Summoners, we recently encountered an issue with the Alliance Quest Setup Phase Starting Timer that may cause the Setup Phase Starting Timer to display erroneous information, though we are working on a fix for it as quickly as possible. Additionally, if the Setup Phase does not let you plan your days in advance, you will be able to once the Event officially begins on the Alliance Quest Start date.

For clarity, the next Alliance Quest Enlistment Phase will begin on December 5 at 20:00 UTC, regardless of what the in-game timers display.

The next Alliance Quest Start will be on December 6 at 20:00 UTC. This is when Summoners should be able to enter each Map. Thank you for your patience and understanding as we work to resolve this issue.
Alliance War Season Rewards will start to roll out to Summoners very soon. These will take a while to get to everybody, so do not worry if an Alliance Mate receives their rewards, but you haven't yet. We thank you for your patience.

Nexus Cav drop rates [Merged]

11214161718

Comments

  • Zan0Zan0 Posts: 3,097 ★★★★★
    Sending a message every minute does not help anyone
  • Kd101Kd101 Posts: 102
    edited August 3
    Dude sending different messages each with a point isn’t spam either. I understand I won’t post so much anymore out of consideration.
  • Kd101Kd101 Posts: 102
    Dude did you not read the above statements before posting that… bruh.

    Kd101 said:

    A little disagree button doesn’t further the discussion either only avoids it.

    This isn't a chat room. Stop treating it like it. Seriously. Your spamming of comments makes it harder for anyone to find anything in this thread. It's all you commenting over and over again being completely unhelpful.
  • Kd101Kd101 Posts: 102
    DNA3000 said:

    Kd101 said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Kd101 said:

    That one was stated, however it was also unprecedented just as this one was only difference being this offer was more readily available and people weren’t upset about the 10 choices like this either.

    That's probably not the best statement you could make in support of your position. In fact, I can think of no worse one at the moment. If you're saying the problem with the offer is you didn't like the outcome compared to other similar situations in which you were perfectly fine with it, you're saying that the decision of whether these disclosures are proper or not depend on whether they operate in your favor or not.

    Maybe this is something most people think is perfectly fine because they spend their whole lives being advocates, but to an objective observer this is an irreconcilable admission of bias. If I was acting as an arbiter between you and Kabam (and I am not) that one statement would probably make it basically impossible for me to rule in your favor.

    It is also an unforced error because it is, or at least should be obvious that my entire discussion of that situation was only to speculate on what the effect of a disclosure would be, not on whether the disclosure was sufficient or not. It is really important to follow the logic being presented, and not just skim it looking for things to disagree with. In this case, that worked to your detriment.
    If you base it off of one statement you are misguided I would recommend reading a few more to figure out the rest.
    That's kind of ironic. One: I generally do not respond to threads I haven't read in full. Two: If you read that post and got the impression I was making a decision based on one statement of yours, you've just done the exact thing I cautioned you not to do: just skim posts looking for things to disagree with. It makes you look like someone who shouldn't be taken seriously. I would caution you against going for the hat trick, but I don't think that would be productive.
    I had also thanked you for your input after reading more in-depth into your statement. It was a skimming your are correct and I thanked you after I read it.
  • Sparty6Sparty6 Posts: 16
    I can’t wait to turn this into a thread about “show me your compensation pulls” and watch the trolls cry.
  • DemonzfyreDemonzfyre Posts: 14,371 ★★★★★
    Sparty6 said:

    I can’t wait to turn this into a thread about “show me your compensation pulls” and watch the trolls cry.

    I'll be here when they don't watching the other "trolls" cry.
  • hungryhungrybbqhungryhungrybbq Posts: 1,838 ★★★★
    grfvb said:

    Wicket329 said:

    grfvb said:

    YoMoves said:

    I have a sneaking suspicion that these cav crystals are not the ones that were wrong.

    I think it may have been the *class* nexii that were wrong.

    I am still of a mind that the 4.5% drop rate on the nexus class crystals were erroneously placed there and that the original drop rate was supposed to be the 1.5% over three spins of a single crystal, exactly how the ones bought yesterday are currently. I am of the mind that someone at Kabam simply oversighted and did not properly do the math/adjust the rates properly on the last set, and that these are actually correct. In which case, this is a bevy of whining about absolutely nothing, and the only possible gripes would be with the class nexus deals (which, as I recall, most people were pretty happy with.)

    But that's speculation. Can't know until someone who is paid to know lets US know. All I'm saying is don't jump to the worst possible conclusions and set the forums on fire searching for a scapegoat. If they messed up, given the (mostly premature at this moment) outrage, they'll likely come out and say it. If not, then you're likely going to get mad anyways, and I can't stop you, but know it'd be over nothing at all in that scenario...

    agreed 1000x here mate.. giving 4.5% on single spin is ridic op
    4.5% is the current 6* drop rate for Featured Cavalier crystals per spin. These are basics, so it should be a 3% 6* drop rate per spin.
    yeh but that's too good no if it was nexus and u got 3 spins.. that's 8.74% chance of getting a 6*
    You're funny, man. You keep adding 3 sets of drop rates together to claim it's supposed to add up to a single drop rate. Of course people thought each individual chance was 3%. That's what's makes them *better* than a standard Cav. Or what *should* have made them better... Otherwise they'd be worse than a standard Cav...
    C'mon man.
  • sherin_66sherin_66 Posts: 158 ★★
    Rookiie said:

    sherin_66 said:

    I think one of the most important things you should do when you are considering to purchase something is to actually read the description of the item(s) so you don't fall into a hole like this.

    Dude, I'm sorry but this was a black swan.
    Are you seriously going to tell me that you check the specs of whatever you routinely buy EVERY SINGLE TIME?
    At some point it becomes mechanical, not a conscious decision, and you get duped.
    Sorry but, people are so good at looking back at a situation and providing so called 'logic' or 'reasoning'.
    There's a reason we've got a massive, growing merged thread. Hundreds or thousands of people were duped. It's not like it happened to a handful of people. If that was the case, then go ahead and take aim.
    Look, I'm FTP, so I just read over the description of new stuff they release briefly to see if anything has changed (crystals, unit deals etc.) I thought a universally known concept is that people should actually take the time to read over the description of what they are SPENDING money on, but it seems that people do not. Correct me if I am wrong, but was this the first time cav nexus crystals have been released? I don't keep tabs on the store as much as my spending comrades.
  • StellarStellar Posts: 769 ★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    Sparty6 said:

    I can’t wait to turn this into a thread about “show me your compensation pulls” and watch the trolls cry.

    I'm actually concerned that if Kabam sends out compensation to people who bought the offer, it will cause a ton of people to claim that they now need compensation because had they known the drop odds were in error they would have bought it originally.

    Full disclosure: I weighed the offer last night and decided to get it. So while I think compensation would not be unreasonable in this situation, I would be a beneficiary of that compensation so I have some vested self-interest that could introduce bias.
    You can't address the fact people didn't buy the offer but would have if they had know the odds displayed were an error !
    All Kabam can do is address the problem, if it really was an error, for those who bought it.
  • CorkscrewCorkscrew Posts: 337 ★★★
    DNA3000 said:


    I'm a bit on the fence about this one. On the one hand, the drop odds were explicitly tagged on the crystal, and if we say players have no responsibility to check them, why are they there? Why did we fight to get disclosure? We can't demand disclosure, but then say all the responsibility is on the company. If they don't disclose they are at fault, but if they do disclose players are under no obligation to look at them, and they can still be at fault if the disclosed odds do not meet expectations. To me, that's an unreasonable expectation.

    Did we fight for disclosure? Is that why we have drop rates? I thought it was pre-emptive because of all the talk about regulations to loot boxes, which some countries have enacted and others simply in proposed stage.

    I never got the impression that it was a huge community drive that resulted in us getting drop rates. How we got there probably doesn't matter in the end.... we are where we are.

    However, it does provide some insight into what is the crux of this discussion, which is assumption. Before there were ever drop rates, we "assumed" certain odds based on experience. We now "assume" certain drop rates on named (i.e. cavalier, grandmaster) crystals based on previous information. Just like generally we "assume" we aren't legally binding ourselves to lifelong indentured servitude when we click agree on TOS in every piece of software without reading them.

    There are arguments to be made on both sides i.e. precedent or patterns, good faith versus the "contract" (specified drop rates).

    As it stands, mathematically (and I posted it in another thread), they are almost equal... this crystal versus new cavalier 6* drop rates. If the bait and switch was intended, I personally would classify the marketing as misleading. However, since I can't know their intention, I am willing to accept that it's an error.

    I didn't buy the crystals, so it doesn't affect me either way.

    My expectation is that they will respond in due course given the furore.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 13,556 Guardian
    Corkscrew said:

    DNA3000 said:


    I'm a bit on the fence about this one. On the one hand, the drop odds were explicitly tagged on the crystal, and if we say players have no responsibility to check them, why are they there? Why did we fight to get disclosure? We can't demand disclosure, but then say all the responsibility is on the company. If they don't disclose they are at fault, but if they do disclose players are under no obligation to look at them, and they can still be at fault if the disclosed odds do not meet expectations. To me, that's an unreasonable expectation.

    Did we fight for disclosure? Is that why we have drop rates? I thought it was pre-emptive because of all the talk about regulations to loot boxes, which some countries have enacted and others simply in proposed stage.
    We have drop rates because Apple mandates this for Apple app developers, and Kabam can't make them invisible to Android players. Apple mandates this because players (in general, not specifically MCOC players) strongly advocated for this, and Apple decided to get out ahead of the issue.

    We - specifically some players in the community - did fight for disclosure. Players had been asking, sometimes demanding, drop odds for years in this game. We didn't get it because we won that fight with Kabam, the fight was mooted by Apple. But players did fight for drop odds disclosure.
  • JadedJaded Posts: 4,661 ★★★★★
    jdeck59 said:

    I’m ftp so I don’t have any input on this actual situation. But to all, don’t argue with DNA3000. They 100% know what they’re talking about and you come across like a troll trying to argue with statistics and numbers.

    How dare you assume the pronouns "they"
    DNA3000 is compromised of many rather then one?
  • Ebony_NawEbony_Naw Posts: 2,731 ★★★★★

    I’m ftp so I don’t have any input on this actual situation. But to all, don’t argue with DNA3000. They 100% know what they’re talking about and you come across like a troll trying to argue with statistics and numbers.

    "Statistics don't lie, but people do."

    -Mark Twain or Benjamin Disraeli, depending upon who you ask.

    It is true, numbers do not lie. And DNA is obviously correct about the mathematical computation determining the chance of pulling each rarity. Where DNA is not guaranteed to be correct is with the interpretation of what that means. Only Kabam knows that, and everyone else claiming to have the solution is merely speculating. Now if you are filing for prophet status on behalf of DNA, that is a different story.

    Disclaimer: I have kind of tuned out the back-and-forth, and there may be a very good reason for your comment. In which case, I shall homer.gif into the hedge bushes.
  • StarhawkStarhawk Posts: 424 ★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    Sparty6 said:

    I can’t wait to turn this into a thread about “show me your compensation pulls” and watch the trolls cry.

    I'm actually concerned that if Kabam sends out compensation to people who bought the offer, it will cause a ton of people to claim that they now need compensation because had they known the drop odds were in error they would have bought it originally.

    Full disclosure: I weighed the offer last night and decided to get it. So while I think compensation would not be unreasonable in this situation, I would be a beneficiary of that compensation so I have some vested self-interest that could introduce bias.
    they don't need to compensate people that didn't buy the deal. They could simply have the deal available to anyone who didn't originally purchase it.
  • CorkscrewCorkscrew Posts: 337 ★★★
    edited August 3
    DNA3000 said:


    We - specifically some players in the community - did fight for disclosure. Players had been asking, sometimes demanding, drop odds for years in this game. We didn't get it because we won that fight with Kabam, the fight was mooted by Apple. But players did fight for drop odds disclosure.

    Yeah - I think that's clearer. I didn't think it was players that forced Kabam's hand.

    Apple decided to get ahead of litigation and regulations. There was, maybe still is a massive anti-gambling against micro-transactions that involve chance. Most tabled regulations seem to have lost steam. I liken this to "violence in video games causes violence in real life..." it has an ebb and flow of uproar.
This discussion has been closed.