Change to Thick as Thieves alliance rewards

Der_Lex

This is a very welcome change, thank you. You're saving my alliance commanders a lot of stress.

Unknown

Maybe I have the wrong idea of it.

We want the devs to value our feedback.
We were given an example of them changing something in our favor directly because of our feedback. That is very rare and kind of a big deal even if the magnitude of the change was underwhelming for some.
If they changed something to make us happy and we yelled at them for it, that sends the message that we will never be happy and maybe they shouldn't try to listen to us.
If they changed something to make us happy and we became happy, that should tell them they did something right, and encourage them to do that more often.

thisone

Great decision, thank you Will. Is this a one time deal or is this now the policy for all 4* releases?

warcin

Cryptobrancus wrote:

Maybe I have the wrong idea of it.

We want the devs to value our feedback.
We were given an example of them changing something in our favor directly because of our feedback. That is very rare and kind of a big deal even if the magnitude of the change was underwhelming for some.
If they changed something to make us happy and we yelled at them for it, that sends the message that we will never be happy and maybe they shouldn't try to listen to us.
If they changed something to make us happy and we became happy, that should tell them they did something right, and encourage them to do that more often.

The thing is, and I admit I could be reading this wrong, the way it is written only this one is being changed and it was changed as a sop to all the feedback on how this event was handled today. If this change is going to happen going forward I will praise that as a good decision. If it was only as compensation for this event and will go back to the way it was for the next, then it is a very poor piece of compensation since only a tiny fraction of the people playing will feel its benefits.

scottee

warcin wrote:

Cryptobrancus wrote:

Maybe I have the wrong idea of it.

We want the devs to value our feedback.
We were given an example of them changing something in our favor directly because of our feedback. That is very rare and kind of a big deal even if the magnitude of the change was underwhelming for some.
If they changed something to make us happy and we yelled at them for it, that sends the message that we will never be happy and maybe they shouldn't try to listen to us.
If they changed something to make us happy and we became happy, that should tell them they did something right, and encourage them to do that more often.

The thing is, and I admit I could be reading this wrong, the way it is written only this one is being changed and it was changed as a sop to all the feedback on how this event was handled today. If this change is going to happen going forward I will praise that as a good decision. If it was only as compensation for this event and will go back to the way it was for the next, then it is a very poor piece of compensation since only a tiny fraction of the people playing will feel its benefits.

I think it makes the most sense to wait and see on this, as we won't know if they're changing the 4* reward structure until another one is released. Pre-emptively worrying just causes ulcers.

warcin

scottee wrote:

warcin wrote:

Cryptobrancus wrote:

Maybe I have the wrong idea of it.

We want the devs to value our feedback.
We were given an example of them changing something in our favor directly because of our feedback. That is very rare and kind of a big deal even if the magnitude of the change was underwhelming for some.
If they changed something to make us happy and we yelled at them for it, that sends the message that we will never be happy and maybe they shouldn't try to listen to us.
If they changed something to make us happy and we became happy, that should tell them they did something right, and encourage them to do that more often.

The thing is, and I admit I could be reading this wrong, the way it is written only this one is being changed and it was changed as a sop to all the feedback on how this event was handled today. If this change is going to happen going forward I will praise that as a good decision. If it was only as compensation for this event and will go back to the way it was for the next, then it is a very poor piece of compensation since only a tiny fraction of the people playing will feel its benefits.

I think it makes the most sense to wait and see on this, as we won't know if they're changing the 4* reward structure until another one is released. Pre-emptively worrying just causes ulcers.

Or better communication from D3 avoids confusion.

Unknown

warcin wrote:

Cryptobrancus wrote:

Maybe I have the wrong idea of it.

We want the devs to value our feedback.
We were given an example of them changing something in our favor directly because of our feedback. That is very rare and kind of a big deal even if the magnitude of the change was underwhelming for some.
If they changed something to make us happy and we yelled at them for it, that sends the message that we will never be happy and maybe they shouldn't try to listen to us.
If they changed something to make us happy and we became happy, that should tell them they did something right, and encourage them to do that more often.

The thing is, and I admit I could be reading this wrong, the way it is written only this one is being changed and it was changed as a sop to all the feedback on how this event was handled today. If this change is going to happen going forward I will praise that as a good decision. If it was only as compensation for this event and will go back to the way it was for the next, then it is a very poor piece of compensation since only a tiny fraction of the people playing will feel its benefits.

An excellent question. Will, is there any word on whether this is a kingpin only change or an update to the 4* release format going forward?

JVReal

Cryptobrancus wrote:

Maybe I have the wrong idea of it.

We want the devs to value our feedback.
We were given an example of them changing something in our favor directly because of our feedback. That is very rare and kind of a big deal even if the magnitude of the change was underwhelming for some.
If they changed something to make us happy and we yelled at them for it, that sends the message that we will never be happy and maybe they shouldn't try to listen to us.
If they changed something to make us happy and we became happy, that should tell them they did something right, and encourage them to do that more often.

I think of my kids. They horse around the living room, I tell them to stop, they say OK, and promise not to. 4 days later they horse around in the living room again and knock over the TV and break it. I'm pissed, they are in trouble. I tell them they are in trouble and will be grounded. They apologize and offer to clean up the mess.

Do I un-ground them because they made the gesture of apology and cleaning up the mess? No. They still suffer the consequences of the action. The TV is still broken, and the punishment must run its course, but you acknowledge the apology and thank them for it. You even help them clean up the mess.

Un-grounding them because they said sorry promotes the concept that an apology solves everything, when it doesn't. The apology isn't sincere until it's given with no strings attached knowing it won't get them out of trouble. A sincere apology will ease the feelings, but won't fix the TV or eliminate the punishment.

D3 broke my TV. They apologized and extended the rewards to 100 alliances. I thank them for that. They are still grounded for running back to back new character releases and releasing a 4* so soon and on a Holiday weekend to boot... and it's not even a 4 day weekend like Thanksgiving was.

Unknown

I fear that whatever we might want to think, D3 are the parents in this analogy and we are the kids unhappy with the quality of toys we are being given.

Demiurge_Will

Cryptobrancus wrote:

warcin wrote:

Cryptobrancus wrote:

Maybe I have the wrong idea of it.

We want the devs to value our feedback.
We were given an example of them changing something in our favor directly because of our feedback. That is very rare and kind of a big deal even if the magnitude of the change was underwhelming for some.
If they changed something to make us happy and we yelled at them for it, that sends the message that we will never be happy and maybe they shouldn't try to listen to us.
If they changed something to make us happy and we became happy, that should tell them they did something right, and encourage them to do that more often.

The thing is, and I admit I could be reading this wrong, the way it is written only this one is being changed and it was changed as a sop to all the feedback on how this event was handled today. If this change is going to happen going forward I will praise that as a good decision. If it was only as compensation for this event and will go back to the way it was for the next, then it is a very poor piece of compensation since only a tiny fraction of the people playing will feel its benefits.

An excellent question. Will, is there any word on whether this is a kingpin only change or an update to the 4* release format going forward?

This is an update to the 4-star release format going forward.

warcin

Demiurge_Will wrote:

Cryptobrancus wrote:

warcin wrote:

Cryptobrancus wrote:

Maybe I have the wrong idea of it.

We want the devs to value our feedback.
We were given an example of them changing something in our favor directly because of our feedback. That is very rare and kind of a big deal even if the magnitude of the change was underwhelming for some.
If they changed something to make us happy and we yelled at them for it, that sends the message that we will never be happy and maybe they shouldn't try to listen to us.
If they changed something to make us happy and we became happy, that should tell them they did something right, and encourage them to do that more often.

The thing is, and I admit I could be reading this wrong, the way it is written only this one is being changed and it was changed as a sop to all the feedback on how this event was handled today. If this change is going to happen going forward I will praise that as a good decision. If it was only as compensation for this event and will go back to the way it was for the next, then it is a very poor piece of compensation since only a tiny fraction of the people playing will feel its benefits.

An excellent question. Will, is there any word on whether this is a kingpin only change or an update to the 4* release format going forward?

This is an update to the 4-star release format going forward.

Then I praise that as a good decision and include most of what is in the changes to the next season post as well (and maybe all of it after I try the matchmaking). So yes I do like to acknowledge good things. But I still think there was a big problem on how Thick as Thieves was handled.

Demiurge_Will

Lerysh wrote:

Demiurge_Will wrote:

warcin wrote:

still we were lied to by D3.

Hey, warcin - sorry that you felt misled, but I'm not sure about what. Could you say more, maybe point me at the post where your info came from?

Pretty sure he means the back to back character releases.

Gotcha, thanks. I haven't been able to find an original post - if anyone has it handy, a link would be a great. I want to make sure that all of us that post here are doing our best to talk to y'all in such a way that it's understood that we're sharing our plans and our best current thinking, not creating contracts that will last for years, and I'd like to understand if and how we botched that in this case.

Unknown

IceIX wrote:

scottee wrote:

raisinbman wrote:

so u can change events even while we're doing them? there's no excuse now....

They've always been able to. It's just that the last time they did it, to adjust the community progression bar, it tiny kittied the whole event.

Pretty much this. These sorts of changes *seem* simple but they're really not due to how many other things tie into each of the variables. We don't touch running Events unless there's a pressing need. In this case, responding to valid and ongoing player feedback was the trigger.

I hope how we're gonna cover all these 4* characters is a pressing need

Unknown

That's one small step for Demiurge, one giant leap for playerbase

Ebolamonkey84

Demiurge_Will wrote:

Lerysh wrote:

Demiurge_Will wrote:

warcin wrote:

still we were lied to by D3.

Hey, warcin - sorry that you felt misled, but I'm not sure about what. Could you say more, maybe point me at the post where your info came from?

Pretty sure he means the back to back character releases.

Gotcha, thanks. I haven't been able to find an original post - if anyone has it handy, a link would be a great. I want to make sure that all of us that post here are doing our best to talk to y'all in such a way that it's understood that we're sharing our plans and our best current thinking, not creating contracts that will last for years, and I'd like to understand if and how we botched that in this case.

The only thing I remember was this: http://www.d3pforums.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=19954&p=260747&hilit=+anniversary#p260747

This post from David just said that you were going back to the every 2 weeks release schedule, but it doesn't say you will never ever release them back to back again.

Unknown

Ebolamonkey84 wrote:

Demiurge_Will wrote:

Gotcha, thanks. I haven't been able to find an original post - if anyone has it handy, a link would be a great. I want to make sure that all of us that post here are doing our best to talk to y'all in such a way that it's understood that we're sharing our plans and our best current thinking, not creating contracts that will last for years, and I'd like to understand if and how we botched that in this case.

The only thing I remember was this: http://www.d3pforums.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=19954&p=260747&hilit=+anniversary#p260747

This post from David just said that you were going back to the every 2 weeks release schedule, but it doesn't say you will never ever release them back to back again.

Good find, sounds like David hedged his bets properly and didn't make any promises at all. And now the players have strongly reminded them what we think about back to back releases. This too shall pass.

Stony

Thank you so much! I feel like you did listen and are trying to make the players happy. Thank you again!

MarvelDestiny

IceIX wrote:

scottee wrote:

raisinbman wrote:

so u can change events even while we're doing them? there's no excuse now....

They've always been able to. It's just that the last time they did it, to adjust the community progression bar, it tiny kittied the whole event.

Pretty much this. These sorts of changes *seem* simple but they're really not due to how many other things tie into each of the variables. We don't touch running Events unless there's a pressing need. In this case, responding to valid and ongoing player feedback was the trigger.

Holy cow, can we all just stop complaining and take a breather? Even if the release is not ideal this is an attempt by D3 to RESPOND to our feedback. That's a good thing, right?

Thank you Will, Ice, and everybody for listening to our concerns and working everyday to improve the game. There are days you take one step forward and two steps back (kingpin's release may be one example) and other days you crash and burn. Today isn't one of those days. I'm looking forward to next season kicking @$$ and providing feedback for these most excellent upgrades.

thbrown81

This game is not perfect. But I play it instead of other games because developers are willing to listen to their player base and institute changes. Well done.

Pylgrim

Demiurge_Will wrote:

Lerysh wrote:

Demiurge_Will wrote:

warcin wrote:

still we were lied to by D3.

Hey, warcin - sorry that you felt misled, but I'm not sure about what. Could you say more, maybe point me at the post where your info came from?

Pretty sure he means the back to back character releases.

Gotcha, thanks. I haven't been able to find an original post - if anyone has it handy, a link would be a great. I want to make sure that all of us that post here are doing our best to talk to y'all in such a way that it's understood that we're sharing our plans and our best current thinking, not creating contracts that will last for years, and I'd like to understand if and how we botched that in this case.

Will, I cannot find where it was posted but it was around the time of the Anniversary. I understand that what you said then was not a formal, solemn promise but it showed an acknowledgement of the issues regarding back-to-back character releases and the massive backlash they had back then and now:

-People work really hard to get a new character. Events that don't reward a new character are a sort of a "break" even if you play it through, since both the competition and the drive are lessened. Two weeks on a row of maximum effort is way too tiring and stressful.

-It means that the essential character for the second event will be the new character awarded in the previous one, terribly punishing people that for one reason or the other could not get it.

-It means that within a week you have to pony up enough HP for a second roster slot right after having paid for one, with not enough time to accrue more.

-Release of characters was already seen as too fast since there's simply not enough Iso going around to level up everybody decently. Accelerating that rate, even if only once in a while, compounds the problem.

-In this occasion there was an increased backlash because the second new character was a 4* with the old reward structure which had been massively outcried by the community as alliance breaker. Thankfully that last part was addressed this time.

So yeah, you at no time created an unbreakable contract with us not to do it again, but it showed understanding for the players' pledge. That's why so many people are nowadays feeling betrayed.