I think a lot of it is frustration arises because better ideas exist. And, not only do they exist, they’ve been suggested ad nauseum, are obvious, and continually ignored.
Vaulting worked for some people, some wanted old characters. Obvious solution: multiple options. Let the players choose which pool they’re using. People said this the very day vaulting was implemented.
Instead, Demi has this odd curse of the monkey’s paw style of enhancements, giving people what they technically asked for, but with some unnecessary and painfully obvious downside. The latest, people clamoring for those old heroes get it… via a big bucket of RNG, and a thorn in the side to people wanting to focus on the new 12.
It gives off the feeling Demi doesn’t respect their players enough to give them agency and make their own decisions on how to build their rosters.
Vaulting was also great for people that already had every or nearly every 4* champed. In fact, that is who Vaulting was best for, the 1% (well excluding the REAL 1% that don’t even use anything less than a 5*), because they were almost always guaranteed to run 2 boosted 4* out in every PVP and 3 in every PVE.
My guess is that someone at MPQ realized that Vaulting was creating even larger gaps in the player base and it was going to start messing with events, and that’s the only reason we got a change.
But you are right, I think this change will benefit far more people than what it will hurt, although there will be people that it hurts.
So you really think that they ignore the playerbase suggestions without a good reason ? I am more than sure that if the suggestion was good for all the parties involved, they would have made it. But in reality, what is good for the player, may not be good for the business model (as somebody already said).
The thing is, most of you guys, only think about your side of the screen: the player. But what if you were on the other side: the one who’s making money out of it (not the devs, they are only some guys doing what the manager wants). Wouldn’t that change your perception on things ?
They also have a plan, in which they are forced to invest money (opposed to the players who can invest if they want or don’t invest if they don’t - it’s a free to play game), and from which they want some gains. Did you think for one second that their plans might be turned upside down too ?
I don’t want to take sides on this matter, I’m trying to be objective. I get it! I know why some of the playerbase are angry. But in the same time, I understand the other position that players usually ignore. This solution was the best compromise to their plans in order to satisfy some of the community complains. And it may well be a temporary solution.
I, for one, may have to suffer from this solution as well as other 4* transitioners. But hey, life is not always going according to plan. Sometimes you have to adjust or improvise. RNG ? It’s part of the game. You win some, you lose some. That is all about. And this thing is all across the comics of heroes you play in this game. Spider-Man, for instance, was always divided between the responsability he has as a hero and his love interest. Heck, he was even divided between his love interests (Mary Jane, Felicia Hardy, etc). Things were never simple or perfect. He always won something and lost something else in exchange.
That is the real life. There is no perfection. No simple solutions. Life is complicated and sometimes you feel everything is against you. But you don’t give up and you fight back. You adjust and improvise… At least that we can learn from the heroes we play with, if nothing else.
Being critical about the game or changes in general isn’t a bad thing. Imagine if people never said anything bad about the Dark Avengers or Carnage’s nerf. We’re just trying to make the game better. If anything only being positive all the time hurts the game because then you just turn into a yes man and then the devs think that the game doesn’t need to be tweaked a bit. Vaulting? It meant that my favorite characters were put behind a huge wall and my only shot at them was with bonus heroes. And it also meant that the majority of the teams in Shield Sim would be the same. Do I want to fight Bl4de, Carol and Medusa or Bl4de, Carol and Medusa? Hmm tough choice. So my solutions were custom packs where you would still have the latest but you could add a few favorites to work on too and then switch them out if you’re done working on one. Or even just mixing in some of the older ones in with the latest 12 would have been fine each season. Or stores for vintage heroics and vintage legends. But nada.
It really is the same few people who keep complaining. I can’t call them out, but they are always commenting on some nonsense. I learned to ignore them. Thumbs up to OP for this.
We’re not entirely back to those times. Bonus heroes are still around and provide a 5% chance per pull. Since it arrived right alongside vaulting, we never lived in a time where we had an opportunity to target characters outside of waiting for their covers to roll around in events. The agony of an unusable 13th is much more likely to find itself a champ level than it was before, if the player chooses to put focus on it.
That said, the change does feel like reverse progress. With my current roster under vaulting, I had a 3% chance at drawing a useless cover and no chance at drawing something that would force me to champ spend to avoid a wasted cover. Now I’ve got a 25% chance of having to spend and a 7% chance for a useless cover (not including 5*). When a third of your pulls are risky, hoarding becomes attractive again.
I think a large part of the problem is that som people can’t seem to understand that this is both a game and a consumer product.
I think the FTP crowd view it more as just a game they play, so dissatisfaction over sudden changes to them is just seen as complaining.
Then there are those that are either VIP/ occasion purchases or PTW players, so when these changes occur we voice our opinion, sometimes loudly, because we are both invested in the game and invested in it monetarily too.
They could send every player 100k ISO and 5000 HP with a note that says “this is just a thank you for being a loyal player” and people would still find a reason to piss and moan about it.
When things aren’t exactly, 100% the way people think they should be, they complain. I’ve found this especially true in gaming.
Well as I said in these discussions before, vaulting benefitted me greatly. I have about 4 characters who were vaulted. Only one of them has less than 13 covers. So really, I needed all the current 4*s I could get. Vaulting was tailor made for me!
That said, I’m a minority player. The vast majority are not where I am, have a butt load of 4*s to cover, never mind find ISO for, and vaulting ensured only the current 12 were ever going to get any play in PvP and such. It didn’t benefit the vast majority of players, which is why it definitely needed a rework. This seems to strike a nice balance I think.
I always enjoy reading threads that complain about people complaining, those are always the best.
“But lets face it and be objective for one second: this change is probably for the better, rather than for the worse, for the most majority of the players”
Yes, let’s be objective and base our judgment solely on our own personal anecdotal experience. Let’s not hear other people’s opinions, or, god forbid, have our minds changed by a compelling and persuasive argument.
I am very happy about this new move. The higher rate of newest 12 I thought was a great touch on their part to find some middle ground. I’ve already pulled 2 older covers for characters I assumed would never get champed.
Million to one? Are you from the future with a lot more characters in the game?
The latest 12 still have a higher pull rate than the classics. You will still get plenty of covers to fully cover the new ones. The week a brand new character comes out you get half of the covers you need.
I don’t think there is outrage near the levels that vaulting had.
Many who are upset are upset with how the change was implemented (dropped on us without warning).
Many are upset because better solutions were ignored.
This change is in my opinion a great compromise. And is better than vaulting and is better than dilution. Is it THE BEST solution? No. But since it’s better than the previous two models I will tip my hat to the developers and reflect that feedback in my ratings and surveys of the game.
Oh yeah, and the fact that they kept Bonus Heroes in tact to give us some control over our progression is huge. Well done!
For my part, I loathed vaulting with every fiber of my being. While this solution is a bit clunky in my opinion - not to mention that it would’ve made more sense to do this in the first place instead of vaulting at all - it’s a decent compromise and good enough that I have no legitimate beef with it.
The new solution has been awful for me - I have gone from tokens being about 80% useful to 25% useful. I have a lot of the old guard with one color at 5, and the rest at a low number. 1/1/5 Quake, 1/2/5 X-Deadpool, 2/5/2 Flaptain, 5/2/1 Prof X, 1/2/5 Ghost Rider, 3/5/1 Nova, 1/5/2 Drax, 5/1/1 Miles, etc. I was happy when vaulting ended me pulling yet another blue Quake or Purple X-Deadpool or blue Flaptain. Of the four legendary tokens I’ve pulled under the new system, only one has been useful - a black Chulk for my 1/5/3 Chulk.
token one: Purple X-Deadpool (1/2/7)
token two: Blue Quake (1/1/8)
token three: Blue Mordo (0/7/0) (not the new solution’s fault, obviously. Curse you for stalking me, azure Mordo!)
token four: Black Chulk (now 1/5/4)
I know that’s an insignificantly small sample size, but the recent changes ensure I have over a dozen ways to be disappointed in my token draws, instead of just a few ways.
I realize the most recent iteration is better for a lot of folks, and that’s cool. I just wish there was a bit more granularity in the system to let us fine-tune the contents of our valuable legendary tokens to reduce sadness all of the way around.
