5* thru the 12th released one (and the 16th - 30th 4*), and so on.keep the latest 3x 5* and 8x 4* in a "latest pack". This might mean that some of them are doubled up, so be it. The odds will be slightly different between the 2 packs as will the other rewards. I originally thought of suggesting it the way you said here, but how do you handle the most recent grouping if it's not an even 6 x 5*s and 15 x 4*s? Will the latest group grow to double size and then get split? If so, it would be "diluted" most of the time compared to the other groups. Even having a latest 21 characters group wouldn't fix the problem of some characters being in a diluted group:Group 1: 4*s #1 - 15 + 5*s #1 - 6Group 2: 4*s #16 - 30 + 5*s #7 - 12Group 3: 4*s #31 - 45 + 5*s #13 - 18Group 4: 4*s #46 - 60 + 5*s #19 - 24Group 5: 4*s #61 - 69 + 5*s #25 - 26 - the problem, group is too smallGroup 4&5: 4*s #46 - 69 + 5*s #19 - 26 - also a problem, group is diluted compared to others
abmoraz said: bbigler said: abmoraz said: Don't let the player choose. Just offer the packs based on when they were released. Have a "First grouping" pack, which has the first 6x 5* and the first 15x 4*. Then offer a "second grouping" that has the 7th released 5* thru the 12th released one (and the 16th - 30th 4*), and so on.keep the latest 3x 5* and 8x 4* in a "latest pack". This might mean that some of them are doubled up, so be it. The odds will be slightly different between the 2 packs as will the other rewards. I originally thought of suggesting it the way you said here, but how do you handle the most recent grouping if it's not an even 6 x 5*s and 15 x 4*s? Will the latest group grow to double size and then get split? If so, it would be "diluted" most of the time compared to the other groups. Even having a latest 21 characters group wouldn't fix the problem of some characters being in a diluted group:Group 1: 4*s #1 - 15 + 5*s #1 - 6Group 2: 4*s #16 - 30 + 5*s #7 - 12Group 3: 4*s #31 - 45 + 5*s #13 - 18Group 4: 4*s #46 - 60 + 5*s #19 - 24Group 5: 4*s #61 - 69 + 5*s #25 - 26 - the problem, group is too smallGroup 4&5: 4*s #46 - 69 + 5*s #19 - 26 - also a problem, group is diluted compared to others Groups 1 thru 4 are as you said.Group 5 becomes: 4*s #55 - 69 + 5*s #21 - 26.So every group has 15x 4* and 6x 5*, but group #4 and group #5 have some overlap in their covers; in this case: 4* #55-60 are in 2 different packs as are 5* #21-24. If you are targeting one of those covers, you will have a choice of which pack to purchase.
bluewolf said: Does this idea allow you to limit your need for roster slots? Yes. Are roster slots the #1 driver of spending in game? Yes.Sadly, any idea like this will never therefore be implemented.Perhaps a better/more generous bonus reward structure would be considered.