HULK_BREAK wrote: » 3 for 1? seriously?
Snake_Eyes wrote: » Kabam Miike wrote: » This is definitely for more end game players. If the idea of taking a chance with 3 Catalysts to get one is iffy to you, then you're probably not at a place where this would make sense for you to use! There is no place on the world that this would make sense to anyone other than Kabam. I’m not trying to be funny or disrespectful but why on earth would someone give up 3T4CC for 1 random class catalyst crystal. This literally makes no sense even for end game players.
Kabam Miike wrote: » This is definitely for more end game players. If the idea of taking a chance with 3 Catalysts to get one is iffy to you, then you're probably not at a place where this would make sense for you to use!
Shrimkins wrote: » Snake_Eyes wrote: » Kabam Miike wrote: » This is definitely for more end game players. If the idea of taking a chance with 3 Catalysts to get one is iffy to you, then you're probably not at a place where this would make sense for you to use! There is no place on the world that this would make sense to anyone other than Kabam. I’m not trying to be funny or disrespectful but why on earth would someone give up 3T4CC for 1 random class catalyst crystal. This literally makes no sense even for end game players. You could be like me and have no mutants worth ranking. I have r5 x-23, gambit, iceman, wolvy, psylocke, cable, and AA. I also have a r3 5* storm, NC, and a r4 5* AA. I have zero mutant champs that are even worth consideration for ranking. Any champ I would rank, would be to simply spend the build-up of mutant t4cc that I have. I could sell 3 to try and get a mystic or cosmic since I have fewer of those. It's no loss for me since I wasn't going to use them anyway.
IsThisLoss wrote: » Shrimkins wrote: » Snake_Eyes wrote: » Kabam Miike wrote: » This is definitely for more end game players. If the idea of taking a chance with 3 Catalysts to get one is iffy to you, then you're probably not at a place where this would make sense for you to use! There is no place on the world that this would make sense to anyone other than Kabam. I’m not trying to be funny or disrespectful but why on earth would someone give up 3T4CC for 1 random class catalyst crystal. This literally makes no sense even for end game players. You could be like me and have no mutants worth ranking. I have r5 x-23, gambit, iceman, wolvy, psylocke, cable, and AA. I also have a r3 5* storm, NC, and a r4 5* AA. I have zero mutant champs that are even worth consideration for ranking. Any champ I would rank, would be to simply spend the build-up of mutant t4cc that I have. I could sell 3 to try and get a mystic or cosmic since I have fewer of those. It's no loss for me since I wasn't going to use them anyway. 3 for 1 bruh.. lol you will still need them in the future they should've just increased the amount u can hold
shchong2 wrote: » mostlyharmlessn wrote: » Kabam Miike wrote: » This is definitely for more end game players. If the idea of taking a chance with 3 Catalysts to get one is iffy to you, then you're probably not at a place where this would make sense for you to use! As someone that has ranked up champs to avoid expiring cats, I think this is a great idea. I am by no means an end game player, but I have been in the situation where I have had to face the situation of - spending 5 t1a and 4 t4b's to avoid allowing 2 t4cc's to expire and end up R3'in a 5* I had no intention of ranking up past r2. I would have happily sold 3 of the t4cc's to avoid spending the t1a's and t4b's. @mostlyharmlessn , Glad you like it Pls do share with us once you tried the 3:1 RNG Do share with you, but trading in your expiring 3 T4cc do you manage to get the 1 T4cc of the class you need, or do the RNG give you one of the class that you are also overflowing? Would like to feel your experience since I won't do it myself Cheers and all the best!
mostlyharmlessn wrote: » Kabam Miike wrote: » This is definitely for more end game players. If the idea of taking a chance with 3 Catalysts to get one is iffy to you, then you're probably not at a place where this would make sense for you to use! As someone that has ranked up champs to avoid expiring cats, I think this is a great idea. I am by no means an end game player, but I have been in the situation where I have had to face the situation of - spending 5 t1a and 4 t4b's to avoid allowing 2 t4cc's to expire and end up R3'in a 5* I had no intention of ranking up past r2. I would have happily sold 3 of the t4cc's to avoid spending the t1a's and t4b's.
DrZola wrote: » Fallencircus wrote: » Kabam Miike wrote: » This is definitely for more end game players. If the idea of taking a chance with 3 Catalysts to get one is iffy to you, then you're probably not at a place where this would make sense for you to use! As an end game player I can whole-heartedly dispute that statement. This is a horrible deal. End game players are overflowing with t4cc. This is just another way to stick it to us it seems. With how absolutely horrible the game has been performing recently I would think that you would start introducing things that are over the top, not whatever this is. 100% agree. This feels...wrong. It’s the typical scenario of one step forward and three steps back with this game. I’m not disputing the validity of RNG in MCoC, but why should players be penalized 3:1 for poor results generated by the game? No matter how overflowing you may be, it’s a double slap in the face...and then you are subject to the whims of RNG all over again. Dr. Zola
Fallencircus wrote: » Kabam Miike wrote: » This is definitely for more end game players. If the idea of taking a chance with 3 Catalysts to get one is iffy to you, then you're probably not at a place where this would make sense for you to use! As an end game player I can whole-heartedly dispute that statement. This is a horrible deal. End game players are overflowing with t4cc. This is just another way to stick it to us it seems. With how absolutely horrible the game has been performing recently I would think that you would start introducing things that are over the top, not whatever this is.
Austin555555 wrote: » Snake_Eyes wrote: » Kabam Miike wrote: » This is definitely for more end game players. If the idea of taking a chance with 3 Catalysts to get one is iffy to you, then you're probably not at a place where this would make sense for you to use! There is no place on the world that this would make sense to anyone other than Kabam. I’m not trying to be funny or disrespectful but why on earth would someone give up 3T4CC for 1 random class catalyst crystal. This literally makes no sense even for end game players. It makes more sence to trade 1 for 1. No matter where you are in the game
RagamugginGunner wrote: » Kabam Miike wrote: » This is definitely for more end game players. If the idea of taking a chance with 3 Catalysts to get one is iffy to you, then you're probably not at a place where this would make sense for you to use! It's actually not for end game players because we have all the t4cc we need. personally, even after opening a bunch of crystals to r5 Starky, I still have over 30 full t4cc crystals and over 1100 frag crystals. IMO, the main people who are goin to go for this deal are mid game players gambling their minimal number of t4cc on the 20% chance they get the class they need for that r4 champ. 80% of the time they're going to be hugely disappointed not only because they didn't get the class they wanted, but also because they don't have a plethora of t4cc to throw away.
Barclays3377 wrote: » Kabam Miike wrote: » This is definitely for more end game players. If the idea of taking a chance with 3 Catalysts to get one is iffy to you, then you're probably not at a place where this would make sense for you to use! WOW Mike you wrote it... Can you just say this game for people with money. this is discrimination for real. DISCRIMINATION men. Sorry to be direct
hephaestus wrote: » I bet I'll pull Ironman 10 times before I pull Blade.
DNA3000 wrote: » hephaestus wrote: » I bet I'll pull Ironman 10 times before I pull Blade. It is possible, but I am willing to take that bet.
Thought50 wrote: » 1 to 1 and make it random (as long as we don’t get the same class back). Now that in my opinion is a good idea.
hephaestus wrote: » DNA3000 wrote: » hephaestus wrote: » I bet I'll pull Ironman 10 times before I pull Blade. It is possible, but I am willing to take that bet. I've already pulled him 3 times ... still no Blade. Thought50 wrote: » 1 to 1 and make it random (as long as we don’t get the same class back). Now that in my opinion is a good idea. That would effectively be a "pick your class system." Just keep trading whatever you want until you get what you want.
DNA3000 wrote: » DrZola wrote: » Fallencircus wrote: » Kabam Miike wrote: » This is definitely for more end game players. If the idea of taking a chance with 3 Catalysts to get one is iffy to you, then you're probably not at a place where this would make sense for you to use! As an end game player I can whole-heartedly dispute that statement. This is a horrible deal. End game players are overflowing with t4cc. This is just another way to stick it to us it seems. With how absolutely horrible the game has been performing recently I would think that you would start introducing things that are over the top, not whatever this is. 100% agree. This feels...wrong. It’s the typical scenario of one step forward and three steps back with this game. I’m not disputing the validity of RNG in MCoC, but why should players be penalized 3:1 for poor results generated by the game? No matter how overflowing you may be, it’s a double slap in the face...and then you are subject to the whims of RNG all over again. Dr. Zola However you want to characterize it, the "penalty" of resources expiring is a consequence of inventory limits. The limits themselves imply that there's a penalty for not using resources beyond the inventory limit. Players are assuming that anything they acquire in-game is somehow something they permanently "own" and when the game "takes it away" that's a penalty, but that's simply false. The value of the trade isn't properly compared to the value of the catalysts going in, but rather to the enforced by design perishable nature of resources above the inventory limit. You can say it is a slap in the face that the game forces you to give up three for one, but it isn't forcing you do that. It is allowing you to take three things that are about to have zero value and trade them for something that has higher than zero value. If you're actually trading three catalysts that have actual value to you for the chance at one catalyst with actual value to you, then that's dumb and the player that does that has no one to blame but themselves. It is a slap in the face, but it is a self-inflicted one.
DrZola wrote: » DNA3000 wrote: » DrZola wrote: » Fallencircus wrote: » Kabam Miike wrote: » This is definitely for more end game players. If the idea of taking a chance with 3 Catalysts to get one is iffy to you, then you're probably not at a place where this would make sense for you to use! As an end game player I can whole-heartedly dispute that statement. This is a horrible deal. End game players are overflowing with t4cc. This is just another way to stick it to us it seems. With how absolutely horrible the game has been performing recently I would think that you would start introducing things that are over the top, not whatever this is. 100% agree. This feels...wrong. It’s the typical scenario of one step forward and three steps back with this game. I’m not disputing the validity of RNG in MCoC, but why should players be penalized 3:1 for poor results generated by the game? No matter how overflowing you may be, it’s a double slap in the face...and then you are subject to the whims of RNG all over again. Dr. Zola However you want to characterize it, the "penalty" of resources expiring is a consequence of inventory limits. The limits themselves imply that there's a penalty for not using resources beyond the inventory limit. Players are assuming that anything they acquire in-game is somehow something they permanently "own" and when the game "takes it away" that's a penalty, but that's simply false. The value of the trade isn't properly compared to the value of the catalysts going in, but rather to the enforced by design perishable nature of resources above the inventory limit. You can say it is a slap in the face that the game forces you to give up three for one, but it isn't forcing you do that. It is allowing you to take three things that are about to have zero value and trade them for something that has higher than zero value. If you're actually trading three catalysts that have actual value to you for the chance at one catalyst with actual value to you, then that's dumb and the player that does that has no one to blame but themselves. It is a slap in the face, but it is a self-inflicted one. While I understand the logic of it, I’m still put off by the mechanics. The very reason there is a need for this in the first place is an artificial cap on the amount of items that can be held in inventory. Why do cats expire? Because Kabam decided they should, like they are tomatoes or something. Why can’t some things be consumed before they expire? Because the other things you need in order to use all the perishable things you have aren’t readily available in game, partly because the folks who manage the overall in game economy have done so in an ad hoc fashion. Hence—rotting tomatoes. And the trade isn’t for things with > zero value in all instances. In fact, for many it is a trade for something with the mere potential for > zero value. That’s where the slap in the face comes in...you’ve been slapped by RNG once already and your fate is once again in the hands of RNG. I’m sure some will be happy with the results. But many will not. Dr. Zola