Mmx1991 wrote: » Regen Immunity Power control Ability Accuracy Reduction Damage Dealers These are the qualities we look for in champs for AQ and AW offense.
DrZola wrote: » Mmx1991 wrote: » Regen Immunity Power control Ability Accuracy Reduction Damage Dealers These are the qualities we look for in champs for AQ and AW offense. This is a valid point and responsive to @DNA3000 above. On that list, apart from the featureds, there are very few of the attributes listed. And for what there is, there are at least several champs not on the list who do it far better. Take, for example Regen: included in the 18 are Cable, Beast, Punisher, Venompool, Mordo, Doc Ock, Phoenix and Nebula, all of whom have some form of Regen. Apart from Phoenix, I would wager that most of the community doesn’t think of any those champs in the top 3 they think of when they think of a Regen champ. Or take Immunity: unless I’m wrong, Nebula is the sole bleed immune there. Beast and AV have some bleed resistance but are not immune. Nebula is also poison immune, along with Ronan (yuck!) which about rounds that one out. For power control, there’s Hawkeye and CW and Doc Ock, with a little from Nebula and Punisher, but HE and CW are really the most reliable in the list. Damage dealers. Hmmm...Phoenix. Maybe HE. Maybe Ock. But overall not much. Ability accuracy reduction is similarly not well-represented. Feel free to correct if I’ve missed something. Not intended to be comprehensive and working from memory. Dr. Zola
linux wrote: » DNA3000 wrote: » linux wrote: » Regardless, saving 90k shards for a less than 1/4 chance to get the champ you want (when you really only want one from the featured crystal) is going to lead most people to miss and be unhappy. The vast overwhelming majority of public complaints about the featured 5* crystal on both these forums and the reddit seem to me to be not that the player missed, but that out of all the tries for featured they got nothing but "garbage" champions instead, making the value of the crystal perceived to be worse than just pulling basics. So if you are focusing on "unhappy players" I think it is far more important to focus not on the chance to "win," but rather on the chance to "lose." This crystal seems to have a lower chance to pull champions most would consider garbage champs repeatedly. I'm looking at that list ... and to be honest, I don't agree with you about many of them. CW, Ant-Man, Thor JF (I have her duped, and yes she's staying at r1) ... those are pretty bad. I'd also be disappointed by Cyclops, Sentry, Loki, and Ronan given where I am in terms of progression, though I'll grant that CW and Cyclops would have uses if I didn't already have a deep bench of 5*s. But I'd find them very disappointing (I say that from experience, as I have all all the above except Sentry and Loki; AM is duped 3x).
DNA3000 wrote: » linux wrote: » Regardless, saving 90k shards for a less than 1/4 chance to get the champ you want (when you really only want one from the featured crystal) is going to lead most people to miss and be unhappy. The vast overwhelming majority of public complaints about the featured 5* crystal on both these forums and the reddit seem to me to be not that the player missed, but that out of all the tries for featured they got nothing but "garbage" champions instead, making the value of the crystal perceived to be worse than just pulling basics. So if you are focusing on "unhappy players" I think it is far more important to focus not on the chance to "win," but rather on the chance to "lose." This crystal seems to have a lower chance to pull champions most would consider garbage champs repeatedly.
linux wrote: » Regardless, saving 90k shards for a less than 1/4 chance to get the champ you want (when you really only want one from the featured crystal) is going to lead most people to miss and be unhappy.
BigPoppaCBONE wrote: » bradshaw84 wrote: » I guess the radio silence from kabam on this subject now means we’ve reached the inevitable stage 3 of their approach to customer service. 1. Drop the bomb, try and make it sound like they’re doing it for us, insult our intelligence a little (a lot). 2. Dig themselves in deeper by sending Mike out to the wolves and have him attempt to answer questions that quite frankly they cannot answer to the satisfaction of the customers without digging themselves in deeper. 3. Let the community duke it out on their own, maybe even fight amongst themselves a little, whilst remaining quiet...if they wait long enough everybody will shut up and get in line (12.0 aside). You left out the part in 3 where the thread stops bubbling to the top with new posts making it both harder to find and easier to ignore.
bradshaw84 wrote: » I guess the radio silence from kabam on this subject now means we’ve reached the inevitable stage 3 of their approach to customer service. 1. Drop the bomb, try and make it sound like they’re doing it for us, insult our intelligence a little (a lot). 2. Dig themselves in deeper by sending Mike out to the wolves and have him attempt to answer questions that quite frankly they cannot answer to the satisfaction of the customers without digging themselves in deeper. 3. Let the community duke it out on their own, maybe even fight amongst themselves a little, whilst remaining quiet...if they wait long enough everybody will shut up and get in line (12.0 aside).
linux wrote: » I can understand the argument that the featured crystal would be curated with champs where none of them will be a disappointment -- I just don't think this fills that bill. It's true that it left out HB and IP, but it left out lots of good champs and included some which are not very useful.
Ja1970 wrote: » Realy good change to the 5* featured crystal, this needed to happen
DrZola wrote: » Mmx1991 wrote: » Regen Immunity Power control Ability Accuracy Reduction Damage Dealers These are the qualities we look for in champs for AQ and AW offense. This is a valid point and responsive to @DNA3000 above.
Hubris_hater wrote: » Bobbie_Drake wrote: » With 120k shards saved up now since the 2nd iceman opening I realize I should be able to dupe blade with the gem but after that my chances of getting a hero I really want have decreased from 20-25% to about 4%. Blade featured crystal is still the same mate, so you should be good
Bobbie_Drake wrote: » With 120k shards saved up now since the 2nd iceman opening I realize I should be able to dupe blade with the gem but after that my chances of getting a hero I really want have decreased from 20-25% to about 4%.
DNA3000 wrote: » DrZola wrote: » Mmx1991 wrote: » Regen Immunity Power control Ability Accuracy Reduction Damage Dealers These are the qualities we look for in champs for AQ and AW offense. This is a valid point and responsive to @DNA3000 above. I don't agree it responds to the point I made in the post I believe you are referencing. The point I made was that players were not making statements or asking questions that the devs are in a reasonable position to respond to. But this post (specifically the first half you are quoting) essentially states that there are much better champions for various purposes than the ones the devs curated for the first crystal. @Kabam Miike already responded to this assertion. He said that the intent of the crystal was not, and was never specified to be intended to, include the best champions. He said that the intent of curation was to exclude the worst champions, as they datamined them to be. So when you point out there are better champions, the response is "yes there are." There's nothing more they can say about that beyond what @Kabam Miike said. Having said that, and not being privvy to Kabam's datamining, I decided to write out the champions I would have deleted as being the bottom of performance to respond to @linux and it does give me pause. There are fewer "squibs" in the curated list than there are in the basic crystal on a percentage basis. But I'm not sure there are enough fewer to justify the featured crystal shard cost. What I think the bottom is and what Kabam has datamined the bottom to be is of course almost certainly different, but it does raise questions for me about precisely which metrics Kabam is focusing on when it comes to underperformance or effectiveness. I do now have a question that Kabam should be able to answer. Without giving away the actual data, I would like to know how many champions were deemed "not effective" or "less effective" and thus excluded from the curated list. @Kabam Miike is that a question that Kabam can answer? Out of the 84 or so basic champions that could have been added to the new featured, how many are NOT going to be added given the current state of the game (i.e. I assume Red Hulk and Luke Cage were two of the champions excluded, although they could become eligible after they are changed as a result of the beta test changes coming up).
AnotherPool wrote: » If you are player, will you spend your precious shards on this craaaaaaaap?
This is just insane and ridiculous, if you can't see now, you will see from your game statistics in May and realize how stupid this change is.
DrZola wrote: » You miss my point. I believe you commented that the complaints were not helpful to the devs.
DNA3000 wrote: » AnotherPool wrote: » If you are player, will you spend your precious shards on this craaaaaaaap? 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.
DNA3000 wrote: » DrZola wrote: » You miss my point. I believe you commented that the complaints were not helpful to the devs. I never specifically made that comment, and if at any point I implied it that was not my intent. What I said was that in the context of transparency and dialog, if the players want the devs to be responsive, the players need to make statements or ask question that can reasonably be responded to. If players want to suggest that the crystal would be better received if the devs changed the focus from excluding the worst to including the best, that's entirely their prerogative. But that's formulating a suggestion, not requesting a dialog specifically and outside the bounds of the post I made in this context.
Gargamesh wrote: » DNA3000 wrote: » AnotherPool wrote: » If you are player, will you spend your precious shards on this craaaaaaaap? 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. Dude, I don't know what game you are talking about but mcoc needed and was fixed big time after 12.0 and some player, like me, never really came back. I went from hardcore gamer whale to if the Kabam HQ burns down I'll bring popcorn. These days I'm playing occasionally only and the reason for that is because patch 12.0 proved how Kabam gives a flying f*ck about their community. And that's ok, takes two for a deal...and I'm free to walk away, which I did. So don't pretend 12.0 didn't effect the game, the community, the company...12.0 had a huge impact, as you can tell by how Kabam freaked and tried to save their sh*t...all of a sudden they even started communicating things with us
DrZola wrote: » DNA3000 wrote: » DrZola wrote: » You miss my point. I believe you commented that the complaints were not helpful to the devs. I never specifically made that comment, and if at any point I implied it that was not my intent. What I said was that in the context of transparency and dialog, if the players want the devs to be responsive, the players need to make statements or ask question that can reasonably be responded to. If players want to suggest that the crystal would be better received if the devs changed the focus from excluding the worst to including the best, that's entirely their prerogative. But that's formulating a suggestion, not requesting a dialog specifically and outside the bounds of the post I made in this context. And in my opinion that type of comment can be (and should be) responded to by the devs—to wit, why not put a more balanced set of champs in the featured crystal based on attributes x, y and z? There’s allegedly a lot of thought that went into which champs were included—how about a little insight into what the brain trust thought was important and why? Further, I made no suggestion that only the best champs be included; rather, I noted that the few champs in the 18 weren’t close to being best in class on any of the attributes Mmx listed (which I did sign onto as being a reasonable set to consider when deciding which champs to include). Ultimately, if they want us to believe they’ve done a lot of rigorous analysis of their empirical data, they need to do a lot more than have Miike standing around attesting to the wonders of New Xavier School Cyke. Even noobs don’t believe that. Dr. Zola
Kabam Miike wrote: » “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.”
