Jump to content


antiduplicators are actually much worse than previously thought


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
47 replies to this topic

will0hlep #1 Posted 19 December 2019 - 04:59 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 10993 battles
  • 61
  • [TD_UK] TD_UK
  • Member since:
    10-19-2017
to use anti duplicators you have to select a tier, collection and type

Edited by will0hlep, 19 December 2019 - 05:00 PM.


xx984 #2 Posted 19 December 2019 - 05:17 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 65829 battles
  • 3,716
  • [HOOT] HOOT
  • Member since:
    08-11-2013


BravelyRanAway #3 Posted 19 December 2019 - 05:27 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 24709 battles
  • 12,481
  • [H_I_T] H_I_T
  • Member since:
    12-29-2010

View Postwill0hlep, on 19 December 2019 - 03:59 PM, said:

to use anti duplicators you have to select a tier, collection and type

That does make sense....don't you think?....otherwise how would it know what you want?



arjun69 #4 Posted 19 December 2019 - 05:29 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 106133 battles
  • 849
  • [ARJ] ARJ
  • Member since:
    11-29-2012

for instance i would like to have a random level 5 for 360 - no duplicate.

if it is as described i would need 1080. thats very bad imo

 



Homer_J #5 Posted 19 December 2019 - 05:55 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Moderator
  • 33157 battles
  • 36,664
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View Postwill0hlep, on 19 December 2019 - 03:59 PM, said:

to use anti duplicators you have to select a tier, collection and type

 

That's exactly as I thought. Not much worse, not even slightly worse.



MeetriX #6 Posted 19 December 2019 - 09:12 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 24895 battles
  • 4,165
  • [_ACE] _ACE
  • Member since:
    08-12-2012

I had no use of them at all.

Can I sell them?



xtrem3x #7 Posted 19 December 2019 - 10:17 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 36115 battles
  • 1,947
  • [EFE-X] EFE-X
  • Member since:
    01-03-2013

View Postarjun69, on 19 December 2019 - 04:29 PM, said:

for instance i would like to have a random level 5 for 360 - no duplicate.

if it is as described i would need 1080. thats very bad imo

 

 

If you only need 1 level 5 to complete a collection you wouldn't select any random level 5 for 360. You would select the one you want and then get angry after it generates 5 duplicates in a row.

This stops the part where you get angry having 5 duplicates in a row



Spurtung #8 Posted 19 December 2019 - 11:06 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 76259 battles
  • 7,206
  • [WG_PT] WG_PT
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View Postxtrem3x, on 19 December 2019 - 09:17 PM, said:

 

If you only need 1 level 5 to complete a collection you wouldn't select any random level 5 for 360. You would select the one you want and then get angry after it generates 5 duplicates in a row.

This stops the part where you get angry having 5 duplicates in a row

 

Why exactly not? A random lvl 5, when there's only one possible outcome, would get you precisely the one you needed.

 

OP is right, this system is some serious BS, a random lvl 5 with no duplicator should be doable, end of. We only get 17 antiduplicator consumables anyway, so they shouldn't have further restrictions.



yaourti #9 Posted 19 December 2019 - 11:31 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 5964 battles
  • 1,863
  • [DUMBA] DUMBA
  • Member since:
    04-03-2013

View PostHomer_J, on 19 December 2019 - 04:55 PM, said:

 

That's exactly as I thought. Not much worse, not even slightly worse.


WG staff opinion is WG staff opinion.



xtrem3x #10 Posted 19 December 2019 - 11:38 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 36115 battles
  • 1,947
  • [EFE-X] EFE-X
  • Member since:
    01-03-2013

View PostSpurtung, on 19 December 2019 - 10:06 PM, said:

 

Why exactly not? A random lvl 5, when there's only one possible outcome, would get you precisely the one you needed.

 

OP is right, this system is some serious BS, a random lvl 5 with no duplicator should be doable, end of. We only get 17 antiduplicator consumables anyway, so they shouldn't have further restrictions.

 

It's not designed to save you loads and loads of shards using it on random... They're a company wanting to make money so they hope people will buy more boxes!

It's designed to stop the negative feedback people gave the last 2 years when getting duplicates constantly even when specifying what they needed to the extent that it took any & all enjoyment away.

 

This is a typical case where no matter what you give, people always want more. It's best just to not give anything to somebody like you :child:



yaourti #11 Posted 19 December 2019 - 11:42 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 5964 battles
  • 1,863
  • [DUMBA] DUMBA
  • Member since:
    04-03-2013
If I want a random tier five, I should be able to spend an anti-duplicator thingy to get a random tier five I haven't already got.

Spurtung #12 Posted 19 December 2019 - 11:56 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 76259 battles
  • 7,206
  • [WG_PT] WG_PT
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View Postxtrem3x, on 19 December 2019 - 10:38 PM, said:

It's not designed to save you loads and loads of shards using it on random... They're a company wanting to make money so they hope people will buy more boxes!

It's designed to stop the negative feedback people gave the last 2 years when getting duplicates constantly even when specifying what they needed to the extent that it took any & all enjoyment away.

 

This is a typical case where no matter what you give, people always want more. It's best just to not give anything to somebody like you :child:

 

Well, then they shouldn't restrict antiduplicators. As it is, they can keep that, I actually prefer getting duplicates than this BS.

 

I mean:

- either spend 1080 per build and never get any duplicates or

- spend 360 per build on randoms a limited amount of times

 

As it is, no, thanks.


Edited by Spurtung, 20 December 2019 - 12:01 AM.


Nethraniel #13 Posted 19 December 2019 - 11:59 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 15264 battles
  • 2,671
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    05-30-2012

View Postyaourti, on 19 December 2019 - 11:31 PM, said:


WG staff opinion is WG staff opinion.

He is not WG staff, he is volunteer forum moderator, and a player.



BravelyRanAway #14 Posted 20 December 2019 - 12:04 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 24709 battles
  • 12,481
  • [H_I_T] H_I_T
  • Member since:
    12-29-2010

View PostNethraniel, on 19 December 2019 - 10:59 PM, said:

He is not WG staff, he is volunteer forum moderator, and a player.

You can smell the jelly off him.



yaourti #15 Posted 20 December 2019 - 12:04 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 5964 battles
  • 1,863
  • [DUMBA] DUMBA
  • Member since:
    04-03-2013

View PostNethraniel, on 19 December 2019 - 10:59 PM, said:

He is not WG staff, he is volunteer forum moderator, and a player.

 

Sorry, trying to use respectable language to avoid a perma ban.



Spurtung #16 Posted 20 December 2019 - 12:07 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 76259 battles
  • 7,206
  • [WG_PT] WG_PT
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View Postyaourti, on 19 December 2019 - 10:31 PM, said:

View PostHomer_J, on 19 December 2019 - 04:55 PM, said:

That's exactly as I thought. Not much worse, not even slightly worse.

WG staff opinion is WG staff opinion.

 



TheJ4ckal #17 Posted 20 December 2019 - 12:37 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 2664 battles
  • 52
  • Member since:
    11-01-2014

You know the reason randoms are cheaper is because of exactly that, it is random and you dont know what you will get?

Oh, you want exactly what you want and you want it cheap?

Ooooh that nasty games company, who's game do they think this is!!!



malachi6 #18 Posted 20 December 2019 - 12:42 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 51289 battles
  • 4,387
  • Member since:
    04-14-2011

View Postyaourti, on 20 December 2019 - 12:04 AM, said:

 

Sorry, trying to use respectable language to avoid a perma ban.

 

You could use critical and logical thinking and have no issues at all.  


Edited by malachi6, 20 December 2019 - 12:43 AM.


Orkbert #19 Posted 20 December 2019 - 12:54 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 28798 battles
  • 2,288
  • Member since:
    08-29-2013
Given that the OP chose to claim that the anti-duplicators "are much worse than previously thought" it would be nice if he were to explain why he initially thought they were bad to begin with.

yaourti #20 Posted 20 December 2019 - 01:06 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 5964 battles
  • 1,863
  • [DUMBA] DUMBA
  • Member since:
    04-03-2013

View Postmalachi6, on 19 December 2019 - 11:42 PM, said:

 

You could use critical and logical thinking and have no issues at all.  


Homer J thinks it's great because he works for WG, or alternatively, Homer J works for WG because he backs the company line- critical and logical enough? Or just trolling?

Edit: your statement is so meaningless really.


Edited by yaourti, 20 December 2019 - 01:13 AM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users