I can't imagine telling a customer, hey we identified a bottleneck but we don't recommend fixing it because you have extra capacity on your backend. They would say, how can I utilize that extra capacity when my frontend is at Max capacity. That is the essence of the issue as I see it.
There is 2 ways of releived the bottleneck, reduce the amount of t1a needed for 5*s or increase the amount of t1a that can be obtained. Personally the cost side is the easiest fix. Though increasing t1a availability would allow some farming if t2a frags if they want to go that direction.
Umm you can not compare t1a availability to industrial production irl. They obviously want rank up materials to be a captive supply and this is not a free market. There will always be a limiter to regular progression and t1a is as reasonable as t4b or t4cc. Being it is a “basic resource” it is preferable to have t1a as a limiter rather than a more complex resource like t4cc.
Umm you can not compare t1a availability to industrial production irl. They obviously want rank up materials to be a captive supply and this is not a free market. There will always be a limiter to regular progression and t1a is as reasonable as t4b or t4cc. Being it is a “basic resource” it is preferable to have t1a as a limiter rather than a more complex resource like t4cc.
You don't like any parallel that doesn't fit your narritive. You are presuming that kabaam wants to keep T1A a captive resource, yet kabaam has made statements that make me think otherwise. If you are right it would be nice to have kabaam lay the topic to rest. I am tired of discussing it.
I hate when people act like a comparison has to be an exact parallel, the idea is to compare the same principles. An industrial facility production capacity has a lot to do with bottlenecks and we are discussing bottlenecks so to me it is a viable comparison especially since I have experience in complexity industrial facilities.
We've heard from many of you that as you've moved up through Maps, you've been finding it more difficult to collect less rare Rank Up materials that used to be more plentiful in your inventories. These new additions will make some of those materials slightly easier to collect.
This quote from Kabaam is why I don't agree with your presumption. I know they are talking about T4CC, but T1A is a "less rare rank up material" and would be comparable.
Even if t1a are gained at the exact same rate as in season 3 of AQ, which I don't agree with but that isn't the point, that still shows the t1a shortage. Kabam has drastically increased the amount of 5* shards, 4* shards, t4b, t4c and t2a over the past few months. Literally the only thing that they haven't increased in the availability of t1a. That's either an oversight or a deliberate attempt to stifle rosters with a low level material. TBH I'd believe both and I'm not sure which is worse.
Umm you can not compare t1a availability to industrial production irl. They obviously want rank up materials to be a captive supply and this is not a free market. There will always be a limiter to regular progression and t1a is as reasonable as t4b or t4cc. Being it is a “basic resource” it is preferable to have t1a as a limiter rather than a more complex resource like t4cc.
You don't like any parallel that doesn't fit your narritive. You are presuming that kabaam wants to keep T1A a captive resource, yet kabaam has made statements that make me think otherwise. If you are right it would be nice to have kabaam lay the topic to rest. I am tired of discussing it.
No I don’t like bad analogies as they are like leaky screwdrivers and no one wants a leaky screwdriver when they are working on a problem.
So if you believe Kabam is looking at the supply why are you bothering with the poor arguments?
Even if t1a are gained at the exact same rate as in season 3 of AQ, which I don't agree with but that isn't the point, that still shows the t1a shortage. Kabam has drastically increased the amount of 5* shards, 4* shards, t4b, t4c and t2a over the past few months. Literally the only thing that they haven't increased in the availability of t1a. That's either an oversight or a deliberate attempt to stifle rosters with a low level material. TBH I'd believe both and I'm not sure which is worse.
Another way of saying this is I do not agree with objective reality and math.
In arguendo, Given they “drastically” increased these materials that frees up more glory (which they have increased) for you to spend on t1a.
But yeah they do deliberately manage available resources to meter progression and give players something to work towards.
Still waiting for people complaining about lack of t1a to show their rosters and prove theyre not being stupid with their rank ups.
What do you consider to be a stupid rank up? I took my 5* am to r3 over lots of potential 4* rank ups. Was that stupid? In the short run probably but in the long run definitely not.
In my book any duped 5* takes priority for rank ups over any 4* unless it's a god tier 4*.
You get only without the monthly event every 6 days 2 t1a. That means 10 a month. The monthly gives you 4 so that's only 14 t1a a month. That means you cant R3 a 5 star every month.
The Alliance event rewards are the same since the start. It's like they haven't progressed like the rest of the game that's ****.
Monthly has 5, 6 if you also do normal. But we have a new monthly coming up that may include more.
Monthly AQ at your level has 6 with 775g per cycle, 9 with 1425g per cycle or 15 with 3750g per cycle. All possible for a top 20 ally.
Arenas have 3 per month.
Yes 3 day is 10 a month.
I’m counting 34 a month at your level with max glory expenditure, 28 if you spend 1425 glory per cycle saving 1300 glory.
That’s just shy of 3 r3 a month @ 28 a month and you easily have the glory to buy the extra two to round it out.
Dude nobody in top Ally’s is spending glory on t1a. Maybe in a pinch but not regularly. We shouldn’t have to. We don’t earn enough glory to
Not spend it all on t2. Personally mostly
Buy potions with it. But to use it all on t1 is just stupid.
If you are not taking advantage of t1a availability that doesn’t exactly reinforce the belief there is a lack of t1a.
Give me an example of a top ally and show me their expenditures of glory cause all you have offered in that regard is baseless words.
Stoping getting hit or bring someone with heals if you are wasting glory on pots. If you are still getting hit use units for pots which is essentially buying t1a since you cannot just buy t1a with units with any regularity.
But the do not have to use all glory on t1 to regularly rank 3 5s anyways at that level they still have plenty left for pots.
Either way, if you spend glory on Alphas you cant buy t4b. If you buy t4b you cant buy alphas...
If a map 2, 3, and 4 have alphas in them so should map 5 and 6...As you play harder maps reward should grow in the crystals, not be taken away.
Still waiting for people complaining about lack of t1a to show their rosters and prove theyre not being stupid with their rank ups.
What do you consider to be a stupid rank up? I took my 5* am to r3 over lots of potential 4* rank ups. Was that stupid? In the short run probably but in the long run definitely not.
In my book any duped 5* takes priority for rank ups over any 4* unless it's a god tier 4*.
Rank ups done for the sake of ranking 5* up. Example ranking spidergwen up because "muh 5* are future". I have a mate who does nothig but complain about t1a being non existant, yet he refuses to rank 4* and ranks 5* he will never use outside arena. Thats being stupid with your rank ups.
The way I look at it, dupe 5* shouldnt necasarrily take precedence over a better 4*. Example, you dupe 5* collosus. Who takes precedence, him or 4* iceman? Him or 4* x23? Obviously resources would get better practical use out of iceman or x23 over collosus. Why I want to see rosters is because I fully believe half the people complaining about no t1a are doing the opposite and choosing 5* dupe collosus over 4* iceman/ x23, even though collosus has no practical use to them. Their purposefully choosing to use 10 alpha over 3 because "muh 5* are future*. Its a self inflicted shortage. Obviously doesnt apply to every single person, but again Im willing to bet over half are. Different situations will warrant different choices for rosters.
Myself, I get 1 alpha from alliance event weekly and buy 2 from glory for a grand total of 3 a week. I dont do alpha arena. Ones from eq are bonus, so 4 extra a month. Ive never had a shortage of alpha, always have enough to rank up a new champ. I have 2 r4 5*, 3 r3 5*, 4 r2 5* and 7 r1 5*. I have 14 r5, 9 r4 4* and over 50 r3. My personal bottleneck is gold, but thats 100% self inflicted because i dont play tons of arena.
I actually have antman 5* at r3 myself as well. Used on defense so it had purpose. Hes gaining even more purpose with the Mordo nerf for those who still get messed up by him. I dont consider a rank up done with purpose behind it stupid, but i do consider ones done, again, for purpose of "muh 5* are future" stupid. Especially if you will never use that champ outside arena.
Im not trying to sound condescending or be a **** like some folks, but this forum often has trouble applying logic to situations and this is definitely one of them.
Still waiting for people complaining about lack of t1a to show their rosters and prove theyre not being stupid with their rank ups.
What do you consider to be a stupid rank up? I took my 5* am to r3 over lots of potential 4* rank ups. Was that stupid? In the short run probably but in the long run definitely not.
In my book any duped 5* takes priority for rank ups over any 4* unless it's a god tier 4*.
Rank ups done for the sake of ranking 5* up. Example ranking spidergwen up because "muh 5* are future". I have a mate who does nothig but complain about t1a being non existant, yet he refuses to rank 4* and ranks 5* he will never use outside arena. Thats being stupid with your rank ups.
The way I look at it, dupe 5* shouldnt necasarrily take precedence over a better 4*. Example, you dupe 5* collosus. Who takes precedence, him or 4* iceman? Him or 4* x23? Obviously resources would get better practical use out of iceman or x23 over collosus. Why I want to see rosters is because I fully believe half the people complaining about no t1a are doing the opposite and choosing 5* dupe collosus over 4* iceman/ x23, even though collosus has no practical use to them. Their purposefully choosing to use 10 alpha over 3 because "muh 5* are future*. Its a self inflicted shortage. Obviously doesnt apply to every single person, but again Im willing to bet over half are. Different situations will warrant different choices for rosters.
Myself, I get 1 alpha from alliance event weekly and buy 2 from glory for a grand total of 3 a week. I dont do alpha arena. Ones from eq are bonus, so 4 extra a month. Ive never had a shortage of alpha, always have enough to rank up a new champ. I have 2 r4 5*, 3 r3 5*, 4 r2 5* and 7 r1 5*. I have 14 r5, 9 r4 4* and over 50 r3. My personal bottleneck is gold, but thats 100% self inflicted because i dont play tons of arena.
I actually have antman 5* at r3 myself as well. Used on defense so it had purpose. Hes gaining even more purpose with the Mordo nerf for those who still get messed up by him. I dont consider a rank up done with purpose behind it stupid, but i do consider ones done, again, for purpose of "muh 5* are future" stupid. Especially if you will never use that champ outside arena.
Im not trying to sound condescending or be a **** like some folks, but this forum often has trouble applying logic to situations and this is definitely one of them.
Pretty well written but I don't agree with your logic. For me, ranking up 4*'s is basically pointless unless (as I said previously) it's a god tier 4*.
In choosing to rank up a champ there are basically 5 total uses for any champ: arena, AQ, AW attack, AW def, and questing.
So if I have a choice between a 5* and a 4* I have to consider all those areas of the game.
Arena: 5*s will always be better.
AQ: already use 2 r4 5*s in AQ attack and no 4* is going to replace them
AW attack: use 1 r4 5* and I have blade, GP, and iceman at 5/50 to round out that team. No current 4* is going to replace any of those.
AW def: 5*s will always be better here as well because they can eventually be ranked up higher and have a higher PI.
questing: 5*s win out again because they can be ranked up higher.
So to answer your question, if I had the choice to rank up a dupe 5* colossus or 4* x-23 (I already have a 5/50 iceman) then I would choose colossus every time. x-23 would not benefit me in any area of the game. At least colossus would help me out in the arena more and eventually I could potentially rank him up higher and stick him on defense.
@Shrimkins That Colossus only helps you get to milestones with less fights, he does not do it any quicker (in fact much slower) and has less arena point potential than an equivalent 4*. Do you think the game is anywhere close to a point where you will use t2a on Colossus?
No 5* are not better in arenas.
And it sounds like your only use for ranking champs lays in AW defense as your attack teams are built out. So how is Alpha failing to keep up with your actual needs?
If T1 alphas become more available there will just be moaning for another bottleneck that isn't in line with the alphas you would be getting.
Lose lose situation for Kabam which isn't fair.
Do you not see the issue with having a basic rank up material as the bottleneck? Something that you use on a rank 2 4* should not be what holds you back from ranking a 5* champ.
Now the argument has become that you are telling us who we should rank? Or what our game plan should be, I have no desire to rank up any more 4*s as the last 3 r5s I did are all bench warmers, there are 3 4*s left who might bump my current members off my attack teams, but they are all available as 5*s and r4 worthy, so not even sure I would immediately rank them if I pulled them. Otherwise my attack teams are good. I would prefer to rank my 5* because of arena. What do you mean 5* aren't better in arena? they certainly are for what I'm trying to achieve ie. getting points, they certainly are for achieving milestone rewards much faster, as I said before r2s can enter the infinity streak from fight 15, I get t4b arena by running through only 5*s from fight 5 and do the 1.1m in 21 fights, efficiency is nice, I agree with shrimpkins, more t2as are coming. , more shards are coming. In fact more of everything in the ducking game has been announced this month except for t1as, I have always thought t4bs was a more logical bottleneck. i don't like seeing my 4*s that would be fun to use sitting at r2 because I can't spare the alpha. (Or don't want To spend my glory on them as I've already bought several items that week and the 3rd or 4th one is getting a bit pricey) Surely kabam should be trying to drive us towards harder content than easier content, and having none of the bottleneck resource (again I qualify bottleneck as the resource I have to spend most of my glory on) in the harder maps is pushing people to run more map 3s,
The two major choke points created by the alpha imbalance is r3ing 4* and r2ing 5*.... that is what seems completely illogical to me
Now with the 5* shards about to flood in there is no way to dispute there is a MASS shortage of t1a. We can only hope that 6* champs don't require mass t1a consumption as well.
Seatin and Dave just released videos on the t1a shortage. @CoatHang3r you should tell them how to properly use their resources.
Yeah Seatin with a full roster of r2 5s capped alphas who refuses to rank 4* with the same power equivalent of a 5*? Only thing I saw from Dave was him telling people ranking 5s is a bad move and they should be focused on 4s rather than thier useless 5s. Anyways no thanks I don’t seek out pandering panderers for anything other than a laugh.
*The snowflake tears in the form of abuse flags will help make a nice cup of coffee. Thank you whoever you are.
Seatin and Dave just released videos on the t1a shortage. @CoatHang3r you should tell them how to properly use their resources.
Yeah Seatin with a full roster of r2 5s capped alphas who refuses to rank 4* with the same power equivalent of a 5*? Only thing I saw from Dave was him telling people ranking 5s is a bad move and they should be focused on 4s rather than thier useless 5s. Anyways no thanks I don’t seek out pandering panderers for anything other than a laugh.
*The snowflake tears in the form of abuse flags will help make a nice cup of coffee. Thank you whoever you are.
You make less and less sense the more garbage you spew.
You just argued for 6 pages that t1a wasn't an issue, but now you watch a video of a guy you degrade at every turn, and now you're all for t1a improvements?
You just argued for 6 pages that t1a wasn't an issue, but now you watch a video of a guy you degrade at every turn, and now you're all for t1a improvements?
Not at all, the video is very insightful. His suggestions should all be implemented and who doesn’t want to max out their Antman? That’s prolly why I’d don’t have an issue with t1a, don’t have that Antman.
You just argued for 6 pages that t1a wasn't an issue, but now you watch a video of a guy you degrade at every turn, and now you're all for t1a improvements?
Not at all, the video is very insightful. His suggestions should all be implemented and who doesn’t want to max out their Antman? That’s prolly why I’d don’t have an issue with t1a, don’t have that Antman.
He just reiterated what we have been saying over the past 10 t1a threads that you've spammed your nonsense in.
Comments
You don't like any parallel that doesn't fit your narritive. You are presuming that kabaam wants to keep T1A a captive resource, yet kabaam has made statements that make me think otherwise. If you are right it would be nice to have kabaam lay the topic to rest. I am tired of discussing it.
This quote from Kabaam is why I don't agree with your presumption. I know they are talking about T4CC, but T1A is a "less rare rank up material" and would be comparable.
So if you believe Kabam is looking at the supply why are you bothering with the poor arguments?
In arguendo, Given they “drastically” increased these materials that frees up more glory (which they have increased) for you to spend on t1a.
But yeah they do deliberately manage available resources to meter progression and give players something to work towards.
I will find it during my lunch break but it is when they increased T4cc frags to map crystal. It was an announcement.
What do you consider to be a stupid rank up? I took my 5* am to r3 over lots of potential 4* rank ups. Was that stupid? In the short run probably but in the long run definitely not.
In my book any duped 5* takes priority for rank ups over any 4* unless it's a god tier 4*.
Either way, if you spend glory on Alphas you cant buy t4b. If you buy t4b you cant buy alphas...
If a map 2, 3, and 4 have alphas in them so should map 5 and 6...As you play harder maps reward should grow in the crystals, not be taken away.
Rank ups done for the sake of ranking 5* up. Example ranking spidergwen up because "muh 5* are future". I have a mate who does nothig but complain about t1a being non existant, yet he refuses to rank 4* and ranks 5* he will never use outside arena. Thats being stupid with your rank ups.
The way I look at it, dupe 5* shouldnt necasarrily take precedence over a better 4*. Example, you dupe 5* collosus. Who takes precedence, him or 4* iceman? Him or 4* x23? Obviously resources would get better practical use out of iceman or x23 over collosus. Why I want to see rosters is because I fully believe half the people complaining about no t1a are doing the opposite and choosing 5* dupe collosus over 4* iceman/ x23, even though collosus has no practical use to them. Their purposefully choosing to use 10 alpha over 3 because "muh 5* are future*. Its a self inflicted shortage. Obviously doesnt apply to every single person, but again Im willing to bet over half are. Different situations will warrant different choices for rosters.
Myself, I get 1 alpha from alliance event weekly and buy 2 from glory for a grand total of 3 a week. I dont do alpha arena. Ones from eq are bonus, so 4 extra a month. Ive never had a shortage of alpha, always have enough to rank up a new champ. I have 2 r4 5*, 3 r3 5*, 4 r2 5* and 7 r1 5*. I have 14 r5, 9 r4 4* and over 50 r3. My personal bottleneck is gold, but thats 100% self inflicted because i dont play tons of arena.
I actually have antman 5* at r3 myself as well. Used on defense so it had purpose. Hes gaining even more purpose with the Mordo nerf for those who still get messed up by him. I dont consider a rank up done with purpose behind it stupid, but i do consider ones done, again, for purpose of "muh 5* are future" stupid. Especially if you will never use that champ outside arena.
Im not trying to sound condescending or be a **** like some folks, but this forum often has trouble applying logic to situations and this is definitely one of them.
Lose lose situation for Kabam which isn't fair.
Pretty well written but I don't agree with your logic. For me, ranking up 4*'s is basically pointless unless (as I said previously) it's a god tier 4*.
In choosing to rank up a champ there are basically 5 total uses for any champ: arena, AQ, AW attack, AW def, and questing.
So if I have a choice between a 5* and a 4* I have to consider all those areas of the game.
Arena: 5*s will always be better.
AQ: already use 2 r4 5*s in AQ attack and no 4* is going to replace them
AW attack: use 1 r4 5* and I have blade, GP, and iceman at 5/50 to round out that team. No current 4* is going to replace any of those.
AW def: 5*s will always be better here as well because they can eventually be ranked up higher and have a higher PI.
questing: 5*s win out again because they can be ranked up higher.
So to answer your question, if I had the choice to rank up a dupe 5* colossus or 4* x-23 (I already have a 5/50 iceman) then I would choose colossus every time. x-23 would not benefit me in any area of the game. At least colossus would help me out in the arena more and eventually I could potentially rank him up higher and stick him on defense.
No 5* are not better in arenas.
And it sounds like your only use for ranking champs lays in AW defense as your attack teams are built out. So how is Alpha failing to keep up with your actual needs?
Do you not see the issue with having a basic rank up material as the bottleneck? Something that you use on a rank 2 4* should not be what holds you back from ranking a 5* champ.
The two major choke points created by the alpha imbalance is r3ing 4* and r2ing 5*.... that is what seems completely illogical to me
4* r3>r4 = 1 t1a
4* r4>r5 = 2 t1a
Not bad yeah? Wait for this...
5* r1>r2 = 5 t1a
5* r2>r3 = 5 t1a
5* r3>r4 = 6 t1a
Boom quick maths?
Now with the 5* shards about to flood in there is no way to dispute there is a MASS shortage of t1a. We can only hope that 6* champs don't require mass t1a consumption as well.
*The snowflake tears in the form of abuse flags will help make a nice cup of coffee. Thank you whoever you are.
You make less and less sense the more garbage you spew.
Get rekt.
He just reiterated what we have been saying over the past 10 t1a threads that you've spammed your nonsense in.