So, to be perfectly clear: Everyone hates update 191?

124»

Comments

  • Daredevil217Daredevil217 Posts: 2,669 Chairperson of the Boards
    JSP869 said:
    You don't need to open 400 heroics to earn a few 4* covers. You need to open only 27 Classic or LTs to get a 4* cover.
    That's what I did after Shards went live, immediately got my first "bonus" level for Kate taking her to 305, and after pulling this week's Heroic Tokens (& other event Tokens) she's currently at 371 / 400 towards her next '"bonus" level.

    The plan is to get Kate to 320 to help me finish my currently 3/4/3 Clint Barton. He's already at 132 / 500, and after doing the math, 290 more Legendary pulls will have earned me two "bonus" Clint covers, although Kate will still be shy of 320. But I'll also be earning 3 shards for Kate with every Heroic and Event Token I pull, so I might get her to 320 around the same time I make my 290th Legendary Pull.

    Also helping Kate is that I've BH/Sharded 3* Hawkguy, and his "bonus" covers have been rolling in. Unfortunately my dupe Hawkguy is only 249 so he won't give up a Kate cover for another 16 levels, but adding 17 levels to him will give me two LTs, plus a third LT when I champion him again (14 more covers :tongue: ), and he'll give me a second Kate cover at 183 (another 17 covers :lol: )

    As Dutch said, I've just got to stick to the plan.

    I don't know if you're aware, but Hawkeye should be one of the next two classic essentials so he will have a cover for sale for 250 CP.  I'm definitely planning to buy that and will be using 3*Hawk/ 4* Kate Bishop shards to get the rest of the way there (8 covers and that 250 CP cover will champ him for me).

    Saving my 5* shards for someone else.
  • optimus2861optimus2861 Posts: 1,200 Chairperson of the Boards
    grumbLEGO said:
    Honestly, I’ll take working toward a certainty over the odds of maybe getting what I need any day. I’d love to see the 5*s showing up a progress rewards in SL 10(patent pending), and the shards mean that maybe it’ll take longer and it’s at “lower” odds, but eventually I will get the cover I need. I’ll miss the surprise of a bonus cover but it beats the disappointment of always missing the odds. 
    This is my take on shards vs BH. And I even fell victim to 'wasted' shards very recently here. I had 4* Thanos as a TH, at 12 covers, then actually pulled his 13th cover from a token when he was only at 63/400. So be it. I got him champed earlier than I expected (had a saved cover already). 

    Let's see how shards roll out elsewhere in the game before tarring & feathering the whole setup. 
  • pheregaspheregas Posts: 1,463 Chairperson of the Boards
    Shards is the Socialism of Progress.  We all get it at the same rate.  Sure, with money, you can accelerate this.  Everyone is as equal to their effort/purchasing levels as they want to be.

    Again, the "wasted" shards commentary doesn't affect the 3 or 4* tiers at all.  Shards don't just fall out of the sky, so change them as soon as you fill the desired quantity of earned covers.

    My biggest complaint continues to be that not all Classic 5s have feeders and that a feeder could be announced at random.  If my only goal is to champ my unchamped 5s, then I've put forth potentially months of effort towards one character that I could have put towards a different character that say, already had a feeder or was in Latest.
  • pheregaspheregas Posts: 1,463 Chairperson of the Boards
    pheregas said:
    Shards is the Socialism of Progress.  We all get it at the same rate.  Sure, with money, you can accelerate this.  Everyone is as equal to their effort/purchasing levels as they want to be.

    Socialism where people can pay more money to get more socialism is very bad at being socialism.
    You are indeed, correct.  Pay to Win wrecks my argument.  The way I phrased this was entirely intentional.
  • bluewolfbluewolf Posts: 4,000 Chairperson of the Boards
    Shards IS like socialism in that everyone will shard the meta, find them easier to complete, and so PVP will become a giant mess of even more of the same teams that you hate but are easiest to complete (Grittyshop and Worthy/HE).
  • HoundofShadowHoundofShadow Posts: 2,548 Chairperson of the Boards
    It's 4320 HP.
  • ROY84ROY84 Posts: 27 Just Dropped In
    It's been a couple of weeks. I've gotten a single 4* from shards .
  • VhailorxVhailorx Posts: 4,590 Chairperson of the Boards
    pheregas said:
    Shards is the Socialism of Progress.  We all get it at the same rate.  Sure, with money, you can accelerate this.  Everyone is as equal to their effort/purchasing levels as they want to be.

    Again, the "wasted" shards commentary doesn't affect the 3 or 4* tiers at all.  Shards don't just fall out of the sky, so change them as soon as you fill the desired quantity of earned covers.

    My biggest complaint continues to be that not all Classic 5s have feeders and that a feeder could be announced at random.  If my only goal is to champ my unchamped 5s, then I've put forth potentially months of effort towards one character that I could have put towards a different character that say, already had a feeder or was in Latest.
    Pretty sure you have confused socialism with a bogeyman or some other shapeless monster hiding under your bed.

    (Also, if you can spend money to get ahead of everyone else , it's not really much in the way for socialism). 

    But yeah, you identify the major issue with stranded shards.  It's a 5* problem, for sure.  But I think it will ultimately take a big chunk off the top of a lot of player's targeted heroes progress (specifically, the ones who don't plan/hoard carefully).  So the actual progress most players will get from TH is even lower than it looks on paper.

  • MayoMayo Posts: 58 Match Maker
    edited December 2019
    I guess most defender of the shard system are the ones who take this game as a second job. Their defense is merely to mantain their status quo. Why?
    1. Shards are good because you can get the cover you need to champ your character.... Don't be naive, the hitters that always hit you in the past will still hit you after you champ because 1 cover does not make a difference in pve and less in pvp. 
    2. Shards are good because with bh you could accumulated several useless covers over time... Don't be naive, those covers are not wasted, i have riri at lvl 200 with 18 covers accumulated. When champed it will make a difference in my game play and against my competition.
    3. Shards make easier to get covers... Don't be naive, in the 2 months God emperor doom got released I had him champed an several levels above other whales Just because I got Lucky with bh chancing. I Still need to see more than 2 top players with 5* carnage champed and with at least 5 extra levels on which probably are 0.00001% of all players. 
    4. With shards you really do not lose resources because once you get the cover you want you can change to another hero... Don't be naive, unless you play the game as a job the probability of nailing the exact number of shards to claim a cover is low, even if it is a shard more in excess when you change to another hero you are still losing resources. 
    5. This system will benefit more players when shards are implemented in other parts of the game... Don't be naive, have you forgotten the promising support system? Was it ever completed? If yes where can i get supports from other parts of the game aside from buying them? If not why are they appearing in vaults when hero covers will be more productive since mid and high level supports are almost imposible to get?
    6. This system will make this game more active... Don't be naive, the number of players champing heros will descend for the reasons above so higher ranked players will mantain their status quo longer. It seems game developers do not understand the concept of scale economy in business or are betting their high investors will keep mantaining the game until its life cycle has expired. (yes, everything including games have a life cycle)

    BH will always have more positives than negatives been the only draw back that it can not be turned into direct profit by the game. However gives no so competitive players to aspire to the higher levels of play without being pulverised by the current status quo players for long. 

    Bring back BH at least until game developers can provide a complete shard system that could be tested by all players and prove it does not only benefit real money expenders. 
  • HoundofShadowHoundofShadow Posts: 2,548 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited December 2019
    The objectives of TH have been clearly stated:
    1) ability to make targeted progress to characters across the 3-star tier and up.
    2) ability to work towards specific colors without waiting through 5 Saved Covers to convert.
    The above are what players requested. 

    Based on in-game data, feedbacks and analysis, this should satisfy majority of the players.It's unfortunate that the reality of this world doesn't align with your version of reality. 

    The source of unhappiness around here is usually due to being unable to deal with how reality works and impatience. They continue to push their ideas of how MPQ should be without taking into consideration of all the stakeholders involved in those decision-making process.

    Right now, the minority are affected by TH. Let's wait a couple months and see what the rest of 100,000+ players say. If they find that this is worse than BH, the devs will make changes to it.
  • MayoMayo Posts: 58 Match Maker
    edited December 2019
    The objectives of TH have been clearly stated:
    1) ability to make targeted progress to characters across the 3-star tier and up.
    2) ability to work towards specific colors without waiting through 5 Saved Covers to convert.
    The above are what players requested. 

    Based on in-game data, feedbacks and analysis, this should satisfy majority of the players.It's unfortunate that the reality of this world doesn't align with your version of reality. 

    The source of unhappiness around here is usually due to being unable to deal with how reality works and impatience. They continue to push their ideas of how MPQ should be without taking into consideration of all the stakeholders involved in those decision-making process.

    Right now, the minority are affected by TH. Let's wait a couple months and see what the rest of 100,000+ players say. If they find that this is worse than BH, the devs will make changes to it.
    1. Easily done with BH system
    2. Just make BH  covers be neutral color. 

    Thus you only needed to modify the BH system instead of investing time on shards and rather in solving the dilution problem. 

    Players ask additions to the game, not replacements towards expending more money but the only way to broaden the player base is keeping it simple and de stressing. 

    What is unfortunate is that you believe your point of view is the only valid one... Let me guess... You are a veteran 5* player of this game /  member of a top guild group? 

    If the shard system is better then player rotation and activity should increase. That data along the ones stated in your post are unknown afaik. However many of the players I have chatted will not be doing ST as they usually did before the update.

    I agree is a matter of time for the developers to see the results of this update as it happened with supports. I myself expect the same behavoiur this time. 
  • HoundofShadowHoundofShadow Posts: 2,548 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited December 2019
     It's reasonable to believe that the players didn't ask the developers to remove BH. 
    Afterall, players want to gain resources with the least amount of effort and money. And that's the problem with living in a "it's all about me" world. "Me, me, me!". People who are absorbed in their world are out of touch with reality.
    In the real world, tradeoff has to be made between parties with different goals. It's an undeniable fact and a reality of life. Because tradeoff has to be made, that's why BH was replaced. 
    It's not unreasonable to believe that they have worked out the implications of implementing colourless covers. Obviously, it's going to hurt them in the long run. That's why they didn't go that route.
    My stand has always been: it's impossible to make every stakeholders happy when changes are made. Therefore, the next best scenario is to make the majority happy. Based on in-game data and feedbacks revealed by the devs, TH should be a system that is better for majority of the players overall, in terms of fulfilling both objectives mentioned.
    I recognise that there are players unhappy with TH. But, again, it's impossible to make everyone happy. Someone will be on the "losing" end.  Please find a developer that can make all changes that satisfy every single players that play their games. They don't exist.
    The devs mentioned that "wildcard" shards aren't that bad. This could be something that makes the anti-TH players slightly less unhappy. The approach of the developers have been pretty straightforward:

    1) Gather data about problems
    2) Work out different solutions
    3) Choose the best solutions/changes
    4) Implement the solutions/changes
    5) Gather and analyse data/feedback
    6) Make changes
    7) Repeat the step 4-7.
    They are probably at step 5 now.

    It was not mentioned that one of the objectives of TH is to increase players' activity. So, this is irrelevant.

    I'm only a 4* player.


  • MayoMayo Posts: 58 Match Maker
     It's reasonable to believe that the players didn't ask the developers to remove BH. 
    Afterall, players want to gain resources with the least amount of effort and money. And that's the problem with living in a "it's all about me" world. "Me, me, me!". People who are absorbed in their world are out of touch with reality.
    In the real world, tradeoff has to be made between parties with different goals. It's an undeniable fact and a reality of life. Because tradeoff has to be made, that's why BH was replaced. 
    It's not unreasonable to believe that they have worked out the implications of implementing colourless covers. Obviously, it's going to hurt them in the long run. That's why they didn't go that route.
    My stand has always been: it's impossible to make every stakeholders happy when changes are made. Therefore, the next best scenario is to make the majority happy. Based on in-game data and feedbacks revealed by the devs, TH should be a system that is better for majority of the players overall, in terms of fulfilling both objectives mentioned.
    I recognise that there are players unhappy with TH. But, again, it's impossible to make everyone happy. Someone will be on the "losing" end.  Please find a developer that can make all changes that satisfy every single players that play their games. They don't exist.
    The devs mentioned that "wildcard" shards aren't that bad. This could be something that makes the anti-TH players slightly less unhappy. The approach of the developers have been pretty straightforward:

    1) Gather data about problems
    2) Work out different solutions
    3) Choose the best solutions/changes
    4) Implement the solutions/changes
    5) Gather and analyse data/feedback
    6) Make changes
    7) Repeat the step 4-7.
    They are probably at step 5 now.

    It was not mentioned that one of the objectives of TH is to increase players' activity. So, this is irrelevant.

    I'm only a 4* player.



    The destiny of this game is the same of other similar games that made the same decisions, great games are a balance of good free gaming and optional systems to received support from happy users. Tekken series, civilization, etc. Yo can play with reasonable enjoyment and you can support the game without feeling the pressure of dedicating hours and real money knowing the game will go on for many years. 

    What is a good balance for example? 
    Both systems co existing until the new systems is fully implemented. 

    I have stopped all purchases aside VIP for now, i can not imagine myself paying for an incomplete product. I think you and others do or at least tolerate it. 

    I am also a 4* player and have no more than a month in a t100 guild, with no interest in harvesting 100s of covers a week. I only want to have a good experience playing this game. 


  • KolenceKolence Posts: 701 Critical Contributor
    tiomono said:
    ROY84 said:
    So I jumped the gun a little. I though you only got 5* shards upon pulling a 5* cover. Knowing you get the shards from every LT is definitely better. Still don’t like the loss of BH. 
    It's only 3 shards though. You'd have to pull hundreds of covers to get a 5* 

    I've gotten 5* bonus heroes on pulls off 5 or less. 

    I can't even understand the people who defend this. 
    Its 167 pulls, not hundreds. 

    How many times did you have dry spells on bonus 5*'s that were longer than 167? I'm sure the spreadsheet people have plenty of data to support how horrible dry spells were.
    Why, hello there! A spreadsheet person here. I'm so glad you asked. :) 
    Number of pulls without a bonus 5-star: 28, 71, 121, 118, 383, 77, 128, 162, 108, 4, 30, 140, 3, 53, 229, 24, 30, 587.
    That's since anniversary 2017. I guess... 3 runs over 167 pulls in 2 years and change. Or 5 runs over 133 pulls.
    Sooo... It's a mixed feeling for me. On one hand, BH 5's were very good to me. On the other, they ended on a longest drought I had (very likely including the time before, when I wasn't keeping track). And yet, over this whole period, it was still slightly above the average.
    As for the update... I don't hate it. And hate is a strong word for all this anyway. I do dislike how it reduced the overall rate of extra 5* covers for everyone as a group. I'll belive the rate will be the same or better than it was with BH when I see it. For now, it's a reduction, and that's a fact, not a feeling. 
    I was careful not to have wasted BH most of the time (except a few times I would gamble on a 5/x/x character, knowing full well I could get burned) and I suspect I'll be careful to waste as few shards as possible (that is up to me anyway) with TH too.
Sign In or Register to comment.