Maybe i missed it but how often does this crystal get "refreshed" ? like how often do the 18 champs get changed?
There will be a New Crystal every 3 Months. This Crystal will feature the 6 newest Champions, and another pool of 18 Champions as the Base Pool.
If you keep cycling the 18 champs, eventually you're going to create a completely STACKED 15K crystal if the next couple are as underwhelming as this one.
Champions will repeat, but will not appear twice in a row.
You're expanding my words to make some sort of non-implied point.
They look at all the data. Not just the top Players. Yes, what you're saying is true, but it has nothing to do with what I said. Technically, I'm sure they could find people who use all Champs "effectively" at different points. That's not the point I'm making.
I said they look at all demographics. Meaning they don't just rely on the data from the Top Tier. You would find that the list of Champs used is very acute. They look at others as well. Most likely on an individual basis. Meaning they look at all Champs, and how they perform among those that use them.
Do I know this for fact? No. I do not have access to their data. Can I see this from various comments and the results in the Crystal? Absolutely.
They're not trying to find the most effective. They're trying to not include the ones that performed the worst, and I suspect those results are the ones they're working on buffing, at least starting with Luke and Rulk.
What you're saying is not what I'm saying. I didn't say they can include any Champ because they can find people who use any Champ effectively. That's contrary to what they have said themselves. Clearly they're looking for the ones not doing so well, and that is among the Players that use them.
We don't know the Champs excluded. The internal statistics are based on game play, not the Forum. I'm talking about comments from the Moderator, and the results of what's included. My theory is that they examined the data from all Champs. Which means they examined all demographics by way of who uses them.
I know what everyone else knows. That they're looking at Champs based on imperial data, that they're making an effort not to include the ones that perform poorly, and that there is a varied range in the Crystal.
I am entitled to my own opinion based on the information presented. That's not up for debate.
Anyone that is trying to sell me on the idea that the benefit of the new crystal is that you get a higher chance at a "featured" champion versus a basic champion does not understand the attractiveness of 5* featured crystals within the player community.
The novelty or "newness" of a champ has very little to do with why the crystal is desirable.
1) The current featured crystal is the best chance you have to awaken/dupe a 5* champ in the game right now.
2) It is your best chance to obtain a likely high damage or high utility 5* champ by using early feedback and deciding if they are the champ you need
3) It is your best chance to target a champ that you have the rank up materials or awakening gem for.
4) Re-runs are icing on the cake because it gives you the second chance to either obtain or awaken the champ you've invested in
5) Let's not forget that for higher tiers, it is possible to target high prestige and boost that prestige with an awakening
5* champs are still the most expensive to obtain and rank up. They are still the most powerful champs that we have access to in the game and duping a champ is one of the fundamental factors in deciding who we rank up in the game. Why do you think the first question out of most people is: "Is your champ awakened?"
You can also look at how people save their shards, they don't save shards for just any random featured champ, they save them for high utility champs that are going to help them in the game. Kabam even acknowledged that implictly by saying 'Yeah we know you are all saving for Blade".
We also look at featured champs based on resources we've acquired, how many of us are sitting on science awakening gems waiting for a decent science champ? Or we have catalysts waiting to expire and we want to use them on a decent 5* champ instead of just more arena fodder.
All of this goes away with the new crystal and the best I can say about it is that it gives us the opportunity at a decent number of middle of the road champs.
It seems obvious to me that their empirical data is not based on top alliances. Some might say that that is how it should be. I'm going to say that sampling bias is not necessarily bad bias. The bottom or beginning players just play the champs that they have, not necessarily the champs that are effective (this is already skewing your data). Top alliances have the chance to place proven and effective defences and to use effective attackers.
Let's say you get financial advice? Do get advice from a grad student, a mainstream consultant and a finance guru? Or do you go straight to the finance guru?
Anyway, I would like to hear from Kabam, and try to ask some constructive questions:
1) What population do you draw your empirical data from? All players/alliances? Top 10%?
2) What is/are the definition(s) of effective? Kills? Damage output?
@Kabam Miike please do not make this change. If you were to add a different crystal with rotating characters that would be fine. For those of us reaching the point where saving and aiming for certain characters is becoming viable this is a huge slap in the face. It also puts us at a huge disadvantage against other summoners who have benifited from the featured character crystals. Just please reconsider i know there has been a lot of negative feedback besides mine.
If you're getting me to pay a 50% premium on the most expensive crystal, make it worth it. I don't necessarily get an increased chance at the champs I want or need, if I can't target high utility or class of the resources that I have.
You're just giving me a better shot at something "new".
Is there is any change in the shards required for the new featured five star crystals or its the same 15K shards. Why can't kabam reduce the required shards to 13K because it's too hard obtain 5 Star shards and 15K is 50% more than than the normal 5 Star shards.
This is a terrible idea and we have to rely on Kabam to put non-garbage champs in the crystal. Huge mistake. Just look at what's coming in the first crystal.
Kabam needs to understand that those of us who risk the extra 5k shards risk it for a specific champ..and for that specific champ to have a much higher percentage of dropping then other champions...the great part of the featured crystal is that if we miss we still can pull a Hyperion or iceman of voodooo or star lord...the new crystal now takes the champ we want and says wait 3 months before u get a 4 percent chance at it and 23 other champions that we don’t care if you want or not
Hi kabam no derailing or anything bad but please can we have your input to whether you would consider any of ours suggestions to switch up the crystal idea pretty please?
This empirical data statement is nonsense - Hiding behind your desks looking at your data of effectiveness and not confronting your player base. I usually take the bigger picture side here, and defend the decisions of the company, but I just cant here. That statement is a bunch of garbage and is a huge slap to your player base.
I've got some empirical data for you. I just surveyed 36 pages of people complaining about this new step forward for the game, and the future of these crystals look pretty grim. Clock is ticking to do some damage control.
I mean this in the worst of ways. Your team is deluded. In what universe are those champs even semi useful? Tier 20? There is NOBODY in any decent ally using 90% of those champs anywhere but defense (and only a couple for that) let alone **** attack or aq. They are NOT top options. Not a single one is god tier. Pathetic. Open your eyes.
If you are not a fan of the Champions in the Crystal, you can always wait until the Featured Champion you like is added to the Basic Pool, like the 3-Star and 4-Star Champions.
Also, nobody said they are the top Champions, and while player perception of these Champions may differ, these Champions are ones that people use to great success.
Oh my god, why do you keep saying this? Nobody believes most of these champions on the list are being used by players "to great success." Unless by this you mean these players used some of these champs to great success, given that they were forced to use a garbage champ like cyclops, Antman, Loki, Phoenix , venompool, civil warrior. If there were one time Cyclops managed to take down a Dorm miniboss in AW, without reviving, the "great success" was that it actually happened given that they were using cyclops.
To be fair the mods say what they are told so when they say something like antman will bring you success then yeah they really need to research more on how the game works in real life.
I mean this in the worst of ways. Your team is deluded. In what universe are those champs even semi useful? Tier 20? There is NOBODY in any decent ally using 90% of those champs anywhere but defense (and only a couple for that) let alone **** attack or aq. They are NOT top options. Not a single one is god tier. Pathetic. Open your eyes.
If you are not a fan of the Champions in the Crystal, you can always wait until the Featured Champion you like is added to the Basic Pool, like the 3-Star and 4-Star Champions.
Also, nobody said they are the top Champions, and while player perception of these Champions may differ, these Champions are ones that people use to great success.
Who the hell uses Ant Man or Venompool for anything other than arena fodder?
“I didn't say most used, but they are among the most effective. Cyclops actually scores very high on this list. There is a smaller group of players that use him, but they use him VERY effectively.”
"Among the most effective".
Among implies compared to other champs.
Who are these other champs?
Cyclops might be very effective COMPARED TO Hulk Buster and Luke Cage, but he's not an effective tool.
If a car that has a top speed of 20mph is compared to others who can only go a max of 15mph, you can claim that it's "among the most effective", but it's not an effective car.
People can use all the mental gymnastic they want to justify these decisions, but reality says most of these champs aren't "among the most effective" at all.
Can we get something similar for 4 star champions? I would really like to have more chances on getting Hyperion or Gwenpool since I hadn't had time to grind for them and my chances to get them from 4s crystals are probably 0.
You know how many players were certain that this game was doomed after 12.0 and we would all know it soon enough? All of them were about as wrong as wrong gets.
.
This is fun, don't you remember those apologies for 12.0 posted by Kabam? don't you remember it just took a couple of weeks for them to rollback some of those stupid and ridiculous changes in 12.0?
If everyone is just like you and accept all the greedy changes made by them with no complaint, this game is already dead.
In fact, they didn't actually "roll back" very many changes. They revised some of them, but every champion that was nerfed was still nerfed, just less in some cases. Every mechanical change they made remained (like the stacking armor break mechanic no one seemed to have noticed), and every attribute players complained about was defaulted to zero but remained in the game (like armor penetration and critical resistance).
And once again, this is entirely irrelevant to what I was saying, because I don't deny any of these changes happening. I said, and apparently have to repeat, again, that even with every single one of those changes there were still many players saying MCOC was doomed either because those changes did not go far enough or were irrelevant.
And while everyone is not like me, I feel comfortable adding you to the list of people who believe that the game is effectively dead if it doesn't specifically address your issues or if everyone doesn't see every game change exactly the same way you do.
No point speaking with grounded you see how this thread just focuses on him when he posts. Just one of those people who will always have an answer. It won't stop unless people just read what he says and moves on after maybe a small convo. Our main focus keeps drifting away because of this. I have never once had to argue with him because I ignore it is quite easy.
Thank you for knocking some sense into the rest of us Spirit.
Ok so back on topic. It seems that between the "garbage" pool and the new system of 5 star featured the community is unhappy. Now we may be more receptive if we had some of that, oh whats the word; clear..no, opaque...no.
OH YEAH Transparency. Yeah that good communication that Kabam and the forum mods promised and talked about so recently. There has to be more of a reason for this.
Some form of logic the devs want. But once again we are left in the dark waiting for the surprise party of our nightmares.
I don't see how transparency has anything to do with it. They announced the change well in advance and stated their general reasons for doing so. Its not perfect, but that's ample transparency. What you seem to be asking for is absolute accountability, in other words you believe the devs have a responsibility to convince you their decisions are warranted, and if you disagree they are wrong until they figure out a way to prove themselves right.
I am a strong proponent of better dev communication and better transparency about how the game works in general. But the devs are not accountable to the players in that specific way. Kabam is ultimately accountable to its playerbase in a general sense, but their individual developers are not required to defend their design decision against all player opposition. They are only required to explain them to be reasonably transparent.
The fact that the thread keeps repeating false indictments against the devs, like the false accusation that Kabam said the curated eighteen basic champions were the "most effective" champions, is a really good reason why game developers generally opt out of communicating on public forums most of the time.
I may not agree with everything Kabam does, I'm not even saying I approve of every aspect of the new featured crystal system (I have a few objections myself). But based on the recent history of the game and the statements they've made in and related to the announcement, it all seems reasonably logical to me. There is a logical explanation for at least the broad strokes of the changes. But no one really seems interested in that. They just seem to want to beat up the devs over a decision they disapprove of. Transparency doesn't grant that right.
The devs cannot answer questions like "why are you screwing the players" or "why are you making the game pay to win" or "how can you believe these eighteen champions are the most effective champions" because all of those things contain false assumptions. They are all either emotional objections that have no basis in reality or fundamentally erroneous. Even attempting to respond to them in any way can only end up causing more problems. The mindset behind all questions like that cannot lead to any productive dialog.
If we want the devs to respond to us, we have to give them something reasonable to respond to. And for the most part, we aren't doing that.
We are only responding in kind to the BS they are pulling on us. They brought this on themselves, and we aren't being that unreasonable anyhow.
The situation is not symmetric. When the devs communicate badly with you, that hurts you. When you communicate badly with the devs, that also hurts you. In a tit-for-tat war, the players lose.
This may or may not have been covered, but with Blade being added to the basic before his feature comes back out will that mean there is an increased odds in his feature?
YouTuber Jade Jolie reminded me in her video a very important aspect of this change.
What about those that are not Uncollected? Cannot get a new 5* straight off the bat?
This change isn't for good but for the bad. It's really cheap and about money. Very bad move. No one will pay 15k for the same chance for obtaining Hela OR Antman. If you listen to the community, do not push it.
I would personally boycott this. How 'if you want new 5* you have to wait 3 months and you have the same chance for it and old champions' can be good for us, it's ridicoulus. No one asked for this. You want us to gamble with units instead. EA level. Leave it as it is or make 2 featured crystals.
You already dropped out of top 20 games that most people spend on. And don't say that if it's not appealing to me, it can be for others, because all this thread provided negative feedback. None of this champions are worth duping (not counting Hela, Doc Ock and RagnaThor for prestige mostly). Are you crazy? Want another boycott? Seatin already said that he won't spend money for a while on the game because of this change.
@RehctansBew
That is also something I wondered I mean this will be the last featured crystal we get. Might as well end it in a good way to start off the new featured crystal.
Comments
Antman will repeat
They look at all the data. Not just the top Players. Yes, what you're saying is true, but it has nothing to do with what I said. Technically, I'm sure they could find people who use all Champs "effectively" at different points. That's not the point I'm making.
I said they look at all demographics. Meaning they don't just rely on the data from the Top Tier. You would find that the list of Champs used is very acute. They look at others as well. Most likely on an individual basis. Meaning they look at all Champs, and how they perform among those that use them.
Do I know this for fact? No. I do not have access to their data. Can I see this from various comments and the results in the Crystal? Absolutely.
They're not trying to find the most effective. They're trying to not include the ones that performed the worst, and I suspect those results are the ones they're working on buffing, at least starting with Luke and Rulk.
What you're saying is not what I'm saying. I didn't say they can include any Champ because they can find people who use any Champ effectively. That's contrary to what they have said themselves. Clearly they're looking for the ones not doing so well, and that is among the Players that use them.
No don’t go. You must know something we don’t about the selection process
I am entitled to my own opinion based on the information presented. That's not up for debate.
The novelty or "newness" of a champ has very little to do with why the crystal is desirable.
1) The current featured crystal is the best chance you have to awaken/dupe a 5* champ in the game right now.
2) It is your best chance to obtain a likely high damage or high utility 5* champ by using early feedback and deciding if they are the champ you need
3) It is your best chance to target a champ that you have the rank up materials or awakening gem for.
4) Re-runs are icing on the cake because it gives you the second chance to either obtain or awaken the champ you've invested in
5) Let's not forget that for higher tiers, it is possible to target high prestige and boost that prestige with an awakening
5* champs are still the most expensive to obtain and rank up. They are still the most powerful champs that we have access to in the game and duping a champ is one of the fundamental factors in deciding who we rank up in the game. Why do you think the first question out of most people is: "Is your champ awakened?"
You can also look at how people save their shards, they don't save shards for just any random featured champ, they save them for high utility champs that are going to help them in the game. Kabam even acknowledged that implictly by saying 'Yeah we know you are all saving for Blade".
We also look at featured champs based on resources we've acquired, how many of us are sitting on science awakening gems waiting for a decent science champ? Or we have catalysts waiting to expire and we want to use them on a decent 5* champ instead of just more arena fodder.
All of this goes away with the new crystal and the best I can say about it is that it gives us the opportunity at a decent number of middle of the road champs.
It seems obvious to me that their empirical data is not based on top alliances. Some might say that that is how it should be. I'm going to say that sampling bias is not necessarily bad bias. The bottom or beginning players just play the champs that they have, not necessarily the champs that are effective (this is already skewing your data). Top alliances have the chance to place proven and effective defences and to use effective attackers.
Let's say you get financial advice? Do get advice from a grad student, a mainstream consultant and a finance guru? Or do you go straight to the finance guru?
Anyway, I would like to hear from Kabam, and try to ask some constructive questions:
1) What population do you draw your empirical data from? All players/alliances? Top 10%?
2) What is/are the definition(s) of effective? Kills? Damage output?
If you're getting me to pay a 50% premium on the most expensive crystal, make it worth it. I don't necessarily get an increased chance at the champs I want or need, if I can't target high utility or class of the resources that I have.
You're just giving me a better shot at something "new".
I've got some empirical data for you. I just surveyed 36 pages of people complaining about this new step forward for the game, and the future of these crystals look pretty grim. Clock is ticking to do some damage control.
Oh my god, why do you keep saying this? Nobody believes most of these champions on the list are being used by players "to great success." Unless by this you mean these players used some of these champs to great success, given that they were forced to use a garbage champ like cyclops, Antman, Loki, Phoenix , venompool, civil warrior. If there were one time Cyclops managed to take down a Dorm miniboss in AW, without reviving, the "great success" was that it actually happened given that they were using cyclops.
Thanks. Now it's in my head. Haha. Next it'll be Rick Astley. XD
Who the hell uses Ant Man or Venompool for anything other than arena fodder?
"Among the most effective".
Among implies compared to other champs.
Who are these other champs?
Cyclops might be very effective COMPARED TO Hulk Buster and Luke Cage, but he's not an effective tool.
If a car that has a top speed of 20mph is compared to others who can only go a max of 15mph, you can claim that it's "among the most effective", but it's not an effective car.
People can use all the mental gymnastic they want to justify these decisions, but reality says most of these champs aren't "among the most effective" at all.
In fact, they didn't actually "roll back" very many changes. They revised some of them, but every champion that was nerfed was still nerfed, just less in some cases. Every mechanical change they made remained (like the stacking armor break mechanic no one seemed to have noticed), and every attribute players complained about was defaulted to zero but remained in the game (like armor penetration and critical resistance).
And once again, this is entirely irrelevant to what I was saying, because I don't deny any of these changes happening. I said, and apparently have to repeat, again, that even with every single one of those changes there were still many players saying MCOC was doomed either because those changes did not go far enough or were irrelevant.
And while everyone is not like me, I feel comfortable adding you to the list of people who believe that the game is effectively dead if it doesn't specifically address your issues or if everyone doesn't see every game change exactly the same way you do.
The situation is not symmetric. When the devs communicate badly with you, that hurts you. When you communicate badly with the devs, that also hurts you. In a tit-for-tat war, the players lose.
YouTuber Jade Jolie reminded me in her video a very important aspect of this change.
What about those that are not Uncollected? Cannot get a new 5* straight off the bat?
This change isn't for good but for the bad. It's really cheap and about money. Very bad move. No one will pay 15k for the same chance for obtaining Hela OR Antman. If you listen to the community, do not push it.
I would personally boycott this. How 'if you want new 5* you have to wait 3 months and you have the same chance for it and old champions' can be good for us, it's ridicoulus. No one asked for this. You want us to gamble with units instead. EA level. Leave it as it is or make 2 featured crystals.
You already dropped out of top 20 games that most people spend on. And don't say that if it's not appealing to me, it can be for others, because all this thread provided negative feedback. None of this champions are worth duping (not counting Hela, Doc Ock and RagnaThor for prestige mostly). Are you crazy? Want another boycott? Seatin already said that he won't spend money for a while on the game because of this change.
That is also something I wondered I mean this will be the last featured crystal we get. Might as well end it in a good way to start off the new featured crystal.