Upcoming 5-Star (11/17 release): No 3-Star Version

ThaRoadWarrior

Maybe they’ll increase the token economy at a similar rate and everything will be awesome. But it’s pretty easy to see that adding more characters to the token pools and leaving the economy the same means you will get covers much more slowly than you used to.

Hammer3001

I think it would make sense to only do the 3/5 release a few times a year and only when it makes sense.
Say they want to release a 5-Star Rocket Raccoon with the release of Guardians 3; are they going to release a second 3-Star Rocket? Or are they going to pass on a 5-Star character because there’s already a 3-Star version?
That said; when they want to release a 3-Star version of a previously existing 5-Star; they should.

Chipster22

@Bad said:

More 3*s means more rewards.

Is this really true?

More tokens would provide more rewards.

More 3* characters would just mean that tokens given would get spread more thinly among them.

bigjojo04

@Chipster22 said:

@Bad said:

More 3*s means more rewards.

Is this really true?

More tokens would provide more rewards.

More 3* characters would just mean that tokens given would get spread more thinly among them.

More 3* may mean it may take longer or have less chances to pull the ones you want but it does give more feeders for characters that may not have one yet thusly giving you more rewards. Just cuz it decreases your chances to pull a certain 3* having more it still provides more rewards than what there was.

ThaRoadWarrior

But you need to get that same 3* over and over to hit those rewards - if you rarely to never get them then are you really better off?

bigjojo04

Yes because it’s still more rewards regardless. If you want the rewards for that particular 3 then just favorite them and get it thru shards. And plus with the new 3* that get released the odds to get them when they’re first released are increased so you’ll get them at a higher rate so you won’t ‘rarely to never’ get them.

Bowgentle

Why is it more rewards?
The same number of covers is given out, spread over an ever increasing army of characters.
That's like saying it would be good to release a character each day, because imagine all the rewards!
I never thought I'd see people arguing that dilution is a GOOD thing.

bigjojo04

How is it not more rewards? Just because you’re not getting them all daily doesn’t mean that there aren’t more…..

HoundofShadow

It's not more rewards. Some simple math will show that.

Before September, there were 47 3*. For really veteran players, 3* farm turns about twice a year. We have 47 * 113 covers * 2 = 10, 622 3* covers in a year.

Right now, we have 49 3*. The number of times 3* farm turn is 10,622 / (49*113) = 1.92 times a year.

As you can see, your 3* farm turns slower the more 3* you have. Also, the closer your characters are to max champed, the better your rewards are.

The dev needs to insert additional 11074 - 10622 = 452 covers a year for it to be termed more rewards.

Ares76

I'm a 5-star player and my 3-stars are still very important for farming rewards.

I don't know how often I rotated my 3-stars since I started this game. I guess it must be around 10-times at least.
Every 3-star-cover is the equivalent of 5/113 Legendary tokens for me. All my 3-stars are at different levels right now. Due to the bonus odds my Emma and Arcade already surpassed other 3*s on their way to max-champ.

I don't see how releasing more 3-stars slows this down for veterans.

If you're a beginner and you're starting your first cycle to max-champs it could be.
But then is it really so important for 3-star-players to get as many Legendary tokes as possible in this early stage of the game? They will get them sooner or later since every cover is 5/113 of a LT. More 5-stars means you have to spend more HP on rostering them which is also a hinderance for new players.

DAZ0273

@HoundofShadow said:
It's not more rewards. Some simple math will show that.

Before September, there were 47 3*. For really veteran players, 3* farm turns about twice a year. We have 47 * 113 covers * 2 = 10, 622 3* covers in a year.

Right now, we have 49 3*. The number of times 3* farm turn is 10,622 / (49*113) = 1.92 times a year.

As you can see, your 3* farm turns slower the more 3* you have. Also, the closer your characters are to max champed, the better your rewards are.

The dev needs to insert additional 11074 - 10622 = 452 covers a year for it to be termed more rewards.

That assumes that you farm all 3* which I don't think is necessarily the case for all. I don't have a farm for all 49, maybe half that. So switching out which 3* I am building at any given moment doesn't necessarily impact to the degree above but every 3* added does mean I have less chance to get whatever 3* I am chasing in the farms I do have running.

I agree it is not more rewards overall though but it is potentially more targeted rewards if it opens up lines of feeders to 4* who never had 3* feeders in the past and they then lead to new 5* fed. But that is a different thing to what I think is being suggested?

ThaRoadWarrior

Anecdotal RNG isn’t super useful, but at this point being a champ-em-all player on day 2463 with all pre-Emma 5s champed except for half a cover of black suit and 11 max-champ 4s with all the rest champed, I’ve organically champed Emma to 177 without favoriting her and my Arcade is 3/4/5 with 2 saved covers - hardly what I’d call swimming in them but having them specifically champed isn’t super important to me so much as what the champ rewards do. I don’t keep any 3* on roster for it’s own sake, just node access and champ rewards; I flip them over as soon as they hit 266 and I get a 267th to reroster. I only really say that to say I guess I’m some flavor of “vet,” and those new 3*s are coming down the pipe but hardly in anything more than a trickle. We’ll have to go back to the Latest 12 odds we had in the old days after a few more releases to keep parity I think. It’s the seeds of a bad situation from my perspective, but I don’t have all the data or the roadmap so take that for what it’s worth.

loroku

More 3-stars = more HP required = slower progress for everyone except SCL10.

More ANY characters = slower progress, but 5-stars aren't as big of a deal for the lower-level folks.

More 3-stars is fewer rewards. I saw the argument that the recent 3-stars are better than the old ones, but that doesn't really make much difference to anyone. 3-star matches are a solved equation. Maybe this will shake that meta up slightly? But it still won't make much difference, and in the end, it will take longer to get a usable 3-star team, so it's ultimately worse.

Bad

More 3s are more rewards.
It enables more new 4s and shards covers which actually are more valuable rewards than the 3* in itself, and not talking about the 5* covers and shards those new 4* give.
You can calculate the overall rewards for a 3* and the distribution but if you forget that all of this is a tree interconnected, the calculations are untrue.
Also a really active player won't care at all about more 3* releases.

dianetics

There are less rewards. Because it slows down the whole progression of farming that tier. The feeders to the 3* territory is not increasing. We are not receiving additional covers either.

I look at the 3*s as rotating the tier, and not just singular bonuses from them. If you fatten the roster without increasing chances for covers, then you lengthen the time it takes to rotate the tier.

If you need around 5000 covers to rotate the tier, then when you start adding more characters the turnaround become longer. In just 12 months it will take 6500 covers to rotate it.

You aren’t adding rewards, you are slowing down the farm.

ThaRoadWarrior

Even if you want to argue the semantics that a new character with a new reward tree == more rewards, the point on the table is that it slows down your aquisition of those rewards SIGNIFICANTLY, and those rewards are what fuel your ability to aquire rewards in the upper roster tiers. It's overal a huge cooldown on roster growth to bloat the feeder tiers. Saying there are more or less rewards is a straw man - the point is that it slows down progression to add them.

Bad

Are we not receiving aditional covers? What about the deathlok shardmas? The arcade, emma 5? The 4 covers and community shards for doop? Several reptil covers? Yesterday last deathlok cover?
I can guarantee all these tasty covers make a difference when farming because they worth a lot of new 3s levels.
Again, is not just about 3 farming, is about 4s and 5s rewards they enable.

dianetics

It’s the frequency of pulls not the bonus covers they provide. It will take more time to turn around the tier and slow down the farm.
If you receive the specific covers you need less frequently then you are not getting the rewards you want.
You could always target a specific character but you will still not see that character as often from natural pulls.

Bad

And why do you want a so fast adquisition?
That only helps on long term to have 4s dupes. 4s dupes are the real dead weight filling slots because nobody will sell a dupe anymore seeing so many shardmas.
No, more 3*s means more rewards because it keeps the farm producing.
It slows down the reward adquisition? Oh, but this game works on a fast adquisition concept? Because I didn't notice before.

ThaRoadWarrior

again, that's a straw man. randomly given covers to new characters isn't the same as predictable income of hp, cp, tokens, etc from a fixed size 3* farm.