The effects of Vaulting



  • animaniactooanimaniactoo Posts: 486 Mover and Shaker
    I well remember the hamster wheel I had JUST gotten off when vaulting was introduced. I was a 3* player who had an insane period of about 3 months where I was just champing one character after the other and didn't dare let covers expire because who knew when I would get another? At the end of it, I had almost every 3* champed, I was starting to work on the 4* level... and the vaulting went into place. I was annoyed. Mostly I was annoyed because I had just put so much time and effort into those characters (literally, I champed 3* black widow 2 days before she went into the vault), and was looking forward to the additional levels really powering them up as I got them.

    Part of my issue was also that the vaulted characters were still in play. They were being used as essentials, which to me created a massive imbalance for players whose characters were either stlll pretty low, or didn't have them and weren't going to be able to acquire them or make them very useable anytime soon.

    Between those, I wanted some solution that built the old characters alongside the new characters. I was fine with the 50/50 solution.

    As a semi-serious player when that went into effect, I saw the major difference that vaulting had made, and I posted a thread about why I thought the original vaulting had been necessary for a bit, which you can find here if you have another half hour to read another one of my posts:

    However... oh boy dilution is a problem that is just getting worse. And I well remember the days when I had a new character and couldn't roster them because I'd pulled 3 new covers for 3 characters and only had about 200 hp on hand and wasn't getting enough in time and I had to choose who I was going to roster. It hurt even worse when I'd "earned" those covers for placing well in events.


    I think the solution here may be to utilize the shield rank system further. Make it possible for players to build characters and develop them at a pace that is tied to their shield level better. Leave some iso crunch in - enough to make an occasional purchase feel worthwhile, but lift the heavy load of a wide array of characters all available to be developed at the same time. So up to level 15 (for example), you can only pull and build 1-2 star characters. At 15-40, you can build 3* characters, but only select ones. At level 15, 3* Iron Man and 2 other characters become available. At 20 you get another 3. At 25, another 3, and then starting at 26, another starts becoming available as you reach each additional rank. At level 40, you get 3 4*s, and continue the cycle until level 75 or so, when 5*s become available.

    Doing it that way should condense and make it possible to selectively focus and build a few characters at a time, reducing cover waste significantly, while also having a reason to keep playing and ranking up in order to access the bigger better more, etc.

    Fundamentally some things might have to change about the structure of the game - different SCLs might need to have different essential characters for the lower levels, but it creates a path forward for a new player entering the game now not to be overwhelmed. Tokens would have to be adjusted/limited to prevent pulls that players aren't eligible for (yet). It would be great if there was an option to "pick" who you want to unlock at some of the levels but I imagine that might take more programming than possible at this point in time.

    N.B.: I picked numbers more or less out of my head, I haven't actually played in 4 months or so and some levels might need adjusting but it's a rough outline of the concept.
  • CalnexinCalnexin Posts: 1,078 Chairperson of the Boards
    Going back to full dilution is awful.  I'd completed the 4* tier and was in a regular rhythm with only 2 or 3 unchamped at any given time.  I like getting them out of my hair. 

    I also think it really helped newer players get into the game.  Lets face it - going into PvP with non-champs is, for the most part, a non-starter.  You're an instant target.  Spreading the odds out to the crusty non-competitive old-timers just makes it harder to become functional in that mode.
  • AXP_ismeAXP_isme Posts: 809 Critical Contributor
    I’m not hopeful personally. 

    With most of the 4*s champed this doesn’t significantly affect me and for that i’m grateful. Like a lot of others, in every survey I always say I wouldn’t recommend the game to my friends (certainly if I want to keep them as friends 😊). The barriers to entry were too high, even with the split between latest and classic. With this change I think the barrier just got a lot bigger. New, or newer, players will be in a vicious cycle of unpredictable pulls, dozens of low covered four stars and not having a strong enough roster to get the HP they need to roster all these incoming covers. 

    I think the other thread running alongside this about 4* players jumping to 5* land may be very prescient. The conspiracy part of me (bear with me...) wonders if this is a monetisation drive. I expect there are more players staying in the 4* tier than there are moving up to fully fledged 5* tier given the reliance on RNG. I also imagine that the engagement, and more importantly spend, are higher the higher tier the player is in. I wonder whether someone has confused correlation and causality and assumed that by driving 4* players into 5* land they might increase the spend per player. Certainly if the barriers to entry are as high as we all think there would be little new blood coming through, or at least those who will reliably spend money in large amounts. That would make monetising the existing player base that much more important. 

    Just an idea... 🤐
  • PolarPopBearPolarPopBear Posts: 76 Match Maker
    They could have made "Latest" really latest and left the increased odds on latest 12 for the LL token
  • BorstockBorstock Posts: 1,631 Chairperson of the Boards
    I'm still fine with it, but I can't imagine how a new player will ever be able to compete. 
Sign In or Register to comment.