On Retroactive Rewards

DarthDeVo

killahKlown said:

captainheath said:

Yes, the vets already earned a token at those levels.  But that token is not always a 5 star.  

Without the vets, this game would probably not have lasted this long.  We are invested in our rosters in both time and money.  

I remember the time when all players got a potential windfall of iso depending on their rosters.  I imagine many of us were looking for something at least fair to vets like that time was.  IMO, a company should value their current customers at least as much as their newer customers.  Especially since the current, long-standing customers have already shown an interest and are more likely to have built up a habit of spending.

The comment that it is just free stuff goes in both directions.  It really doesn't cost anything to give out in-game prizes.  But it does build rapport and loyalty.

The problem with that analogy is that when all of that iso was handed out, it was for retroactive Shield rank.  If your amount of play put you at rank 60 that day, you earned all of the ISO that you should have earned for every rank up to rank 60.  But the new players start from rank 1.  After much playing, when they reach rank 60 they will have received the same amount of ISO rewards that you earned on your insta-rank 60 day.

Retroactive level rewards is not the same cup of Kool-Aid.  When a feeder gets introduced, people with a large 4* Iceman will have already earned an LT for every tenth level.   Then you expect additionally the retroactive 5* cover.  Whereas a newer player will not receive an LT and a 5* cover when they receive that rank.

It's funny how much the Unfair label gets tossed around now that it's us on the short end.  But when we were double dipping those rewards while the newer players could not, there was no mention of it being unfair in our favor.

I guess my take on this is I feel I've been on the wrong end of the stick no matter what. 

When SCL was introduced, I was only a few months in. My windfall was minuscule compared to vets, and it felt unfair to me. 

When 5* feeders were introduced, most of my champed 4*s were at the 300 level or so. So while I was able to double dip on some of the updates, I still felt I was getting the short end of the stick a bit. I think the best result I ever had for any 5* feeder update was Captain Marvel. I think I got three covers for her off the bat. 

Now, my roster was finally in a place that I was expecting a nice little haul of rewards with this update, only to find out, once again, that I've somehow drawn the short straw. 

So yeah, pardon me for whinging a little bit when I say this update is unfair. 😋

Vhailorx

killahKlown said:

TPF Alexis said:

Dogface said:

shinnaruto said:

Dogface said:

Basepuzzler said:

Dogface said:

The current set-up might be unfair to vets, but wouldn't it be unfair to newer players if veteran players got retroactively rewarded 6 covers additional to the rewards they got in the process? 

No because the vets earned those covers by spending years and $ leveling said characters.

So vets deserve more than I do? 

Dogface, if the "vet" gets what they should have, how does this wrong you?

Bc it means it isn't the same for all players. If one is upset about getting 2 covers instead of 6, they should equally be upset if some get double rewards and others not. 

The same for everyone isn't always fair. What we're talking here is a reward proportional to the amount of time and money a given player has spent on the game. Y'know, the same principle as how someone who works 40 hours a week makes more money than someone who works the same job for 30 hours a week.

That's dumb.  If it takes me 3 weeks to work 40 hours...I should still be entitled to the same pay that you received for your 40 hour week.  40 hours is 40 hours.  Just like Level 340 should have equal rewards for you and for me, regardless of how long it took either of us to achieve that level.

This seems to ignore the fact that people can have different per-hour wages based on a variety of factors.  But that's kinda beside the point here

  Vets are not "better" than new players (though whether they are more or less valuable to demi/d3 is a harder question).

But more importantly, truly "equal" rewards are not possible when in game rewards are altered (unlike shield rank, which was additive).  So what is fair?  Everyone gets the rewards that were live at the time they earned it?  Or everyone loses what they had earned and gets only the new rewards?  Or everyone gets every reward?  I don't know that there is a morally right answer.  But there definitely was a settled answer in MPQ (and it was: "if you have already earned a reward that is subsequently changed, you get the new reward too").  At least that was true until today.

captainheath

killahKlown said:

captainheath said:

Yes, the vets already earned a token at those levels.  But that token is not always a 5 star.  

Without the vets, this game would probably not have lasted this long.  We are invested in our rosters in both time and money.  

I remember the time when all players got a potential windfall of iso depending on their rosters.  I imagine many of us were looking for something at least fair to vets like that time was.  IMO, a company should value their current customers at least as much as their newer customers.  Especially since the current, long-standing customers have already shown an interest and are more likely to have built up a habit of spending.

The comment that it is just free stuff goes in both directions.  It really doesn't cost anything to give out in-game prizes.  But it does build rapport and loyalty.

The problem with that analogy is that when all of that iso was handed out, it was for retroactive Shield rank.  If your amount of play put you at rank 60 that day, you earned all of the ISO that you should have earned for every rank up to rank 60.  But the new players start from rank 1.  After much playing, when they reach rank 60 they will have received the same amount of ISO rewards that you earned on your insta-rank 60 day.

Retroactive level rewards is not the same cup of Kool-Aid.  When a feeder gets introduced, people with a large 4* Iceman will have already earned an LT for every tenth level.   Then you expect additionally the retroactive 5* cover.  Whereas a newer player will not receive an LT and a 5* cover when they receive that rank.

It's funny how much the Unfair label gets tossed around now that it's us on the short end.  But when we were double dipping those rewards while the newer players could not, there was no mention of it being unfair in our favor.

However, in the big picture, one legendary token is not much.  It takes a long time to actually fully-cover a five star.  A legendary token is just the ability to roll the dice, it isn't a winning dice roll.  IMO, unfair still applies.

SuperRecoome

I was under the impression after reading the announcement that we'd get all the retroactive rewards that have been changed. I don't have a particularly robust roster but I thought I'd be getting some mighty tokens as I now cannot get them on most of my 3 star characters

TPF Alexis

killahKlown said:

TPF Alexis said:

Dogface said:

shinnaruto said:

Dogface said:

Basepuzzler said:

Dogface said:

The current set-up might be unfair to vets, but wouldn't it be unfair to newer players if veteran players got retroactively rewarded 6 covers additional to the rewards they got in the process? 

No because the vets earned those covers by spending years and $ leveling said characters.

So vets deserve more than I do? 

Dogface, if the "vet" gets what they should have, how does this wrong you?

Bc it means it isn't the same for all players. If one is upset about getting 2 covers instead of 6, they should equally be upset if some get double rewards and others not. 

The same for everyone isn't always fair. What we're talking here is a reward proportional to the amount of time and money a given player has spent on the game. Y'know, the same principle as how someone who works 40 hours a week makes more money than someone who works the same job for 30 hours a week.

That's dumb.  If it takes me 3 weeks to work 40 hours...I should still be entitled to the same pay that you received for your 40 hour week.  40 hours is 40 hours.  Just like Level 340 should have equal rewards for you and for me, regardless of how long it took either of us to achieve that level.

And in that time, I would have "worked" 120 hours. You're getting exactly the same thing per "40 hours of work".

BoyWonder1914

killahKlown said:

captainheath said:

Yes, the vets already earned a token at those levels.  But that token is not always a 5 star.  

Without the vets, this game would probably not have lasted this long.  We are invested in our rosters in both time and money.  

I remember the time when all players got a potential windfall of iso depending on their rosters.  I imagine many of us were looking for something at least fair to vets like that time was.  IMO, a company should value their current customers at least as much as their newer customers.  Especially since the current, long-standing customers have already shown an interest and are more likely to have built up a habit of spending.

The comment that it is just free stuff goes in both directions.  It really doesn't cost anything to give out in-game prizes.  But it does build rapport and loyalty.

The problem with that analogy is that when all of that iso was handed out, it was for retroactive Shield rank.  If your amount of play put you at rank 60 that day, you earned all of the ISO that you should have earned for every rank up to rank 60.  But the new players start from rank 1.  After much playing, when they reach rank 60 they will have received the same amount of ISO rewards that you earned on your insta-rank 60 day.

Retroactive level rewards is not the same cup of Kool-Aid.  When a feeder gets introduced, people with a large 4* Iceman will have already earned an LT for every tenth level.   Then you expect additionally the retroactive 5* cover.  Whereas a newer player will not receive an LT and a 5* cover when they receive that rank.

It's funny how much the Unfair label gets tossed around now that it's us on the short end.  But when we were double dipping those rewards while the newer players could not, there was no mention of it being unfair in our favor.

It's also funny how a lot of us never complained about this when we were newer players, because we knew that we'd get there eventually as long as we kept playing. Were there changes introduced to the game that benefitted the vets more than us? Absolutely. But that wasn't the vets fault for naturally having played the game longer than we had and having invested more time, energy, and resources. That's completely natural, and completely pointless to complain about. There were several feeders introduced who I barely got any 5* covers from because they were baby champs, while there were vets who got fat pay days. There were also feeders introduced who I got about the same amount of covers for as longer vets of the game, because they were relatively new 4* characters. Now that I've entered the 5-star realm myself and can do many of the same things, I DARESAY those missed covers and LTs here and there really haven't hampered my progress all that much. If you want to complain that you're not getting rewards fast enough then fine, but don't claim its unfair because there's always going to be players that have advanced further than you, and thus benefit more from these kinds of changes. 

BuzzedLightbeer

IceIX, first and foremost, thanks for the update and acknowledgement that there has been a lot of feedback regarding this issue.  I am sure this is not the easiest situation for you and your teammates to try and navigate.  I am also certainly appreciative of the fact that new 5* feeders were introduced to the game, as I received one cover for three different 5* characters that I previously had none of prior to the change.  Thank you!

Without trying to speak for anyone else and/or the source of their frustration though, I will state that for me personally it was extremely disappointing to suddenly realize that I was not in fact receiving the amount of retroactive rewards I had expected.  Regardless of whether my expectations not being met were a result of my own misunderstanding or via information/communication regarding this change not being as clear as it could be, I am left still very confused.  

Citing just one specific example (of numerous) from my own situation, I have a 5/1/5 5* Professor X.  He has been the only 5* character I have assigned as a “shards” recipient, and am obviously chasing him.  I have a level 304 4* Professor X, and was pumped that in addition to the one saved cover I thought I’d be receiving, I’d also receive enough shards from the levels 295-300 retroactive rewards to get another purple cover and have him at 5/2/5, and so much closer to champing him!  To come away with just the one saved cover and one-fifth the amount of shards needed to do this was quite a disappointment.  What really confuses me is how the devs feel this is appropriate - if I merely had ten less levels invested in my 4* Professor X at the time this went live, I’d be in line to still scoop up those shards needed within the next six levels.  To have missed out on something so desired by such a close margin just does not feel right, and I’m left feeling like I’d much, much rather have been back at level 294.  Surely having players that have invested a ton of time (not to mention possible financial resources) into the game shouldn’t come away feeling like they’d have been better off if they hadn’t worked quite as hard as they had?

I sincerely hope some type of resolution is implemented.

killahKlown

captainheath said:

killahKlown said:

captainheath said:

Yes, the vets already earned a token at those levels.  But that token is not always a 5 star.  

Without the vets, this game would probably not have lasted this long.  We are invested in our rosters in both time and money.  

I remember the time when all players got a potential windfall of iso depending on their rosters.  I imagine many of us were looking for something at least fair to vets like that time was.  IMO, a company should value their current customers at least as much as their newer customers.  Especially since the current, long-standing customers have already shown an interest and are more likely to have built up a habit of spending.

The comment that it is just free stuff goes in both directions.  It really doesn't cost anything to give out in-game prizes.  But it does build rapport and loyalty.

The problem with that analogy is that when all of that iso was handed out, it was for retroactive Shield rank.  If your amount of play put you at rank 60 that day, you earned all of the ISO that you should have earned for every rank up to rank 60.  But the new players start from rank 1.  After much playing, when they reach rank 60 they will have received the same amount of ISO rewards that you earned on your insta-rank 60 day.

Retroactive level rewards is not the same cup of Kool-Aid.  When a feeder gets introduced, people with a large 4* Iceman will have already earned an LT for every tenth level.   Then you expect additionally the retroactive 5* cover.  Whereas a newer player will not receive an LT and a 5* cover when they receive that rank.

It's funny how much the Unfair label gets tossed around now that it's us on the short end.  But when we were double dipping those rewards while the newer players could not, there was no mention of it being unfair in our favor.

However, in the big picture, one legendary token is not much.  It takes a long time to actually fully-cover a five star.  A legendary token is just the ability to roll the dice, it isn't a winning dice roll.  IMO, unfair still applies.

So let's all trade in an LT for each retro 5* we are "entitled" to

IceIX

Just chiming in to restate that all this is valuable stuff, and I *greatly* appreciate you all in taking the time to provide this feedback. Not that we didn't get some useful player-side information from the other thread(s) and elsewhere, but the measured feedback here is golden.

killahKlown

TPF Alexis said:

killahKlown said:

TPF Alexis said:

Dogface said:

shinnaruto said:

Dogface said:

Basepuzzler said:

Dogface said:

The current set-up might be unfair to vets, but wouldn't it be unfair to newer players if veteran players got retroactively rewarded 6 covers additional to the rewards they got in the process? 

No because the vets earned those covers by spending years and $ leveling said characters.

So vets deserve more than I do? 

Dogface, if the "vet" gets what they should have, how does this wrong you?

Bc it means it isn't the same for all players. If one is upset about getting 2 covers instead of 6, they should equally be upset if some get double rewards and others not. 

The same for everyone isn't always fair. What we're talking here is a reward proportional to the amount of time and money a given player has spent on the game. Y'know, the same principle as how someone who works 40 hours a week makes more money than someone who works the same job for 30 hours a week.

That's dumb.  If it takes me 3 weeks to work 40 hours...I should still be entitled to the same pay that you received for your 40 hour week.  40 hours is 40 hours.  Just like Level 340 should have equal rewards for you and for me, regardless of how long it took either of us to achieve that level.

And in that time, I would have "worked" 120 hours. You're getting exactly the same thing per "40 hours of work".

I'm afraid you really are not grasping this.  Feel free to PM me if you would like further lessons.

Bryan Lambert

As much as I hate to interrupt the always entertaining “my analogy is better than your analogy” stage of the discussion:

The very idea of “fairness” is system-dependent. That’s why these analogies break down very quickly. When we talk about the disparity between players at different levels and “the rich getting richer” in MPQ, what does that mean in terms of gameplay?

Well, it only matters where I’m competing with other players. Between time lices, bracket flips, and Shield clearance levels, plus the fact that only a handful of the hundreds of characters in the game make any difference in actual competition, the practical effect of vets getting a few more champ levels on classic 5’s they never use is a lot smaller than it used to be back in the day. The players are broader and also more fragmented. The vets aren’t going to gain a significant competitive advantage from old-school retroactive rewards, so while they may be gaining extra stuff, they’re not gaining much in the way of extra power. 

So there’s really no need to get sidetracked down a path of pitting “newbies vs. vets” against each other. (Full disclosure - I’m about as much of a vet you can be time-wise and not particularly competitive roster-wise. Never maxed a 4, for example).

captainheath

killahKlown said:

captainheath said:

killahKlown said:

captainheath said:

Yes, the vets already earned a token at those levels.  But that token is not always a 5 star.  

Without the vets, this game would probably not have lasted this long.  We are invested in our rosters in both time and money.  

I remember the time when all players got a potential windfall of iso depending on their rosters.  I imagine many of us were looking for something at least fair to vets like that time was.  IMO, a company should value their current customers at least as much as their newer customers.  Especially since the current, long-standing customers have already shown an interest and are more likely to have built up a habit of spending.

The comment that it is just free stuff goes in both directions.  It really doesn't cost anything to give out in-game prizes.  But it does build rapport and loyalty.

The problem with that analogy is that when all of that iso was handed out, it was for retroactive Shield rank.  If your amount of play put you at rank 60 that day, you earned all of the ISO that you should have earned for every rank up to rank 60.  But the new players start from rank 1.  After much playing, when they reach rank 60 they will have received the same amount of ISO rewards that you earned on your insta-rank 60 day.

Retroactive level rewards is not the same cup of Kool-Aid.  When a feeder gets introduced, people with a large 4* Iceman will have already earned an LT for every tenth level.   Then you expect additionally the retroactive 5* cover.  Whereas a newer player will not receive an LT and a 5* cover when they receive that rank.

It's funny how much the Unfair label gets tossed around now that it's us on the short end.  But when we were double dipping those rewards while the newer players could not, there was no mention of it being unfair in our favor.

However, in the big picture, one legendary token is not much.  It takes a long time to actually fully-cover a five star.  A legendary token is just the ability to roll the dice, it isn't a winning dice roll.  IMO, unfair still applies.

So let's all trade in an LT for each retro 5* we are "entitled" to

Heh:  I'd gladly do so.

The problem is that when you've played for a long time, the game doesn't change much.  There are so few ways to maximize play because it takes a significant amount of time to get a 5 star to enough covers to matter.  

In this age of not buffing characters, a lot of vets were likely looking foward to a 'step forward' in play for diversity by getting some 5 star covers for characters they might actually use.  

I started the week thinking that the update would help me finally finish Black Bolt.  Now I can either give up on that idea, spend $100 when he randomly comes up in the store, or slowly gather shards for about 5 months.  None of those options are fun considering the time I've already invested in just this one character.

It is not 'entitlement.'  I'm not that fickle.  I'm a customer that has invested a lot of time and more than a few hundred dollars into this game over five years.  I stepped away for a few months at the beginning of this year when I got frustrated with lack of progress.  I did regularly check this forum to see if things were changed.  When the game got some new events early in summer, I decided to come back.  I rejoined a fairly good alliance and was excited that the entire engine got updated.  To me this was a sign that the devs had a plan for the long-haul.  

This update deflated that balloon for now.  

jb5357

I am sure this is felt by others and already said, but wanted to add my reaction. Since the update was announced, I strategically worked my roster to try and get past points where a mighty token would be issued and secondary shards, because in prior updates, replaced awards were issued. When none of these were issued, it felt like punishment for leveling, and I would have been better off not playing for 5 days, instead of using my resources in game, as I would be getting more/better stuff today vs the last 5 days.

i am not as high is my 4 star champing, so that did not affect me, but i feel penalized for working to max out and level my 3 stars.

bluewolf

Someone probably posted something similar already but here goes:

I have almost all the 5's champed.  One that's been lingering is Doom who ended up 5/5/1 with 7 saved covers.  But I have Invisible Woman at 343 and I always thought eventually she might feed him, so I patiently waited for that day to (hopefully, eventually) come.  I figured I could take trading in 3 covers and champ him, or get her to 360, when the time came.

And then the chart got posted and there it was!  Sue will feed Doom!  And wait...shards!  So I imagined taking those shards and finishing him without any waste at all.....it seemed like a massive gift and I could deal with trading in HP and CP for colorless covers....I've been wanting to use him in different events so I figured I'd (try to) wait and see how rewards went before getting too worked up over the HP and CP stuff.

Well, we know how that worked out.  While still trying to figure out the retro rewards after reading a confusing post, I got one actual Doom cover...and 300 shards.  And IW is ONLY 343 so, 4 less random pulls for her over the past 3900 pulls or so, and I'd have gotten a full shard/cover that I could have converted and used some saved if I wanted, or I guess target her and 3 Doom....you get the point.  Instead I now have 8 saved covers and 300 shards for Doom.

I'm both worse off than I expected based on all 25 prior feeder updates, and have more work to do to get a Doom cover thanks to pulling a few too many IWs (for some reason RNG seems to love her on my account) and every time I think about it, it makes me mad and want to throw my phone across the room.  OK, maybe not right now but it sure makes me want to make sure I don't renew VIP or buy a bundle or anything like that.

tiomono

This update was very odd. Not always consistent with how champion reward updates have been handled for more than a year. Not even consistent with itself.

My 298 hulk buster gave me 1 rescue cover and 250 shards for rescue which seems consistent. Then I look at my level 300 totally awesome hulk that gave me 1 banner cover and only 100 shards.

I'm just baffled how the devs came to this conclusion as a reward structure. Having 2 extra covers for a character gives me 150 shards less instead of the 400 more that the green checkmark would seem to imply.

thedarkphoenix

This is one of those cases where the players with deep rosters and characters on farm should have been rewarded.

The fact that farming multiple characters is a thing already should tell the devs that higher end game play is screwed up.

If this isn't addressed and in a timely manner  in really going to go ahead and have to put mpq aside.

pheregas

Dogface said:

Basepuzzler said:

Dogface said:

The current set-up might be unfair to vets, but wouldn't it be unfair to newer players if veteran players got retroactively rewarded 6 covers additional to the rewards they got in the process? 

No because the vets earned those covers by spending years and $ leveling said characters.

So vets deserve more than I do? 

There’s been a lot to unpack here.

Rather than yet another analogy, let’s discuss what reward changes actually alter. This being OPPORTUNITY.
When a champion reward is changed, newer players have the opportunity to earn those new rewards. Established characters may have gotten a reward, but without a retroactive payout of the new reward, the established player has now lost the opportunity to gain the same reward.
The devils advocate may then bring up the fact that the established player did get a different reward, one unavailable to the newer player. That being then Latest Token.
The Latest Token had a 15% chance of a specific colored 5* character, a character for which surely didn’t include the updated shard reward character at the time it wasn’t earned.
The game has always skewed specificity as having higher worth than randomness. Under that metric, the newer player has a significant advantage.
But coming back to the original point. Every player should have the same opportunity to gain the higher valued reward. In this case, those are the shards.

killahKlown

DarthDeVo said:

killahKlown said:

captainheath said:

Yes, the vets already earned a token at those levels.  But that token is not always a 5 star.  

Without the vets, this game would probably not have lasted this long.  We are invested in our rosters in both time and money.  

I remember the time when all players got a potential windfall of iso depending on their rosters.  I imagine many of us were looking for something at least fair to vets like that time was.  IMO, a company should value their current customers at least as much as their newer customers.  Especially since the current, long-standing customers have already shown an interest and are more likely to have built up a habit of spending.

The comment that it is just free stuff goes in both directions.  It really doesn't cost anything to give out in-game prizes.  But it does build rapport and loyalty.

The problem with that analogy is that when all of that iso was handed out, it was for retroactive Shield rank.  If your amount of play put you at rank 60 that day, you earned all of the ISO that you should have earned for every rank up to rank 60.  But the new players start from rank 1.  After much playing, when they reach rank 60 they will have received the same amount of ISO rewards that you earned on your insta-rank 60 day.

Retroactive level rewards is not the same cup of Kool-Aid.  When a feeder gets introduced, people with a large 4* Iceman will have already earned an LT for every tenth level.   Then you expect additionally the retroactive 5* cover.  Whereas a newer player will not receive an LT and a 5* cover when they receive that rank.

It's funny how much the Unfair label gets tossed around now that it's us on the short end.  But when we were double dipping those rewards while the newer players could not, there was no mention of it being unfair in our favor.

I guess my take on this is I feel I've been on the wrong end of the stick no matter what. 

When SCL was introduced, I was only a few months in. My windfall was minuscule compared to vets, and it felt unfair to me. 

When 5* feeders were introduced, most of my champed 4*s were at the 300 level or so. So while I was able to double dip on some of the updates, I still felt I was getting the short end of the stick a bit. I think the best result I ever had for any 5* feeder update was Captain Marvel. I think I got three covers for her off the bat. 

Now, my roster was finally in a place that I was expecting a nice little haul of rewards with this update, only to find out, once again, that I've somehow drawn the short straw. 

So yeah, pardon me for whinging a little bit when I say this update is unfair. 😋

That sucks you got stuck on both sides man.  Sorry

thedarkphoenix

Never in any type of game that I've played have lower tier players been upset when a changes goes through, they get something but not as much as end or long term players.

IF ANYTHING it's usually a motivating factor to get to that point so if something like that happens again they can be in on it.


Anyway I'm sure this is less about what's fair and unfair to low level players and more about The economy and how much will it damage things if they give out (what they should) what's "owed"  or at least how not to snub those who have developed rosters

KGB

The problem now though is that it's not just 5 levels of champ rewards that have changed. It's 15 levels of rewards at the 4* level. So for someone who has a max champ 370 they would be getting:

5 LTs (at the 300, 320 etc levels) plus 60 cp (the other shard replacement of champ rewards) more than someone who just has a L295 or below 4*. That's a LOT of extra resources they got that I am not going to get just because they got there first.

So while I am sympathetic to their loss, it will be no where remotely fair if they get that much extra resources. There should be a claw back of LT's and CP's if those players get awarded more shards. Or those of us who aren't at those levels need double rewards when we do reach them.

Prior feeder updates already benefited veteran players who double dipped the 280/300 etc rewards with extra LT's so at some point that has to stop for fairness sake.

KGB