Debate on the value of shards
System
Posts: 1,032 Chairperson of the Boards
This discussion was created from comments split from: Is the 4* tier dead?.
0
Comments
-
DAZ0273 said:fight4thedream said:Are lower end rosters hurt by dilution? Only if their main priority is to champ everyone. But this isn't exclusively a 4* tier problem. The 5* tier also has this issue to a lesser extent but ironically the stakes are higher in the 5* tier as champing the "wrong" 5* characters will drastically make a player's experience less enjoyable, particularly in PvP. I don't know how true that is for the 4* tier. I agree the current state of affairs is not ideal for a new player looking to optimize their competitive edge but it's exactly for that reason that I think inter-tier 4*/5* pairings are good for the game since it allows for a greater amount of players to get their foot in the door of the highest tier of play.This is an interesting point.I transistioned to a champion 4* player with X-Force Wolverine, Luke Cage, Mordo and then Wasp (pre-buff) during the period of "meta" Cap Marvel, Medusa, Gamora, R4G and Vulture. I am reasonably confident that the bad RNG handed to me slowed my progress but each of these characters (and especially Wasp post buff) could get me to at least 575 in PvP so you could argue the toss whether having the "meta" would have advanced me faster. Probably in PvE it would have but not enough to have an impact.I am currently waiting to go to the 5* tier. So far I have Cable. That is NOT happening. There is no question however that a champed Kitty would massively influence my game strategies as I have the 4* assorted kit all ready to go.Given that a new player need only really chase a champed 4* Juggernaut, R4G and Bishop to put out a "competetive" (I don't even think Worthy Cap is necessary) PvP team with just a non optimal Kitty Pryde who has a couple of yellow, dilution suddenly doesn't look like a problem.However...each new 4* does make even getting those guys covered more difficult and as shards are glacial pace, I think new players may still struggle with dilution.
4 -
tiomono said:DAZ0273 said:fight4thedream said:Are lower end rosters hurt by dilution? Only if their main priority is to champ everyone. But this isn't exclusively a 4* tier problem. The 5* tier also has this issue to a lesser extent but ironically the stakes are higher in the 5* tier as champing the "wrong" 5* characters will drastically make a player's experience less enjoyable, particularly in PvP. I don't know how true that is for the 4* tier. I agree the current state of affairs is not ideal for a new player looking to optimize their competitive edge but it's exactly for that reason that I think inter-tier 4*/5* pairings are good for the game since it allows for a greater amount of players to get their foot in the door of the highest tier of play.This is an interesting point.I transistioned to a champion 4* player with X-Force Wolverine, Luke Cage, Mordo and then Wasp (pre-buff) during the period of "meta" Cap Marvel, Medusa, Gamora, R4G and Vulture. I am reasonably confident that the bad RNG handed to me slowed my progress but each of these characters (and especially Wasp post buff) could get me to at least 575 in PvP so you could argue the toss whether having the "meta" would have advanced me faster. Probably in PvE it would have but not enough to have an impact.I am currently waiting to go to the 5* tier. So far I have Cable. That is NOT happening. There is no question however that a champed Kitty would massively influence my game strategies as I have the 4* assorted kit all ready to go.Given that a new player need only really chase a champed 4* Juggernaut, R4G and Bishop to put out a "competetive" (I don't even think Worthy Cap is necessary) PvP team with just a non optimal Kitty Pryde who has a couple of yellow, dilution suddenly doesn't look like a problem.However...each new 4* does make even getting those guys covered more difficult and as shards are glacial pace, I think new players may still struggle with dilution.Possibly it is psychological but it feels slow. Not counting the retrospective rewards which are a different thing, shards have so far brought me I think 1 or 2 4* cover to date just from acquisition of shards from cover packs being opened. It feels slow.I'm not sure I would call my opinion "disdain" but YMMV.0
-
DAZ0273 said:tiomono said:DAZ0273 said:fight4thedream said:Are lower end rosters hurt by dilution? Only if their main priority is to champ everyone. But this isn't exclusively a 4* tier problem. The 5* tier also has this issue to a lesser extent but ironically the stakes are higher in the 5* tier as champing the "wrong" 5* characters will drastically make a player's experience less enjoyable, particularly in PvP. I don't know how true that is for the 4* tier. I agree the current state of affairs is not ideal for a new player looking to optimize their competitive edge but it's exactly for that reason that I think inter-tier 4*/5* pairings are good for the game since it allows for a greater amount of players to get their foot in the door of the highest tier of play.This is an interesting point.I transistioned to a champion 4* player with X-Force Wolverine, Luke Cage, Mordo and then Wasp (pre-buff) during the period of "meta" Cap Marvel, Medusa, Gamora, R4G and Vulture. I am reasonably confident that the bad RNG handed to me slowed my progress but each of these characters (and especially Wasp post buff) could get me to at least 575 in PvP so you could argue the toss whether having the "meta" would have advanced me faster. Probably in PvE it would have but not enough to have an impact.I am currently waiting to go to the 5* tier. So far I have Cable. That is NOT happening. There is no question however that a champed Kitty would massively influence my game strategies as I have the 4* assorted kit all ready to go.Given that a new player need only really chase a champed 4* Juggernaut, R4G and Bishop to put out a "competetive" (I don't even think Worthy Cap is necessary) PvP team with just a non optimal Kitty Pryde who has a couple of yellow, dilution suddenly doesn't look like a problem.However...each new 4* does make even getting those guys covered more difficult and as shards are glacial pace, I think new players may still struggle with dilution.Possibly it is psychological but it feels slow. Not counting the retrospective rewards which are a different thing, shards have so far brought me I think 1 or 2 4* cover to date just from acquisition of shards from cover packs being opened. It feels slow.I'm not sure I would call my opinion "disdain" but YMMV.0
-
tiomono said:@Vhailorx
I still feel the colorless aspect of the shard system is very valuable. I had a character get up to 23 saved covers before I could champ them before. That's the kind of very rare example that sticks in your mind and sours a person on rng pretty hard. With shards everytime I get enough for a cover it is one guaranteed step to champing them sooner than under an rng system. Which is why I feel shards do help dillution a bit better than bonus heros.
I think it says something about the design of the system when the first cover you get from a feeder is in fact a colored cover and not shards. Seems like the earlier rewards are what you'd want to be colorless...3 -
Reecoh said:tiomono said:@Vhailorx
I still feel the colorless aspect of the shard system is very valuable. I had a character get up to 23 saved covers before I could champ them before. That's the kind of very rare example that sticks in your mind and sours a person on rng pretty hard. With shards everytime I get enough for a cover it is one guaranteed step to champing them sooner than under an rng system. Which is why I feel shards do help dillution a bit better than bonus heros.
I think it says something about the design of the system when the first cover you get from a feeder is in fact a colored cover and not shards. Seems like the earlier rewards are what you'd want to be colorless...0 -
Reecoh said:tiomono said:@Vhailorx
I still feel the colorless aspect of the shard system is very valuable. I had a character get up to 23 saved covers before I could champ them before. That's the kind of very rare example that sticks in your mind and sours a person on rng pretty hard. With shards everytime I get enough for a cover it is one guaranteed step to champing them sooner than under an rng system. Which is why I feel shards do help dillution a bit better than bonus heros.
I think it says something about the design of the system when the first cover you get from a feeder is in fact a colored cover and not shards. Seems like the earlier rewards are what you'd want to be colorless...Yes, this choice gives away the whole the whole game IMO. On the very day they rolled out the new shard system champion rewards, theoretically the long awaited solution to bad cover rng, I got 1x blue cable and archangel covers. Both of which are now saved thanks to my 5/x/x cover distribution for both of those characters. But because all that extra flexibility "has to come from somewhere" (according to demi/d3 and the white knights), I also get to enjoy fewer bonus covers AND less Iso/HP from my 2* and 3* farms. . .By grabthar's hammer, what a savings!6 -
Vhailorx said:Reecoh said:tiomono said:@Vhailorx
I still feel the colorless aspect of the shard system is very valuable. I had a character get up to 23 saved covers before I could champ them before. That's the kind of very rare example that sticks in your mind and sours a person on rng pretty hard. With shards everytime I get enough for a cover it is one guaranteed step to champing them sooner than under an rng system. Which is why I feel shards do help dillution a bit better than bonus heros.
I think it says something about the design of the system when the first cover you get from a feeder is in fact a colored cover and not shards. Seems like the earlier rewards are what you'd want to be colorless...Yes, this choice gives away the whole the whole game IMO. On the very day they rolled out the new shard system champion rewards, theoretically the long awaited solution to bad cover rng, I got 1x blue cable and archangel covers. Both of which are now saved thanks to my 5/x/x cover distribution for both of those characters. But because all that extra flexibility "has to come from somewhere" (according to demi/d3 and the white knights), I also get to enjoy fewer bonus covers AND less Iso/HP from my 2* and 3* farms. . .By grabthar's hammer, what a savings!0 -
tiomono said:
I keep seeing people say shards are glacial or slow. Aren't they literally 1% slower than bonus heros on average? I get that I'm in the minority on these forums for liking shards even as is. It still somewhat amazes me just how much disdain there is for them. I feel they could even give the average player more hope in getting what they wanted from the game instead of the total "hiding behind the rng curtain" that was bonus heros.It's 1% less overall or 20% fewer when viewed in terms of bonus heroes (4% vs 5% is 4/5ths).In the 3* tier I earn thousands of tokens a year so 1% less adds up to potentially 1 extra max champed 3* on my farm. That's a fair amount of lost resources. Then factor in the 4* and 5* draws (way fewer obviously) and depending on how much you play, it could be a hundred or more 4* covers in a year.KGB
4 -
Shards for me are actually more reliable because I pull as I go. You KNOW you're going to get that 5* cover as you pull, and you can project out how long it will take you to get there. So while not quite as "exciting" as bonus heroes, it lets you make more informed realistic tradeoffs with time vs value deciding who to chase. "wasted" shards are whatever to me really; I'm pulling from latest and shard targeting classics at the 5* tier, so there is no overlap, and 4* champ levels come about 1/week so it's not a huge deal to just finish somebody up if I land an organic cover.2
-
KGB said:tiomono said:
I keep seeing people say shards are glacial or slow. Aren't they literally 1% slower than bonus heros on average? I get that I'm in the minority on these forums for liking shards even as is. It still somewhat amazes me just how much disdain there is for them. I feel they could even give the average player more hope in getting what they wanted from the game instead of the total "hiding behind the rng curtain" that was bonus heros.It's 1% less overall or 20% fewer when viewed in terms of bonus heroes (4% vs 5% is 4/5ths).In the 3* tier I earn thousands of tokens a year so 1% less adds up to potentially 1 extra max champed 3* on my farm. That's a fair amount of lost resources. Then factor in the 4* and 5* draws (way fewer obviously) and depending on how much you play, it could be a hundred or more 4* covers in a year.KGB2 -
tiomono said:DAZ0273 said:fight4thedream said:Are lower end rosters hurt by dilution? Only if their main priority is to champ everyone. But this isn't exclusively a 4* tier problem. The 5* tier also has this issue to a lesser extent but ironically the stakes are higher in the 5* tier as champing the "wrong" 5* characters will drastically make a player's experience less enjoyable, particularly in PvP. I don't know how true that is for the 4* tier. I agree the current state of affairs is not ideal for a new player looking to optimize their competitive edge but it's exactly for that reason that I think inter-tier 4*/5* pairings are good for the game since it allows for a greater amount of players to get their foot in the door of the highest tier of play.This is an interesting point.I transistioned to a champion 4* player with X-Force Wolverine, Luke Cage, Mordo and then Wasp (pre-buff) during the period of "meta" Cap Marvel, Medusa, Gamora, R4G and Vulture. I am reasonably confident that the bad RNG handed to me slowed my progress but each of these characters (and especially Wasp post buff) could get me to at least 575 in PvP so you could argue the toss whether having the "meta" would have advanced me faster. Probably in PvE it would have but not enough to have an impact.I am currently waiting to go to the 5* tier. So far I have Cable. That is NOT happening. There is no question however that a champed Kitty would massively influence my game strategies as I have the 4* assorted kit all ready to go.Given that a new player need only really chase a champed 4* Juggernaut, R4G and Bishop to put out a "competetive" (I don't even think Worthy Cap is necessary) PvP team with just a non optimal Kitty Pryde who has a couple of yellow, dilution suddenly doesn't look like a problem.However...each new 4* does make even getting those guys covered more difficult and as shards are glacial pace, I think new players may still struggle with dilution.
It's not 1% though. If consider only legendary tokens, and assume you opened enough for the bonus hero rate to converge to the advertised probabilities, then the new system will give you ~ 20% fewer 5* covers and 12% fewer 4* covers.
Those numbers add up quite quickly, and the pain was exacerbated by bonus heroes being the last reliable way to cover new characters fast.
3 -
jamesh said:tiomono said:DAZ0273 said:fight4thedream said:Are lower end rosters hurt by dilution? Only if their main priority is to champ everyone. But this isn't exclusively a 4* tier problem. The 5* tier also has this issue to a lesser extent but ironically the stakes are higher in the 5* tier as champing the "wrong" 5* characters will drastically make a player's experience less enjoyable, particularly in PvP. I don't know how true that is for the 4* tier. I agree the current state of affairs is not ideal for a new player looking to optimize their competitive edge but it's exactly for that reason that I think inter-tier 4*/5* pairings are good for the game since it allows for a greater amount of players to get their foot in the door of the highest tier of play.This is an interesting point.I transistioned to a champion 4* player with X-Force Wolverine, Luke Cage, Mordo and then Wasp (pre-buff) during the period of "meta" Cap Marvel, Medusa, Gamora, R4G and Vulture. I am reasonably confident that the bad RNG handed to me slowed my progress but each of these characters (and especially Wasp post buff) could get me to at least 575 in PvP so you could argue the toss whether having the "meta" would have advanced me faster. Probably in PvE it would have but not enough to have an impact.I am currently waiting to go to the 5* tier. So far I have Cable. That is NOT happening. There is no question however that a champed Kitty would massively influence my game strategies as I have the 4* assorted kit all ready to go.Given that a new player need only really chase a champed 4* Juggernaut, R4G and Bishop to put out a "competetive" (I don't even think Worthy Cap is necessary) PvP team with just a non optimal Kitty Pryde who has a couple of yellow, dilution suddenly doesn't look like a problem.However...each new 4* does make even getting those guys covered more difficult and as shards are glacial pace, I think new players may still struggle with dilution.
It's not 1% though. If consider only legendary tokens, and assume you opened enough for the bonus hero rate to converge to the advertised probabilities, then the new system will give you ~ 20% fewer 5* covers and 12% fewer 4* covers.
Those numbers add up quite quickly, and the pain was exacerbated by bonus heroes being the last reliable way to cover new characters fast.
0 -
OK, once again, though I'm pretty sure I've seen someone post this soon after the shards threads started.
Heroics used to give BH every 20 pulls (not every 20 3* or 20 4*).
The store says odds are ~1:16 and ~1:5 for 4* and 3*. That means every 21 BH you got, 16 were 3* and 5 were 4*.
21 BH would take 420 pulls and give 5 bonus 4* which is worth 2000 shards, and 16 bonus 3* which is worth 4800 shards.
With shards, 420 pulls gives 1260 shards for 4* (37% less) and 4200 shards for 3* (12.5% less).6 -
Kolence said:OK, once again, though I'm pretty sure I've seen someone post this soon after the shards threads started.
Heroics used to give BH every 20 pulls (not every 20 3* or 20 4*).
The store says odds are ~1:16 and ~1:5 for 4* and 3*. That means every 21 BH you got, 16 were 3* and 5 were 4*.
21 BH would take 420 pulls and give 5 bonus 4* which is worth 2000 shards, and 16 bonus 3* which is worth 4800 shards.
With shards, 420 pulls gives 1260 shards for 4* (37% less) and 4200 shards for 3* (12.5% less).
Shards gives guaranteed equal rewards for equal effort for every player. Bonus heros did not.
2 -
tiomono said:Kolence said:OK, once again, though I'm pretty sure I've seen someone post this soon after the shards threads started.
Heroics used to give BH every 20 pulls (not every 20 3* or 20 4*).
The store says odds are ~1:16 and ~1:5 for 4* and 3*. That means every 21 BH you got, 16 were 3* and 5 were 4*.
21 BH would take 420 pulls and give 5 bonus 4* which is worth 2000 shards, and 16 bonus 3* which is worth 4800 shards.
With shards, 420 pulls gives 1260 shards for 4* (37% less) and 4200 shards for 3* (12.5% less).
Shards gives guaranteed equal rewards for equal effort for every player. Bonus heros did not.That doesn't argue in favor of shards though. Some people would get very bad BH luck, but if they pulled long enough than, like everyone else, it would average out. Shards means no one gets good or bad rng, and EVERYONE is a little worse off than under bh (unless, I suppose, they have a very good character stuck at 5/5/2 and no viable alternatives in the meantime). Shards, as implemented, is just a bad deal for players.And I say that as someone who has had JJ stuck at 3/8/3 for almost 2 years now (yes, I somehow managed to pull multiple useless black covers for her from LTs, but only AFTER cs coverswaps ended. I had really **** luck with her).But this BH/shards discussion is way off topic for this thread.5 -
Vhailorx said:tiomono said:Kolence said:OK, once again, though I'm pretty sure I've seen someone post this soon after the shards threads started.
Heroics used to give BH every 20 pulls (not every 20 3* or 20 4*).
The store says odds are ~1:16 and ~1:5 for 4* and 3*. That means every 21 BH you got, 16 were 3* and 5 were 4*.
21 BH would take 420 pulls and give 5 bonus 4* which is worth 2000 shards, and 16 bonus 3* which is worth 4800 shards.
With shards, 420 pulls gives 1260 shards for 4* (37% less) and 4200 shards for 3* (12.5% less).
Shards gives guaranteed equal rewards for equal effort for every player. Bonus heros did not.That doesn't argue in favor of shards though. Some people would get very bad BH luck, but if they pulled long enough than, like everyone else, it would average out. Shards means no one gets good or bad rng, and EVERYONE is a little worse off than under bh (unless, I suppose, they have a very good character stuck at 5/5/2 and no viable alternatives in the meantime). Shards, as implemented, is just a bad deal for players.And I say that as someone who has had JJ stuck at 3/8/3 for almost 2 years now (yes, I somehow managed to pull multiple useless black covers for her from LTs, but only AFTER cs coverswaps ended. I had really tinykitty luck with her).But this BH/shards discussion is way off topic for this thread.
And yes this is off topic so it will be my last comment on this subject in this discussion. I would be glad to talk more about it in an on topic discussion.0 -
tiomono said:Kolence said:OK, once again, though I'm pretty sure I've seen someone post this soon after the shards threads started.
Heroics used to give BH every 20 pulls (not every 20 3* or 20 4*).
The store says odds are ~1:16 and ~1:5 for 4* and 3*. That means every 21 BH you got, 16 were 3* and 5 were 4*.
21 BH would take 420 pulls and give 5 bonus 4* which is worth 2000 shards, and 16 bonus 3* which is worth 4800 shards.
With shards, 420 pulls gives 1260 shards for 4* (37% less) and 4200 shards for 3* (12.5% less).
Shards gives guaranteed equal rewards for equal effort for every player. Bonus heros did not.
You'd think if they said Hey, the RNG of Bonus Heroes is making some Big Winners take off, and some Big Losers quit because of their bad runs... the logical follow up to that would be Let's take the average pull rate, or at least what we intended it to be, and apply that to Shards and make everyone pull the average! Everyone will be smack dab in the middle of winning and losing. But instead, what they (apparently) said was Lets take a number signifcantly lower than the average pull rate and stick everyone there! Then, when everyone is losing, no one will quit because they won't feel behind.
And I keep seeing the argument that the loss of speed in acquisition is a balanced pay off because you choose the cover. At the 5 Star Tier...maybe so, since they are so slow to earn that delaying the champion levels because you can't pull the right cover is agonizing. But at every tier beneath that, I have to hard-disagree. You WILL champ the character eventually, so champing it sooner at the cost of the cover differential is not worth it. And I won't accept a counter argument from you if you've ever advised someone "No no, don't convert those 5 saved covers into that last cover you need, it's not worth it and you'll get that cover eventually anyway." since it's the same thing.5 -
**Mod note: Split off this discussion from the Is the 4* tier dead thread. There were a couple of posts that dealt with both topics so I left those in the original thread. Not the cleanest split but hopefully good enough to not be too confusing.2
-
I'm earning a 3* cover via shards every ~2-3 days through leisurely play, and I even did it in a single day, on a lightning round day where I had a final sub and a new event sub I could do together, when i was so inclined. The way I play, the 3* shard rate is up for me reliably. 4*s are coming in 1/week, which is slightly up from my tracking of leaving my BH on Chavez all year in 2019. 5* shard heroes are coming down ~1/63 days, which is at least now trackable. I'm not entirely sure that my reality under both systems isn't actually better, but at least it's predictable and when i get something I can definitely use it.0
-
Having played on bh and shard system for quite some time it seems I got more covers with bh and even though I did not get the color I wanted, when i finally did I could level up my hero several levels giving me more attack options meanwhile with shards it tales more time to get that specific color you need but sincerily.... Does 1 cover make the difference in any game play?
Also something that shard defenders can't argue is that shards REPLACED other ingame resources making it even slower to progress for players who try to play this game actively but with low investment of real money.
Support system is incomplete, abandone and has given some players many advantages in pve and we are still receiving red iso for free and basic support tokens for hp when shards should have replaced them.
I spended a few hundred dollars supporting the game at the start but with shards I rarely invest in more than vip. Games should provide fluidity over resources starvation. There is a limit to how much money a few whales will invest in a game where player rotation is high due to ever imposed progress barriers and shards as implemented are that.
None of the people I recommended the game have lasted more than 6 months, no brainer is the rrason why.2
Categories
- All Categories
- 44.7K Marvel Puzzle Quest
- 1.5K MPQ News and Announcements
- 20.2K MPQ General Discussion
- 3K MPQ Tips and Guides
- 2K MPQ Character Discussion
- 171 MPQ Supports Discussion
- 2.5K MPQ Events, Tournaments, and Missions
- 2.8K MPQ Alliances
- 6.3K MPQ Suggestions and Feedback
- 6.2K MPQ Bugs and Technical Issues
- 13.5K Magic: The Gathering - Puzzle Quest
- 501 MtGPQ News & Announcements
- 5.4K MtGPQ General Discussion
- 99 MtGPQ Tips & Guides
- 420 MtGPQ Deck Strategy & Planeswalker Discussion
- 296 MtGPQ Events
- 60 MtGPQ Coalitions
- 1.2K MtGPQ Suggestions & Feedback
- 5.6K MtGPQ Bugs & Technical Issues
- 548 Other 505 Go Inc. Games
- 21 Puzzle Quest: The Legend Returns
- 5 Adventure Gnome
- 6 Word Designer: Country Home
- 381 Other Games
- 142 General Discussion
- 239 Off Topic
- 7 505 Go Inc. Forum Rules
- 7 Forum Rules and Site Announcements