R192: Champion Rewards Updates

T_REZ5000

Daredevil217 said:

IceIX said:

Falconfreak said:

shap328 said:

So is this live yet? I have a bunch of maxed 2s that I’m waiting to sell

I asked the same question, got no response so I'm assuming no.

No, it's planned to be live this week, possibly as early as tomorrow (Tuesday).

@IceIX,

Is the additional info on retroactive rewards still coming today?

I’d like to know as well.

Daredevil217

I’m opening all my stockpiled (non-LT) tokens before the rewards nerf tomorrow regardless of how retroactive rewards are handed out. Info will just give me an idea of who to shard for the pulls. Even though I hate the new system; I’m trying my best to work with it. And so meeting the players halfway and giving more info tonight is definitely appreciated!

T_REZ5000

I was hoping to get the retroactive reward clarifications before this shard store rotates.  There’s 2x 4*s there that I would pick up if the reward they give will also yield a retroactive reward.  As it stands I guess I’ll pass on them.

liminal_lad

Overall from where I'm at in the game this feels like a net positive. Looking forward to seeing how it goes in practice and also hoping the retro rewards are sweet.

HoundofShadow

Most people will know that F2P games' business model is simply this: you either pay to progress quicker or you grind away to progress.

What's happening is, the general expectations or reactions are these when major changes are made:

1) gets angry/unhappy when they have to grind more to get additional resources
2) get angry when the devs monetise
3) Happy when the devs add more resources on top of existing resources.

If the job of devs is to make only the players happy, they have to avoid doing one and two. If not, the devs have to either rain down resources for increased efforts or sell resources based on Walmart's previous slogan, "Always Low Prices."

There's nothing wrong with feedbacks, but if your feedbacks revolve around only "the devs are not allowed to take away existing resources/features and they should be adding more resources on top of current resources without additional effort or spending", then I think this feedback is not useful at all. 

The players always want the devs to balance the game, but when they do so, they get upset. The reason is simple because the meaning of "balancing the game" as far as resources is concerned is this:

Players: balancing means the devs are not allowed to remove or replace existing resources or features, they can only add on new features or additional resources. 

Devs: give some and take some

How often has devs rained down resources, and when they did, how often were players satisfied? When the devs rained down more resources (such as Power of Palaces/CotMT), the reaction is to demand it to happen more frequently. At what point will players be satisfied? 

Vhailorx

Hound:. No one said the devs weren't "allowed" to do anything.  That's pure straw man.

Also, i would direct your attention to the original launch of ddq (in early March 2015 iirc).  It was pure upside for players (extra iso, tokens, and 1 3* cover a day for everyone who had at least 1 cover already and good enough 2*s to beat the wave node).  Players LOVED it. And, of course, it ruined the economy of MPQ so badly that the game just barely survived another 4.75 years.

What i would like is one of those every year or two.  Instead it has been about 4 years of "one step for forward and a difficult to calcuate number of steps back" every 12-18 months. I do not like that.  So i say as much every time it happens.

HoundofShadow

No one said, but the reactions tell otherwise.

"They should have added in Target Heroes instead of replacing  Bonus Heroes."

"They should have shifted the rewards around champion rewards instead of replacing it with shards."

"They should have put costumes in progression rewards instead of having to buy it for cash." 

"They should have put Support in progression rewards. Support Bundles are money grab."

"They should have made Saved Covers 1:1 for 5* because they "took away" Customer Support swap service (even though it is a goodwill by the devs and it was mentioned that it is not a permanent service."

It will be typically followed up with something like:

"How is this breaking the game economy?"

maltyo9

If the devs had given us all of these feeders at no cost, that would have obviously been amazing.  However, they have chosen to attach a cost to it, and that's understandable.

If that cost had been less iso in champ rewards, then so be it.  I believe that most players would have been agreeable to that.

If that cost had been less HP in champ rewards, then so be it.  I believe that most players would have been agreeable to that.

If that cost had been less CP in champ rewards, then so be it.  I believe that most players would have been agreeable to that.




However, they have chosen to remove 3 of the 4 forms of the in-game economy from champ rewards (and the 4th is a resource that is earned almost entirely through gameplay, and is only usable on a facet of the game that has essentially been abandoned by the devs, despite repeated calls for it to be brought back, even in its previous somewhat impotent form).

While it may pain some to see so many of us point out the flaws in this new system, there is only one way for us to voice our displeasure (or praise, in the case of some), and it is on this forum.

Unless you want to go to Discord and talk about tinykitty pie.

IceIX

Updated the post with more info on retroactive rewards.

MadScientist

Will we get any Mighty Tokens we have missed?

Daredevil217

I’m reading this as no mighty tokens and no shards we have missed at levels like 296 and 298 for for feeders past 300 since we already got a cover at 300. You only would get those 296/298 rewards if you haven’t reached 300. Yikes. 

Razuhlui

Daredevil217 said:

I’m reading this as no mighty tokens and no shards we have missed at levels like 296 and 298 for for feeders past 300 since we already got a cover at 300. You only would get those 296/298 rewards if you haven’t reached 300. Yikes. 

REEEEEE, luckyly i've just 2 4* above 300 and my captiaint Marvel is sitting right at 296 damn

abenness

For each of the new 4* -> 5* feeders, if your 4* was over 280 and you previously got the LL, you will be given the 5* cover as a retro reward.

But if you have a level 300 up to max-champ 4*, you will not get multiple 5* covers.  You will get the partial shards for the "cover" level you are working towards, +100 shards.

So it won't be raining multiple 5* covers for each new feeder.  It will be sprinkling one cover for each, plus shards towards the next you will earn from the level your 4* is at.

For junior-mid rosters, this is fine, and I am really happy to get this variety of single covers.

I acknowledge that senior rosters who would have hoped for many 5* covers for each feeder as per previous generous single-feeder releases, there will be extreme disappointment.

Therealsmkspy

Looks like the shard apocalypse (shard-aggedon) got cancelled.

Freelancer

@abenness I didn't read it that way at all. I read it as, 4* with new 5* rewards will give out the cover from 280 and every Shard you would have earned up to the current level PLUS 100 bonus Shards for every milestone you've reached. So, by my understanding, my 344 Rogue will give me 1 Gambit cover, 1500 progression based Shards and 300 milestone bonus Shards.
4* with existing 5* rewards will only give you Shards if you have passed an XX6 or XX8 milestone without reaching the next cover milestone. So, my 348 Sandman,318 Wolverine and 318 Drax should all earn me 250 Shards towards their 5*.

Markot

For me personaly it's negative change.

Positive: new 5* feeders (but worse than old feeders were)

Neutral: Shards instead of covers. Since saved covers, colorless covers have for me minimal significance. It can help to champ character few weeks earlier, but this has minimal impact on gameplay. To be able to play PVE nodes, it is important just to have character rostered and there colorless covers doesn't help. Champed character speeds my play just by minimal amount which can not help me to place significantly better. 

Negative: Loss of HP and CP. Each roster slot costs 2000 HP, CP help me to get levels of 4* and cover 5*. This loss will cause slower progression for me. 


I would welcome new feeders, if they were implemented the same way as old feeders were. I wouldn't mind shards if just enough shard for one cover were rewarded instead of a cover. But I can not be glad when the changes will cause me slower progression.

And one plea at the end: When I see how bonus heroes were replaced, how champion rewards were changed, please, don't change PVP and PVE rewards. It would be welcome if you just added some shards to existing rewards, but I don't see it likely and I don't wan't to lose more resources. 

abenness

Freelancer said:

@abenness I didn't read it that way at all. I read it as, 4* with new 5* rewards will give out the cover from 280 and every Shard you would have earned up to the current level PLUS 100 bonus Shards for every milestone you've reached. So, by my understanding, my 344 Rogue will give me 1 Gambit cover, 1500 progression based Shards and 300 milestone bonus Shards.
4* with existing 5* rewards will only give you Shards if you have passed an XX6 or XX8 milestone without reaching the next cover milestone. So, my 348 Sandman,318 Wolverine and 318 Drax should all earn me 250 Shards towards their 5*.

From the announcement (not sure how to double-quote):

“In addition, you will gain 100 Shards per 250 Shard milestone you have passed. Meaning that if you have a level 317 Professor X (Charles Xavier), you will gain the 280 Cover, 100 Shards from having passed 315 where you are currently working towards a cover, and a bonus 100 Shards from having passed 300.”

The 250 share milestones mentioned are at the levels 300, 320, 340, 350, 360 where a “traditional” 5* cover would have been awarded. So you get 100 shards bonus at those levels.

344 Rogue will give you 1 cover and 3x100 shards for Gambit.

This is better than what I first thought, but not as generous as what you describe. Equivalent of 2 covers (1 cover and 500 shards) for a max-champ 4*

AXP_isme

I’m quite disappointed with the way shards are being rewarded retroactively. I assumed my level 310ish cyclops would award 1 cable cover and 500 shards (to make up for the cover I would have got at 300). It seems I’ll actually get 1 cover (presumably a blue, which by chance is unusable) and 100 shards. That seems a bit stingy to me. 

I was expecting this to be a hit of a bonanza where shards rained down, like snow, at Christmas time giving the player base that warm seasonal feeling. That would have looked generous, engendered goodwill from a (seemingly jaded) forum and created the conditions under which people would spend more HP on filling their partially filled character shard bars. It feels like a missed opportunity if I’m honest. There are enough slightly OCD types (myself included) around here who would be looking for a chance to acquire these shards or those shards for another level or a nice round number of shards. That would have let them push out targeted holiday bundles and monetised the shard shop even more. Everyone’s a winner, or not. Not, clearly. 

marshall

So basically we're getting a lot less covers than previous feeder announcements. Why?

To save some veterans getting an extra cover or two? How petty.

We're basically being punished for having a character at high levels. Bring denied some paltry reward like a LL or some HP.

To whomever designed this change congrats on finding a way to lose the goodwill it's supposed to bring. Jeez.

Freelancer

Also from the announcement.

IceIX said:

At the same time, for 4-Star characters that are receiving all-new rewards, we want to ensure that players receive those rewards for the level they have reached.

I'll agree it does seem to contradict the example you quoted. Hopefully it was just a tired @IceIX mistake, as I'm sure the 315 in their example should be a 316 too.