mdreyer93 said: Looks like you have the latest ones there. Check out the spreadsheet here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CUD05MS67Z61r5_IfIwMjnKC0TdBq1ytOOhhc0LFcCg/edit?usp=sharing
Ptahhotep said: Ideally every new 4* would be a feeder for the 5* dropping out of latest.
TheRiddler said: Every 4* should be a feeder. There are 16 unfed 5s. And they release one every month. Then you have somebody like Havok who doesn't have a feeder and that character came out almost 2 years ago.
Zalasta said: Christmas is coming. I'm sure that we'll get everything that we asked for.
Srheer0 said: TheRiddler said: Every 4* should be a feeder. There are 16 unfed 5s. And they release one every month. Then you have somebody like Havok who doesn't have a feeder and that character came out almost 2 years ago. But there's like 130+ 4stars currently and not even 100x 5stars.
KGB said:Feeders are a nice occasional bonus cover, but they aren't really something you plan your cover acquisition around.
KGB said: Srheer0 said: TheRiddler said: Every 4* should be a feeder. There are 16 unfed 5s. And they release one every month. Then you have somebody like Havok who doesn't have a feeder and that character came out almost 2 years ago. But there's like 130+ 4stars currently and not even 100x 5stars. Yeah Entrailbucket discussed this in another thread. It makes no sense once you think of it. It would mean many 5* would suddenly get 2 feeders while others would only have 1. Then in the future it would be 1 feeder per 5* (they'd have to make sure every 4* release made sense for the 5* release). At that point the complaint would be 'how come some 5* have 2 feeders and some only 1 feeder?Plus they'd need to also go back and make every 3* feed even MORE 4* since there are now lots of unfed 4* which also makes no sense.Feeders are a nice occasional bonus cover, but they aren't really something you plan your cover acquisition around.KGB
entrailbucket said: I know exactly why they can't do it, but the reason is *dumb*. They can't make any old 4* a feeder, because if they did, certain players would throw a tantrum if we didn't get full retroactive rewards.But consider the same situation at a lower tier. What if certain 3* gave out 4* covers and shards, and others gave out heroic tokens at those levels? Would that be ok?
entrailbucket said: I guess if you think that tokens are a better reward than specific shards and covers, that would be a good argument for keeping things the way they are. I think that's a pretty unpopular opinion, though.
Sekilicious said: entrailbucket said: I guess if you think that tokens are a better reward than specific shards and covers, that would be a good argument for keeping things the way they are. I think that's a pretty unpopular opinion, though. You must not have read the Ultron thread.