S.H.I.E.L.D. Signal Intercepts Arriving

Tromb2ch2

"David wrote:

Moore"]Hi.

The devs are aware of the error prompts some players are seeing with Signal Intercepts. Unfortunately, this isn't something that can be hot fixed out. A correction should be arriving soon in the R114 update.

Regarding Steam players - we know there is disappointment surrounding the lack of Signal Intercepts and we are sorry. Unfortunately, the system can't be implemented for Steam owing to how everything works (external mobile ad companies and other complications). I can't provide exact reasons as I'm not a tech guy, but I've been told it isn't possible right now.

We apologize for the inconvenience. Thanks, everyone.

Please ask them if they will make it so intercepts just happen for VIP. There should be a way to do that that shouldn't require too much coding. We realize that ads won't get added but if we don't have to watch ads on phone vip then steam players should also get this treatment.

DrNitroman

"David wrote:

Moore"]Hi.

Regarding Steam players - we know there is disappointment surrounding the lack of Signal Intercepts and we are sorry. Unfortunately, the system can't be implemented for Steam owing to how everything works (external mobile ad companies and other complications). I can't provide exact reasons as I'm not a tech guy, but I've been told it isn't possible right now.

Thanks for the precisions Hi-Fi.
Althouth the news are disappointing, at least we know you are aware about the situation of Steam players. It's appreciated.

I know some Steam players would agree to migrate to mobile if opportunity given. Personally, I won't trade my PC for a mobile phone, I have my old habits of a PC gamer!

The competition for resources drives players' engagement in this game, especially for addicted veterans like me. I understand that the mechanism for Signal Intercept can't be implemented for Steam. I strongly hope devs will figure a way to bring back some balance in the resource flow between Steam and mobile players.

I don't ask for a strict equivalence, just some balance. In a competitive game this matters a lot.

DFiPL

"David wrote:

Moore"]Hi.

The devs are aware of the error prompts some players are seeing with Signal Intercepts. Unfortunately, this isn't something that can be hot fixed out. A correction should be arriving soon in the R114 update.

Regarding Steam players - we know there is disappointment surrounding the lack of Signal Intercepts and we are sorry. Unfortunately, the system can't be implemented for Steam owing to how everything works (external mobile ad companies and other complications). I can't provide exact reasons as I'm not a tech guy, but I've been told it isn't possible right now.

We apologize for the inconvenience. Thanks, everyone.

That's fine. I don't need exactly the same thing in Steam as mobile gets. But let me chime in with those who say there ought to be something for Steam users.

1 Command Point, 100 Hero Points, 2,000 Iso-8, 1 Heroic Token, 25 Hero Points, 1,000 Iso-8, 250 Iso-8, or 10 Hero Points.

Various permutations here, of course, and it's unlikely that anybody's going to pull all 20 rewards of the same type, but that gives an idea of the difference that just got injected. 200 Hero Points/day. 5000 ISO/day. 20k ISO/day. 500 Hero Points/day. 20 Heroic tokens/day. 40k ISO/day. 2k Hero Points/day. 20 CP/day. I mean, even at the lowest end, that's pretty massive - that's an extra roster spot every DDQ cycle if all that got pulled was the 10 HP bonus. An extra 5k ISO/day is basically a free DDQ's worth of ISO for mobile users that Steam users can't access. And then there are the others.

Yeah, I know, the daily mix is more likely to be a couple from each tier, but even if it got split exactly between the two lowest-value rewards, that's still 100 Hero Points/day and 2500 ISO/day. Which is not trivial.

You wanna add 100 HP/day and 2500 ISO/day to VIP for Steam users on top of what VIP currently provides because the Steam API won't let you do provide the Intercepts the same on both platforms? Sure. I'll sign up. On a recurring basis, even.

But let's not pretend this is something it isn't: 100 HP/day and 2500 ISO/day is like finishing top 3 in a sub at CL7 every single day. No event tokens or CP, sure, but otherwise? And just for playing throughout the day? That's massive.

C'mon. Find a way to throw Steam users a bone.

JVReal

Nightglider1 wrote:

JVReal wrote:

"David wrote:

Moore"]*Updated (11/09/16): a 250 Iso-8 option has been added to bonus rewards.

Whereas this was posted as an additional reward trying to give it a positive spin, it's bottom tier nature was intended to slow down the distribution of top tier rewards.

Reminds me of auto insurance giving you a 'discount' for having good credit... which is another way of saying you aren't being penalized for having bad credit like other people for something that has nothing to do with credit whatsoever.

Credit rating/credit worthiness often shows whether someone is worth taking a risk on.

I agree with that when Credit rating actually impacts the product or service being offered. Credit rating does not correlate with driving a car. It correlates to buying a car, but not driving a car, or getting hit while in a car... and for a service that extends no credit at all since you pay our auto premiums in advance and if you don't pay, they cancel it. No credit extended. Credit rating for car insurance... bad idea. Might as well give me a discount if I eat Raisin Bran Crunch for breakfast because people who eat Lucky Charms have more accidents. Off topic I know, and I apologize.

Dartmaster01

They obviously don't care and have no intention to make it right. There are already bad reviews on steam regarding this issue and there is going to be at least one more. All anyone wanted was for the devs to treat steam users fairly. Is that really to much to ask? Basically they are saying that steam users' money is worth less than a mobile users'. As it stands right now if you spend money on steam, you are paying for mobile users to get new features to help beat you with.

BlackSheep101

JVReal wrote:

Credit rating does not correlate with driving a car.

I assume you have actuarial experience to back that up?

Quick Fire

"David wrote:

Moore"]Hi.

The devs are aware of the error prompts some players are seeing with Signal Intercepts. Unfortunately, this isn't something that can be hot fixed out. A correction should be arriving soon in the R114 update.

Regarding Steam players - we know there is disappointment surrounding the lack of Signal Intercepts and we are sorry. Unfortunately, the system can't be implemented for Steam owing to how everything works (external mobile ad companies and other complications). I can't provide exact reasons as I'm not a tech guy, but I've been told it isn't possible right now.

We apologize for the inconvenience. Thanks, everyone.

This needs to be stickied if it's not. I didn't see it stickied.

BlackSheep101

It's pinned in the bugs forum:
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=54743

_RiO_

Dartmaster01 wrote:

They obviously don't care and have no intention to make it right. There are already bad reviews on steam regarding this issue and there is going to be at least one more. All anyone wanted was for the devs to treat steam users fairly. Is that really to much to ask? Basically they are saying that steam users' money is worth less than a mobile users'. As it stands right now if you spend money on steam, you are paying for mobile users to get new features to help beat you with.

^ This.
Exactly this.

From the way the game's events are scheduled down to how reward systems are engineered, it's evident that this game is geared to mobile and that PC players second-class citizens. The lack of Facebook rewards fits that profile as well and the lack of intercept rewards is just the next in line.

However, personally, I could not care less for ad-fueled rewards and I am glad the Steam version of the game is not infected with them. Rogue ads are responsible for roughly 30% of all malware infections world-wide and more often than should be the case even advertisement SDKs themselves are found to contain malware. And that doesn't even touch upon the privacy issues, which are another even bigger bees nest to steer clear of.

JVReal

BlackSheep101 wrote:

JVReal wrote:

Credit rating does not correlate with driving a car.

I assume you have actuarial experience to back that up?

I don't need actuarial experience to back that up. They do not relate to each other. Credit rating does not impact driving decisions. Credit ratings do not draw or repel deer. Credit ratings do not distract drivers, or impair vision or reaction time.

Cell phones usage does, eating in the car does, changing the radio station or song on your music device does. Weather, road conditions, external forces that create an obstruction to your path, other humans, these things do.

Your past driving record, your age (directly relates to amount of driving experience), the condition of your vehicle. These things are acceptable to me.

Credit rating to determine how safe a driver I am is as useful as the type of phone I use determining how safe I drive. The thing about credit ratings, like cell phones, almost everyone has one. You could gather data and find that more Samsung users are involved in car accidents and file more claims than iPhone users... would you want to be pro-rated on your auto insurance based on what phone you buy? Not me.

Credit ratings need to be kept by and used only by credit lending companies. 3 states have banned them being used to determine auto insurance rates, I hope more join those ranks.

I'm sorry, that's the last of it. My apologies for going off topic again. Won't happen again.

BlackSheep101

I'm sorry, but your statement was that credit ratings don't correlate with driving records. While you'd be safe in saying a poor credit rating doesn't cause a person to drive poorly, the industry has a *lot* of evidence that a poor credit rating does indeed correlate with a higher likelihood of filing a claim. When you manage huge risk pools, you have a large staff of people whose sole job it is to analyze portfolio level data for trends so you can set pricing and reserve levels appropriately.

While it's not reasonable to say paying bills late or defaulting on a loan makes you a bad driver, it is reasonable to say that making poor financial decisions can be a predictor of poor decision-making ability in general.

JVReal

Edit: Duplicate post

JVReal

BlackSheep101 wrote:

I'm sorry, but your statement was that credit ratings don't correlate with driving records. While you'd be safe in saying a poor credit rating doesn't cause a person to drive poorly, the industry has a *lot* of evidence that a poor credit rating does indeed correlate with a higher likelihood of filing a claim. When you manage huge risk pools, you have a large staff of people whose sole job it is to analyze portfolio level data for trends so you can set pricing and reserve levels appropriately.

While it's not reasonable to say paying bills late or defaulting on a loan makes you a bad driver, it is reasonable to say that making poor financial decisions can be a predictor of poor decision-making ability in general.

Poor financial decisions is not the only reason your credit rating will suffer. I went through a divorce after 14 years of marriage, then lost my job and then had to do a short sale on my house. None of which were poor financial decisions on my part. Yet my credit rating was impacted during the next 3 years. It did not impact my driving or claim making.

I understand that they have whole teams lined up to try and make correlations where there are none in order to try and come up with some predictors... and what data they use is just as important. It is inevitable they will draw a conclusion relating to credit rating and car claims since pretty much every licensed driver has a credit rating, and every licensed driver that owns a car is required to have car insurance. It doesn't mean its a reasonable correlation that involves causation. It is that conclusion that the insurance company makes, that bad credit will cause higher claims payout that makes them charge people more for their insurance if they have bad credit. My choice of toilet paper impacts my claim filing history as much as my credit report does... but I guess they don't have that data.

I have no doubts they found that of the people that file claims, many had bad credit. It's coincidence, and not to be used for pro-rating an auto policy. People's political standings say a lot about a person, did they run figures to see if people of one political party or another are more likely to file claims? It's all just ridiculous.

halirin

JVReal wrote:

BlackSheep101 wrote:

I'm sorry, but your statement was that credit ratings don't correlate with driving records. While you'd be safe in saying a poor credit rating doesn't cause a person to drive poorly, the industry has a *lot* of evidence that a poor credit rating does indeed correlate with a higher likelihood of filing a claim. When you manage huge risk pools, you have a large staff of people whose sole job it is to analyze portfolio level data for trends so you can set pricing and reserve levels appropriately.

While it's not reasonable to say paying bills late or defaulting on a loan makes you a bad driver, it is reasonable to say that making poor financial decisions can be a predictor of poor decision-making ability in general.

Poor financial decisions is not the only reason your credit rating will suffer. I went through a divorce after 14 years of marriage, then lost my job and then had to do a short sale on my house. None of which were poor financial decisions on my part. Yet my credit rating was impacted during the next 3 years. It did not impact my driving or claim making.

I understand that they have whole teams lined up to try and make correlations where there are none in order to try and come up with some predictors... and what data they use is just as important. It is inevitable they will draw a conclusion relating to credit rating and car claims since pretty much every licensed driver has a credit rating, and every licensed driver that owns a car is required to have car insurance. It doesn't mean its a reasonable correlation that involves causation. It is that conclusion that the insurance company makes, that bad credit will cause higher claims payout that makes them charge people more for their insurance if they have bad credit. My choice of toilet paper impacts my claim filing history as much as my credit report does... but I guess they don't have that data.

I have no doubts they found that of the people that file claims, many had bad credit. It's coincidence, and not to be used for pro-rating an auto policy. People's political standings say a lot about a person, did they run figures to see if people of one political party or another are more likely to file claims? It's all just ridiculous.

If you're selling insurance, you are somewhat less interested in causation than correlation. It is highly likely that bad credit doesn't cause bad driving, so much as an underlying third factor (poor decision making? Impulsiveness?) could affect both on average. However, knowledge about credit allows you to make better predictions about claims. Counterexamples that buck a trend don't disprove the existence of the trend.

Don't feel bad. Statistics are hard to understand.

JVReal

halirin wrote:

If you're selling insurance, you are somewhat less interested in causation than correlation. It is highly likely that bad credit doesn't cause bad driving, so much as an underlying third factor (poor decision making? Impulsiveness?) could affect both on average. However, knowledge about credit allows you to make better predictions about claims. Counterexamples that buck a trend don't disprove the existence of the trend.

Don't feel bad. Statistics are hard to understand.

It's not hard to understand. They are forcing a connection and creating a relationship where one does not belong. Credit rating to decision making to mental health to health records... where do you stop? How far do you go with the spider web before you stop trying to make correlations?

Why do my counterexamples buck the trend? Why are they less useful? Why are they less of a correlation? Because they don't give a reason enough to surcharge?

It's a company looking for more ways pull in money, abusing a system of statistics to try and justify increased premiums for a very large population by pretending to give a discount to a small group. I work in a Statistics department (I don't do statistics myself thankfully) and I've seen people come in having their data weighted to give them the answer they look for only to have the consultants here say... you can't do that.

I have great credit, I receive great insurance premiums, but when they told me this year that my credit check changed me from discount A to discount B when I did nothing out of the ordinary except pay off certain debt and close a card, then buy a water softener for the house... what does that have to do with my auto insurance and driving/claim history? Nothing... yet here it goes with an increase in premiums for something NOT auto or claim related. That is a problem.

They even gave me a discount for having an advanced degree... why? That means others are out there paying more for auto insurance because they couldn't afford a college degree? wth?

My point is, I know they can make correlations... but should they? I don't think they should. Not with that private data.

Mercalla

I like this new direction this topic is going. I have HUGE issues with insurance as well. It's basically gambling that something bad is going to happen to you, while the insurance agency is gambling that nothing bad is going to happen to you. If we were playing baseball, I'd be banned from the sport for life. What if we removed the requirement for all kinds of insurance all together? Let the fiscally responsible put that money into savings every month as their own insurance policy, AND they get the benefit of using it later in life if/when nothing bad happens.

Nightglider1

Huh. When I wanted to continue the conversation about insurance with JVReal, I sent him a PM instead of train-wrecking the thread. Just sayin'.

JVReal

My apologies again. Please PM if you want to discuss insurance. I like a good discussion, but will likely not respond over the weekend.

Have a great weekend everybody... how about those SHIELD Signal Intercepts!!

Ethelka

Hi!

Is there an idea of the duration of the "automatic rewards" of buyers and vip?
I wish to know if this bonus last for the duration of the VIP status and how long it last for the differents HP et iso prices.

For my experience, it has been 14 days for having bought 2.900 HP.

(sorry for the english).

E.

Xzasxz

"David wrote:

Moore"]Hi.

The devs are aware of the error prompts some players are seeing with Signal Intercepts. Unfortunately, this isn't something that can be hot fixed out. A correction should be arriving soon in the R114 update.

Not a word in patch notes ...