Seriously a Thor tourney?

Unknown

Blue Shoes wrote:

Psykopathic wrote:

pumkin wrote:

Was fully expecting this. There's a reason they brought the nerf hammer down on Thor and Wolvie right now, to square things up in time for incoming tournies. So this could've been foreseen by some players. It is still lame that there was no written advance warning in-game that there were upcoming Thor and Wolvie tournies. Why not warn people contemplating selling their covers that they might want to hold off? It's really not that hard, just as it wouldn't have been hard to time the nerf between events. It's awesome that people were given the opportunity to sell off their covers at an increased price. But there's absolutely no excuse for not warning players ahead of time that there were tournies coming. None. It's just another example of why there's a growing consensus that the devs are either 1) thoughtless, 2) straight up mean and cackling in their cubicles, 3) both.

I dunno which thread I posted this to or if it got buried but yeah
I sold my covers off because I thought the deal to sell was to promote team diversity so I wanted to help a bit and jump off the thorverine bandwagon. I didn't know trying to diversify teams would involve highlighting the 2 over represented covers.

When you have all your eggs in one basket, diversifying doesn't mean moving all your eggs to other baskets. It means moving some eggs to help equalize the amount of eggs in each basket.

So I'm supposed to delevel my Wovie and Thor to... wait a minute....

Unknown

Derethus wrote:

Blue Shoes wrote:

Psykopathic wrote:

pumkin wrote:

Was fully expecting this. There's a reason they brought the nerf hammer down on Thor and Wolvie right now, to square things up in time for incoming tournies. So this could've been foreseen by some players. It is still lame that there was no written advance warning in-game that there were upcoming Thor and Wolvie tournies. Why not warn people contemplating selling their covers that they might want to hold off? It's really not that hard, just as it wouldn't have been hard to time the nerf between events. It's awesome that people were given the opportunity to sell off their covers at an increased price. But there's absolutely no excuse for not warning players ahead of time that there were tournies coming. None. It's just another example of why there's a growing consensus that the devs are either 1) thoughtless, 2) straight up mean and cackling in their cubicles, 3) both.

I dunno which thread I posted this to or if it got buried but yeah
I sold my covers off because I thought the deal to sell was to promote team diversity so I wanted to help a bit and jump off the thorverine bandwagon. I didn't know trying to diversify teams would involve highlighting the 2 over represented covers.

When you have all your eggs in one basket, diversifying doesn't mean moving all your eggs to other baskets. It means moving some eggs to help equalize the amount of eggs in each basket.

So I'm supposed to delevel my Wovie and Thor to... wait a minute....

OK, bad example. The point was that the goal was diversity. It wasn't to make Thor and Wolverine worthless. They are popular characters. They have been featured in many previous events. Why would that change?

Unknown

F*ck you devs, i hope this game fall apart! -.-

Unknown

pumkin wrote:

Derethus wrote:

pumkin wrote:

Was fully expecting this. There's a reason they brought the nerf hammer down on Thor and Wolvie right now, to square things up in time for incoming tournies. So this could've been foreseen by some players. It is still lame that there was no advance warning that there were upcoming Thor and Wolvie tournies. Why not warn people contemplating selling their covers that they might want to hold off? It's really not that hard, just as it wouldn't have been hard to time the nerf between events..

The devs don't seem to think it's easy to time the nerf between events:
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2942#p45695

Yes, I know that's their stance. I also know it's bull. Simply postpone the start of Oscorp and the Thor tourney till the end of Best There Is. (Or some similar scenario when there's only one event running). Patch then. It's not rocket science. So people won't have new content for 24 hours. They'd **** about that too of course, but it's not straight up screwing people over like it was to NERF characters in the middle of events that people have spent boosts, health packs, time, social lives and money on. It's a hands down absurd response.

I get the feeling IceIX isn't coming back to that thread.... so I guess we can expect every nerf to come in the middle of a tournament that features those characters, followed by incentive to sell, followed by a sudden tournament that features those characters again, just so they have an excuse for their poor nerf timings.

Unknown

Blue Shoes wrote:

Psykopathic wrote:

pumkin wrote:

Was fully expecting this. There's a reason they brought the nerf hammer down on Thor and Wolvie right now, to square things up in time for incoming tournies. So this could've been foreseen by some players. It is still lame that there was no written advance warning in-game that there were upcoming Thor and Wolvie tournies. Why not warn people contemplating selling their covers that they might want to hold off? It's really not that hard, just as it wouldn't have been hard to time the nerf between events. It's awesome that people were given the opportunity to sell off their covers at an increased price. But there's absolutely no excuse for not warning players ahead of time that there were tournies coming. None. It's just another example of why there's a growing consensus that the devs are either 1) thoughtless, 2) straight up mean and cackling in their cubicles, 3) both.

I dunno which thread I posted this to or if it got buried but yeah
I sold my covers off because I thought the deal to sell was to promote team diversity so I wanted to help a bit and jump off the thorverine bandwagon. I didn't know trying to diversify teams would involve highlighting the 2 over represented covers.

I only have enough ISO for so many eggs. My eggs were ragnarok wolvie Thor spidey and mag c.
Seemed like a good idea to take an opportunity to transfer some if my eggs yeah?

When you have all your eggs in one basket, diversifying doesn't mean moving all your eggs to other baskets. It means moving some eggs to help equalize the amount of eggs in each basket.

Unknown

Is your reply missing psyko?

Unknown

Derethus wrote:

I get the feeling IceIX isn't coming back to that thread.... so I guess we can expect every nerf to come in the middle of a tournament that features those characters, followed by incentive to sell, followed by a sudden tournament that features those characters again, just so they have an excuse for their poor nerf timings.

The increased sale price is because people complain that they leveled up the character and then the devs nerfed it to oblivion. That is the only reason. It isn't an incentive to sell. It is just an opportunity to reclaim some ISO and HP if you felt cheated by the change. The tournament follow-up is an incentive to keep your characters because they still can be useful.

Unknown

Derethus wrote:

Is your reply missing psyko?

No it's there. It's inside the quote. I accidentally typed it above the last paragraph, my bad.

Unknown

Blue Shoes wrote:

Derethus wrote:

I get the feeling IceIX isn't coming back to that thread.... so I guess we can expect every nerf to come in the middle of a tournament that features those characters, followed by incentive to sell, followed by a sudden tournament that features those characters again, just so they have an excuse for their poor nerf timings.

The increased sale price is because people complain that they leveled up the character and then the devs nerfed it to oblivion. That is the only reason. It isn't an incentive to sell. It is just an opportunity to reclaim some ISO and HP if you felt cheated by the change. The tournament follow-up is an incentive to keep your characters because they still can be useful.

If the tournament was an incentive to keep your characters, it should have been announced as upcoming before people started selling off their characters.

Unknown

Derethus wrote:

I get the feeling IceIX isn't coming back to that thread.... so I guess we can expect every nerf to come in the middle of a tournament that features those characters, followed by incentive to sell, followed by a sudden tournament that features those characters again, just so they have an excuse for their poor nerf timings.

That's a little unfair. IceIX is one person (out of what, three?) dealing with a horde of a community, some of which are falling into mob mentality.

No one has said, anywhere, that it is okay that things happened as they have. Nor have they said their reasons are entirely justifiable - there's no single, good option here.

I think I said it in a different topic, but what it boils down to is having 0 content up in the form of events, when many players have finished all existing content, is seen as bad. It is a death sentence - it's like that doomed friday night slot for tv shows. It's not that it's factually just true, but it's a fear, one that is probably instilled in everyone by society and peers alike from long before they worked on this game. It's not logical, it's not 100% true, but it gets said often enough that even arguing it gets you looked at like some jerk racist in most related circles.

I am not in any way excusing the poor timing or the confusion that has gone on recently, not at all - it's still a load of ****. But it's important to understand the likely reasons for that, that don't depend on illogical fallacies like "people don't care and are out to get us/screw us over".

Unknown

Telicis wrote:

Derethus wrote:

I get the feeling IceIX isn't coming back to that thread.... so I guess we can expect every nerf to come in the middle of a tournament that features those characters, followed by incentive to sell, followed by a sudden tournament that features those characters again, just so they have an excuse for their poor nerf timings.

That's a little unfair. IceIX is one person (out of what, three?) dealing with a horde of a community, some of which are falling into mob mentality.

No one has said, anywhere, that it is okay that things happened as they have. Nor have they said their reasons are entirely justifiable - there's no single, good option here.

I think I said it in a different topic, but what it boils down to is having 0 content up in the form of events, when many players have finished all existing content, is seen as bad. It is a death sentence - it's like that doomed friday night slot for tv shows. It's not that it's factually just true, but it's a fear, one that is probably instilled in everyone by society and peers alike from long before they worked on this game. It's not logical, it's not 100% true, but it gets said often enough that even arguing it gets you looked at like some jerk racist in most related circles.

I am not in any way excusing the poor timing or the confusion that has gone on recently, not at all - it's still a load of ****. But it's important to understand the likely reasons for that, that don't depend on illogical fallacies like "people don't care and are out to get us/screw us over".

The problem is that they won't admit that they timed it poorly. I don't want them to not have content. But schedule events with other characters when you know a nerf is incoming. Don't have a full week and a half of events that feature 2 characters you plan on nerfing in that week and a half.

However, based on IceIX and Will's replies, it's not possible for them to do this sort of planning.

All I want is them to say "Sorry, we nerfed them at a bad time, we'll TRY to be better"

Unknown

Telicis wrote:

Derethus wrote:

I get the feeling IceIX isn't coming back to that thread.... so I guess we can expect every nerf to come in the middle of a tournament that features those characters, followed by incentive to sell, followed by a sudden tournament that features those characters again, just so they have an excuse for their poor nerf timings.

That's a little unfair. IceIX is one person (out of what, three?) dealing with a horde of a community, some of which are falling into mob mentality.

No one has said, anywhere, that it is okay that things happened as they have. Nor have they said their reasons are entirely justifiable - there's no single, good option here.

I think I said it in a different topic, but what it boils down to is having 0 content up in the form of events, when many players have finished all existing content, is seen as bad. It is a death sentence - it's like that doomed friday night slot for tv shows. It's not that it's factually just true, but it's a fear, one that is probably instilled in everyone by society and peers alike from long before they worked on this game. It's not logical, it's not 100% true, but it gets said often enough that even arguing it gets you looked at like some jerk racist in most related circles.

I am not in any way excusing the poor timing or the confusion that has gone on recently, not at all - it's still a load of ****. But it's important to understand the likely reasons for that, that don't depend on illogical fallacies like "people don't care and are out to get us/screw us over".

Nicely said. It is odd at how personal a problem or change can feel, and how easy it is to make assumptions about things you can't observe, such as the actions and motivations of the devs.

Unknown

Derethus wrote:

The problem is that they won't admit that they timed it poorly. I don't want them to not have content. But schedule events with other characters when you know a nerf is incoming. Don't have a full week and a half of events that feature 2 characters you plan on nerfing in that week and a half.

However, based on IceIX and Will's replies, it's not possible for them to do this sort of planning.

All I want is them to say "Sorry, we nerfed them at a bad time, we'll TRY to be better"

While I can't fault you for admitting you want an apology, it does remind me of a fascinating book on vindication/redemption/etc. It was about how people typically want things to be made up for in one of several ways. To some people, an apology is of the utmost importance. To others, it is a solution. Others still might just want revenge or a peace offering.

I think it is necessary that you and I agree to disagree. While you want them to say sorry, I don't. On the contrary, the single most infuriating thing they could do, to me, was apologize, and then screw it up again. To me, an apology without action is worse than no apology at all - but sufficient action taken means I neither require, nor care about if I get an apology after. Neither my way of thinking, nor yours, are wrong... But I think this is a difference worth pointing out.

Unknown

Telicis wrote:

Derethus wrote:

I get the feeling IceIX isn't coming back to that thread.... so I guess we can expect every nerf to come in the middle of a tournament that features those characters, followed by incentive to sell, followed by a sudden tournament that features those characters again, just so they have an excuse for their poor nerf timings.

That's a little unfair. IceIX is one person (out of what, three?) dealing with a horde of a community, some of which are falling into mob mentality.

No one has said, anywhere, that it is okay that things happened as they have. Nor have they said their reasons are entirely justifiable - there's no single, good option here.

I think I said it in a different topic, but what it boils down to is having 0 content up in the form of events, when many players have finished all existing content, is seen as bad. It is a death sentence - it's like that doomed friday night slot for tv shows. It's not that it's factually just true, but it's a fear, one that is probably instilled in everyone by society and peers alike from long before they worked on this game. It's not logical, it's not 100% true, but it gets said often enough that even arguing it gets you looked at like some jerk racist in most related circles.

I am not in any way excusing the poor timing or the confusion that has gone on recently, not at all - it's still a load of ****. But it's important to understand the likely reasons for that, that don't depend on illogical fallacies like "people don't care and are out to get us/screw us over".

It is better to have there be no content for 15 minutes while they push the update and push the update to new players as they log on than to wreck an ongoing tourney and have players blindsided with an increase in costs. People would be near as annoyed if there was better communication and response to ongoing concerns. Players are very passionate because they really like and care about the game. Sometimes this comes across harsh but it is only a byproduct of how let down they are feeling after spending money. The longer you don't address issue the longer speculation of what is going on will fester.

Unknown

Telicis wrote:

Derethus wrote:

The problem is that they won't admit that they timed it poorly. I don't want them to not have content. But schedule events with other characters when you know a nerf is incoming. Don't have a full week and a half of events that feature 2 characters you plan on nerfing in that week and a half.

However, based on IceIX and Will's replies, it's not possible for them to do this sort of planning.

All I want is them to say "Sorry, we nerfed them at a bad time, we'll TRY to be better"

While I can't fault you for admitting you want an apology, it does remind me of a fascinating book on vindication/redemption/etc. It was about how people typically want things to be made up for in one of several ways. To some people, an apology is of the utmost importance. To others, it is a solution. Others still might just want revenge or a peace offering.

I think it is necessary that you and I agree to disagree. While you want them to say sorry, I don't. On the contrary, the single most infuriating thing they could do, to me, was apologize, and then screw it up again. To me, an apology without action is worse than no apology at all - but sufficient action taken means I neither require, nor care about if I get an apology after. Neither my way of thinking, nor yours, are wrong... But I think this is a difference worth pointing out.

The reason I want them to say that they're sorry is because I want them to acknowledge the point. If they say sorry and do it again, I immediately uninstall, because it shows that I can never trust the developers. But by saying sorry instead of giving excuses, that shows they acknowledge what we're saying.

I do wan the action/solution. But I want to know that they're moving in that direction first.

Unknown

Derethus wrote:

The reason I want them to say that they're sorry is because I want them to acknowledge the point. If they say sorry and do it again, I immediately uninstall, because it shows that I can never trust the developers. But by saying sorry instead of giving excuses, that shows they acknowledge what we're saying.

I do wan the action/solution. But I want to know that they're moving in that direction first.

See, that's a very dangerous and narrow-minded way to regard it. On one hand, you ignore all of the following facts:

- The only people you can speak to (like IceIX) do not have 100% freedom to do or say what they want, nor to answer every question 100%. If you have ever worked as a CSR or even at a call center, you know that, and you know what happens to the people who forget it.
- That in addition to the above, anyone you actually speak to is also explicitly not allowed to speak for the rest of the company, or probably the developers. So apologizing would in all likelihood get them fired as soon as it was found out. That's not their job.
- What you consider an 'excuse' might in fact be all that person can say, or present, about said topic.
- An apology gives you no information except the implied "i'm acknowledging what you're saying"... Which is really meaningless except that it makes you feel better. If the only way a player can feel like their opinion matters is by a CM/Dev/etc saying "I hear you", they are probably a lost cause anyway. The easiest way to point this out is to notate the fact that this exact line of thinking, if it were say, about a parent, infuriates most people. Someone else's validation never fulfills an essential need.

But on the other, you yourself willingly admit that if they say sorry and screw up again, you immediately install because "I can never trust the developers". Not only is never a very strong, definite word, but it's basically putting them in this box where their only options are perfection or you leaving.

Not trying to attack you here, just want to point out how you're basically setting them up to fail, no matter what they do or say... Short of becoming inhuman and perfect.

Unknown

Telicis wrote:

Derethus wrote:

The reason I want them to say that they're sorry is because I want them to acknowledge the point. If they say sorry and do it again, I immediately uninstall, because it shows that I can never trust the developers. But by saying sorry instead of giving excuses, that shows they acknowledge what we're saying.

I do wan the action/solution. But I want to know that they're moving in that direction first.

See, that's a very dangerous and narrow-minded way to regard it. On one hand, you ignore all of the following facts:

- The only people you can speak to (like IceIX) do not have 100% freedom to do or say what they want, nor to answer every question 100%. If you have ever worked as a CSR or even at a call center, you know that, and you know what happens to the people who forget it.
- That in addition to the above, anyone you actually speak to is also explicitly not allowed to speak for the rest of the company, or probably the developers. So apologizing would in all likelihood get them fired as soon as it was found out. That's not their job.
- What you consider an 'excuse' might in fact be all that person can say, or present, about said topic.
- An apology gives you no information except the implied "i'm acknowledging what you're saying"... Which is really meaningless except that it makes you feel better. If the only way a player can feel like their opinion matters is by a CM/Dev/etc saying "I hear you", they are probably a lost cause anyway. The easiest way to point this out is to notate the fact that this exact line of thinking, if it were say, about a parent, infuriates most people. Someone else's validation never fulfills an essential need.

But on the other, you yourself willingly admit that if they say sorry and screw up again, you immediately install because "I can never trust the developers". Not only is never a very strong, definite word, but it's basically putting them in this box where their only options are perfection or you leaving.

Not trying to attack you here, just want to point out how you're basically setting them up to fail, no matter what they do or say... Short of becoming inhuman and perfect.

Sorry but you are making excuses for them. If you make a mistake you own it and fix it especially in the tech world. Nobody is expecting them to be perfect just communicate and fix it when they screw up and assure us (the customer) they will try and do better. It really isn't hard.

Unknown

Telicis wrote:

Derethus wrote:

The reason I want them to say that they're sorry is because I want them to acknowledge the point. If they say sorry and do it again, I immediately uninstall, because it shows that I can never trust the developers. But by saying sorry instead of giving excuses, that shows they acknowledge what we're saying.

I do wan the action/solution. But I want to know that they're moving in that direction first.

See, that's a very dangerous and narrow-minded way to regard it. On one hand, you ignore all of the following facts:

- The only people you can speak to (like IceIX) do not have 100% freedom to do or say what they want, nor to answer every question 100%. If you have ever worked as a CSR or even at a call center, you know that, and you know what happens to the people who forget it.
- That in addition to the above, anyone you actually speak to is also explicitly not allowed to speak for the rest of the company, or probably the developers. So apologizing would in all likelihood get them fired as soon as it was found out. That's not their job.
- What you consider an 'excuse' might in fact be all that person can say, or present, about said topic.
- An apology gives you no information except the implied "i'm acknowledging what you're saying"... Which is really meaningless except that it makes you feel better. If the only way a player can feel like their opinion matters is by a CM/Dev/etc saying "I hear you", they are probably a lost cause anyway. The easiest way to point this out is to notate the fact that this exact line of thinking, if it were say, about a parent, infuriates most people. Someone else's validation never fulfills an essential need.

But on the other, you yourself willingly admit that if they say sorry and screw up again, you immediately install because "I can never trust the developers". Not only is never a very strong, definite word, but it's basically putting them in this box where their only options are perfection or you leaving.

Not trying to attack you here, just want to point out how you're basically setting them up to fail, no matter what they do or say... Short of becoming inhuman and perfect.

My views might be a little more flexible than I present them, but I don't really want to detail out every nuance.

With the exception of League of Legends, most companies won't let their developers speak and have a very specific public representative, I understand this. But I'd rather have no response than a response that makes them look incompetent.

I also don't think they have to get everything perfect. But if they say they'll do better at nerf timing next time, and then have a Spiderman tournament with a nerf on the middle hours of the tournament, then they're obviously going to lie to you.

My issue with Demiurge right now is that they say they listen to feedback on the forums, but the Thor/Wolvie nerfs make it obvious that they didn't listen to the feedback from the Rags nerf, where he was nerfed in the middle of LR.

I want something other than "See there's a wolvie tourney and a thor tourney! This justifies our decision to patch in the middle of Avengers Elite!"

I also want more communication, and actual patch notes that don't have to be added to when players find a myriad of things that weren't on the patch notes.

Unknown

Don't care its thor based ...I didn't sell mine because he is boosted so often and is an avenger and I had no current replacement for avenger boosted stuff...but what gets me is thr progress rewards are STILL broken as giantkitty. How have they not cut the 4**** reward in half minimum? It's ridiculous. The progress rewards matter for the pve event so ill enter a bracket early for once, but I am not sure how doable those scores are going to be given the difficulty and what not. Plus side...superbowl = busy and I have less incentive to go for ANOTHER YELLOW IW (what's that..3-4 in a row?).

Hopefully this is the last one with a broken reward system. And hopefully they stop this current format for pve and revert to the old or do somethin new. If ppl KNOW that lvling up hurts them you know what they do? Stop leveling up and spending money and stay low to win prizes.

Unknown

justaplayer wrote:

Sorry but you are making excuses for them. If you make a mistake you own it and fix it especially in the tech world. Nobody is expecting them to be perfect just communicate and fix it when they screw up and assure us (the customer) they will try and do better. It really isn't hard.

I'm by no means making excuses or saying that (ESPECIALLY in the tech world) you shouldn't accept responsibility for a screwup.

I'm just trying to point out that, unless I've missed something, IceIX and the rest have 0 control over the Devs, design of the game, or what happens in regards to scheduling/events/etc. If D3 is like any other company, they are the people who make announcements, who deal with the community, and try to translate feedback back to the designers and such.

It is not only hard, but factually IMPOSSIBLE for someone, in that position to apologize for a mistake they did not make (as they did not cause it). That's the point I'm trying to make.