Merging Chips Suggestion

[davidschlebusch_6020359]

As you already know, all it takes to merge to a higher level chip it requires 5 of the lower level chips which effectively gives you a 100% chance. This can be seen when merging your 5 lower level chips to give you your higher level chip.

Now, what if we could take 4 lower level chips to give us a higher level chip at a success rate of 80%

The way it could scale down is by the following:

5 chips = 100% success rate
4 chips = 80% success rate
3 chips = 60% success rate
2 chips = 40% success rate (Read note)*
1 chip = 20% success rate (Read note)*

*Note: With the low requirement of how many chips it takes to get to the higher chip , there will be a higher failure rate even though the % appears to be fairly high.

The other way it could scale down is by the following:

5 chips = 100% success rate
4 chips = 75% success rate
3 chips = 50% success rate
2 chips = 25% success rate
1 chip = 10% success rate

IMO using 1 chip to merge to a higher level chip shouldn't be implemented or should ultimately have an extremely low success rate/ very high failure rate.

This is an idea that can be worked around and could potentially give us higher level chips 'quicker', of course with the chance of giving us higher level chips at a slower rate. It all depends on how lucky you are!

PS: I'm aware of the current problems with the game and would rather have them fixed first.. but we need some new things that we could discuss about.

[kaisim_2492829]

[...]
PS: I'm aware of the current problems with the game and would rather have them fixed first.. but we need some new things that we could discuss about.

"not getting new things" is one of the current problems we all would like to see "fixed" first lol


... and about your chip gambling idea, i dont like it. sorry.
when it comes to implementing new things or my wish list of desirable stuff, a new way how to gamble chips is not what pops into my mind at all.

[davidschlebusch_6020359]

"not getting new things" is one of the current problems we all would like to see "fixed" first lol


... and about your chip gambling idea, i dont like it. sorry.
when it comes to implementing new things or my wish list of desirable stuff, a new way how to gamble chips is not what pops into my mind at all.

By saying that it is a chip gambling idea by having a success rate attached to less chips to still give you a higher chip level, do you also say that you are saying that sanctifications and stars is also a gamble?
As there is already a gamble in the game there is nothing wrong with giving it a bit more of a gamble. As I have heard from other sources, chip levels in some cases go to level 15 while others say they go to level 10. The reason I like this idea is because for all of us INCLUDING the top coiners it is going to be immensely difficult to get our chips to level 10 without winning large quantities of them from the casino which we know is extremely rare to almost impossible. IMO, without this, I don't feel that in the history of this game will we be able to have a reasonable source of level 10 chips and beyond. Chips are one of the few things with high levels that can make you very strong!

I feel that you need to emphasise on the fact that you don't like it, as I'm not understanding where you come from by saying that you don't like it.

[steveshort59_4035466]

Why add more luck to the game when there is already has such a huge influence on the game? They need to implement protection on odds in some places like gaining stars and saints then that would be an improvement. For example i have used over 200 blue medals trying to get alc from 7 to 8. there needs to be a fail safe after x amount of fails for each star level you automatically get the next star, it can scale relative to the chance but it is ridiculous how chance affects the server. on my server i have had the best luck with pen so i am way ahead in heroic and quest in fact i have been at the limit it will let me go in quest and as i get spots open in inventory for plans i advance in heroic. A few others have had good luck with adam(my adam refuses to get his first moon) and flav so they can beat me in pvp but are multiple bosses behind me in heroic. All because of the reliance on chance and now you want to add more chance to the game hahahaha. and what would you think if there was a glitch in this that allowed one of your competitors on your server to be able to get really high gems bet that would not make u happy. This game needs to go away from chance and towards skill give us more choices and less chances and the game will be better

[davidschlebusch_6020359]

Why add more luck to the game when there is already has such a huge influence on the game? They need to implement protection on odds in some places like gaining stars and saints then that would be an improvement. For example i have used over 200 blue medals trying to get alc from 7 to 8. there needs to be a fail safe after x amount of fails for each star level you automatically get the next star, it can scale relative to the chance but it is ridiculous how chance affects the server. on my server i have had the best luck with pen so i am way ahead in heroic and quest in fact i have been at the limit it will let me go in quest and as i get spots open in inventory for plans i advance in heroic. A few others have had good luck with adam(my adam refuses to get his first moon) and flav so they can beat me in pvp but are multiple bosses behind me in heroic. All because of the reliance on chance and now you want to add more chance to the game hahahaha. and what would you think if there was a glitch in this that allowed one of your competitors on your server to be able to get really high gems bet that would not make u happy. This game needs to go away from chance and towards skill give us more choices and less chances and the game will be better

Steve, I hear where you come from, I really do...

Try consider this for a moment, in my original post when I was demonstrating how the success rate could scale downwards, I included the fact that there would still be a chance at getting your 5 chips to merge for a 100% success rate.
For me, I would be someone to take the chance at 3 or 4 chips to merge to a higher one with a chance to fail, however, you and all other players who disapprove of this idea will be able to take the chance AND be able to build your chips up to 5 to have that 100% success rate.

In your post, you talk about how Tynon need to implement protection on odds in some places like gaining stars and saints and how it would be an improvement. Well, what if I had to tell you that they have already done that!!!
When gaining cards to saint up, you already have the opportunity to build your cards so that it will give you 100% success rate. When starring up, they protect you by not having the chance at losing a star that you have already gained. If I remember correctly, it used be that if you fail you lose one or two stars!

No matter what game you play, there will always be somewhere where you have some kind of form of chance or luck, you are never going to be able to eradicate that. By presenting this idea to you, I have given you more choices and maintained the possibility for you to have less choices by giving you an opportunity at 100% success rate.

[kaisim_2492829]

i didnt mean to hurt your feelings by calling it a "gamble" but it really is a gamble and based on luck. sancts and stars are completely unrelated and out of the question.
now to respond to your personal attack, all i tried to say was that i dont like the idea in the first place and like to add that the higher the chip is, the less i would even dare trying. just thinking about a 90% chance to loose a lv8 chip terrifies me.
also to get things changed in the game there needs to be a profit of some sort in it for ucool that i fail to see in this as well. unless you would for example add an option to increase your chance in gambling a higher chip by sacrifice of gems... in that case you could just increase the casino chances on chips


EDIT PS:
about your sancts and stars issue: sancts you where not able to remove 1 by one but able to remove all at once. at the same time as they introduced "stacking" to raise your chance they also implemented single sanct removal.
at the same time they introduced in not loosing stars when sancting they also introduced transfer, additional purchase options (CW for example), significantly higher fail rate, etc all to raise the sale of gems by increasing your desire for more medals and cards

[service_8572198]

Nothing in the game is random a gamble or based on luck, everything is predetermined

[kaisim_2492829]

Nothing in the game is random a gamble or based on luck, everything is predetermined

wouldnt that depend on how you define the point of predetermination?

example: your guild chest for example is randomly predetermined when you click on it (while you clicked on it, it calculated a random reward that you will be given, no matter which card you when uncover).

[Riot]

I rather like this idea of % chance to fail using lower chip count!

So long as that look ahead bug works on it too. Which it should.

[davidschlebusch_6020359]

i didnt mean to hurt your feelings by calling it a "gamble" but it really is a gamble and based on luck. sancts and stars are completely unrelated and out of the question.
now to respond to your personal attack, all i tried to say was that i dont like the idea in the first place and like to add that the higher the chip is, the less i would even dare trying. just thinking about a 90% chance to loose a lv8 chip terrifies me.
also to get things changed in the game there needs to be a profit of some sort in it for ucool that i fail to see in this as well. unless you would for example add an option to increase your chance in gambling a higher chip by sacrifice of gems... in that case you could just increase the casino chances on chips


EDIT PS:
about your sancts and stars issue: sancts you where not able to remove 1 by one but able to remove all at once. at the same time as they introduced "stacking" to raise your chance they also implemented single sanct removal.
at the same time they introduced in not loosing stars when sancting they also introduced transfer, additional purchase options (CW for example), significantly higher fail rate, etc all to raise the sale of gems by increasing your desire for more medals and cards

Sweetheart don't worry you didn't hurt my feelings one bit

There is no gamble as it is predetermined which service did say...
Sancts and stars are related to my suggestion, or I am trying to make it related because they work on the same concept which I am trying to get you to understand.

Look, I wasn't attacking you out of anything personal, all I was trying to do is understand where you come from by saying you don't like my OP. As a matter of fact you still haven't told me why you don't like my OP. You can't say you don't like something with out substantiating your statement.

I understand you wouldn't dare try to merge a chip with a high failure rate, which is why when I proposed my suggestion to you I also gave the opportunity of still being able to collect a full 5 chips with a 100% success rate. Personally I would collect at least 5 chips if I am going anything higher than lvl 6 chips! However, as I get lvl 4 chips almost daily from labs (not good enough in banish unfortunately :P ) I wouldn't have a problem with merging them with a chance of failure!

Well well, you just gave the way Tynon / uCool can make profit for this! As with sancts you can pay 100 gems to maintain 1 card ..or more (I'm not 100% sure) , with chips we can also pay 100 gems or what Tynon / uCool will put as a reasonable amount of gems to maintain 1 chip.. or more. Also as you are aware it is very difficult to get high level chips, however, if we have 4 lvl 9 chips (for example) and we want to merge to a lvl 10 chip but we are afraid of it failing and it is going to take us another month or two to get another lvl 9 chips of that kind, then we can pay for example 200 gems to have 100% success rate. What you can also do is tick a little box where you pay 200 gems with the 4 lvl 9 chips to give you the 100% success rate, however, if you have 3 lvl 9 chips it will require 400 gems for 100% success rate, instead you can try saving 100 gems by ticking the 200 gem box for 1 lvl 9 chip and ticking the 100 gem box for maintaining all your chips if it fails.

In response to your edit:

Again, I got no issue about sancts and stars.. what Tynon did was probably what saved this game and got them this far!
About sancts removing all at once, that was in the past, forgotten about, and never to be looked back at. We can fortunately now remove 1 at a time
This is what I'm trying to present to you.. is a chip merging idea where you can stack them and as you stack them you get 100% success rate with the most chips stacked in this case ALWAYS 5 NEVER MORE.
You talk about 'transfer'! Well, what if we could take unnecessary chips that people have been throwing their fights for in cwf and making our lives very unpleasant. We should be able to have the chance to take 5 chips, pay (for example) 500 gems for a perfect transfer to give us another 5 chips of same level of a chip of our choice. Without the payment of gems for a perfect transfer they should still give us at least 3 chips of the same level and let us choose which chip we would like. This will 'potentially' stop people throwing their fights in cwf as they probably already have loads of those useless chips floating around and know they can have the opportunity to transfer them to something better. This will also generate loads of income for Tynon / uCool as it requires people to pay for something they don't want to lose.