shardmas then milestonemas.....

entrailbucket

At every other character tier, the champion rewards for all characters are the same.  At the 4* tier, a random assortment of unrelated characters have way, way better rewards than everyone else. 

This makes zero sense.

killahKlown

I think the amount of rewards offered is more than fair.  Stop looking for so many handouts.  Earn your rewards.

Damn millennials

KGB

entrailbucket said:

At every other character tier, the champion rewards for all characters are the same.  At the 4* tier, a random assortment of unrelated characters have way, way better rewards than everyone else. 

Not sure what you mean here? I thought all 4* champ rewards were identical (minus the few that are feeders) Can you elaborate with an example?

I don't think we'll ever get retroactive feeders again. There's just too many players with rosters consisting of duplicate maxed 4* who would be due dozens of 5* covers. If they only only awarded retroactive feeder rewards for 1 maxed 4*, the vets would enact Shardmas 2. If they awarded every retroactive feeder reward then vets will have massive double dipping rewards (ie the original reward for that champ level + new feeder retro reward) which isn't fair to all the new players coming up.

It's best for everyone if they never do retroactive feeders again.

Note that the game is not just behind on 5* feeders, it's also behind on 4* feeders since there has been no update to the 3* rewards give 4* shards to the newer 4* that have been released.

KGB

entrailbucket

All 2* characters feed a 3*.

All 3* characters feed a 4*.

Only a few 4* characters feed a 5*.

This makes no sense.


The rewards aren't the same, because the non feeder 4* kick out CP or tokens, which are *significantly* worse than 5* covers or shards.

KGB

entrailbucket said:

All 2* characters feed a 3*.

All 3* characters feed a 4*.

Only a few 4* characters feed a 5*.

This makes no sense.


The rewards aren't the same, because the non feeder 4* kick out CP or tokens, which are *significantly* worse than 5* covers or shards.

You know what else makes no sense?

The fact that some 3* feed multiple 4*s while others only feed 1 (so 3* rewards not balanced/consistent). We also haven't gotten a 4* feeder for any new 4* since Shardmas so we have lots of unfed 4* now (way more than unfed 5*).

So in truth, feeders are quite inconsistent at every tier (not every 3 has a feeder, some 3* feed multiple 4*/some don't, not every 4* has a feeder, not every 5* has a feeder).

It also doesn't make sense to release Ikaris before Sersi since he would be the obvious feeder for her and not iHulk.

It's not supposed to make sense because feeders are 'bolted on' and not part of the original design. If they didn't have to retroactively award stuff they could easily fix all this. But the player base would never accept such a thing so it's going to remain haphazard.

KGB

entrailbucket

KGB said:

entrailbucket said:

All 2* characters feed a 3*.

All 3* characters feed a 4*.

Only a few 4* characters feed a 5*.

This makes no sense.


The rewards aren't the same, because the non feeder 4* kick out CP or tokens, which are *significantly* worse than 5* covers or shards.

You know what else makes no sense?

The fact that some 3* feed multiple 4*s while others only feed 1 (so 3* rewards not balanced/consistent). We also haven't gotten a 4* feeder for any new 4* since Shardmas so we have lots of unfed 4* now (way more than unfed 5*).

So in truth, feeders are quite inconsistent at every tier (not every 3 has a feeder, some 3* feed multiple 4*/some don't, not every 4* has a feeder, not every 5* has a feeder).

It also doesn't make sense to release Ikaris before Sersi since he would be the obvious feeder for her and not iHulk.

It's not supposed to make sense because feeders are 'bolted on' and not part of the original design. If they didn't have to retroactively award stuff they could easily fix all this. But the player base would never accept such a thing so it's going to remain haphazard.

KGB

Feeders are absolutely consistent at every tier.  Every 2* and 3* feeds one or more characters at the next tier.  Some 4* do too, and others do not, for reasons that only make sense if you've closely followed outside discourse for a few years.

I know exactly why they won't do it -- it's because a small minority of extremely loud players would prefer no rewards at all over rewards they consider "unfair." (I believe the phrase is "cutting off one's nose to spite one's face")

That doesn't mean we should rationalize the current state or accept it.  How do you explain to a new player that Shuri randomly gives out way better rewards than Blade, for example?

DyingLegend

KGB said:

entrailbucket said:

All 2* characters feed a 3*.

All 3* characters feed a 4*.

Only a few 4* characters feed a 5*.

This makes no sense.


The rewards aren't the same, because the non feeder 4* kick out CP or tokens, which are *significantly* worse than 5* covers or shards.

You know what else makes no sense?

The fact that some 3* feed multiple 4*s while others only feed 1 (so 3* rewards not balanced/consistent). We also haven't gotten a 4* feeder for any new 4* since Shardmas so we have lots of unfed 4* now (way more than unfed 5*).

So in truth, feeders are quite inconsistent at every tier (not every 3 has a feeder, some 3* feed multiple 4*/some don't, not every 4* has a feeder, not every 5* has a feeder).

It also doesn't make sense to release Ikaris before Sersi since he would be the obvious feeder for her and not iHulk.

It's not supposed to make sense because feeders are 'bolted on' and not part of the original design. If they didn't have to retroactively award stuff they could easily fix all this. But the player base would never accept such a thing so it's going to remain haphazard.

KGB

Overhauling the feeder scenario would be an absolute nightmare for the Devs. They would have to redo it from the ground up. They would be better off introducing new milestones like have (x) amount of X-Men characters and get (x) amount of shards for any current X-Men character etc.

I think it may confuse new people on why certain characters feed random character, but us grizzled vets just shrug it off as it is what it is, just be thankful they have a feeder in the first place. 

KGB

entrailbucket said:

Feeders are absolutely consistent at every tier.  Every 2* and 3* feeds one or more characters at the next tier.  Some 4* do too, and others do not, for reasons that only make sense if you've closely followed outside discourse for a few years.

I know exactly why they won't do it -- it's because a small minority of extremely loud players would prefer no rewards at all over rewards they consider "unfair." (I believe the phrase is "cutting off one's nose to spite one's face")

That doesn't mean we should rationalize the current state or accept it.  How do you explain to a new player that Shuri randomly gives out way better rewards than Blade, for example?

The 2 and 3 star tiers are complete in that they are not adding more characters to them. So it's easy for those tiers to be finalized in terms of feeders.

I also claim the 3* champ rewards are not equal. Some 3* feed more than 1 4* so the rewards there are 'better' for some 3* than others. How do you explain that to a new player or are you proposing to fix that too?

At the 4* tier there are 2x as many 4* as there are 5* characters. So it's literally impossible for the rewards to be the same for every 4* since there are not enough 5* characters to feed for a 1->1 ratio. So how would you propose fixing that (please don't suggest 2+ 4* feeding a single 5* because that just ain't gonna happen)?

I would support revamping the feeding system if it didn't involve retroactive rewards. But I'm probably in the small minority there given most Forum members here are long time vets with deeper 4* benches than my L330ish characters. They tried once during Shardmas and this Forum melted down over retro rewards and the bad publicity/feelings lasted years. It's small wonder they have never bothered to revisit it to fix the lack of new 4* feeders and 5* feeders falling behind.

So would you support a revamp of the feeding system if you didn't get retro rewards OR you got retro rewards but had to give back the rewards you originally got at those levels in order to get the 5* shards/covers (ie no double dipping)? Until the answer to that is yes from you, me and a vast majority of players don't expect anything to change.

KGB

entrailbucket

A 3* feeding multiple 4* is a million miles away from  Shuri directly rewarding 5* covers while Blade gives out tokens and CP -- it's not even comparable. 

Why are you ok with Shuri's covers being vastly more valuable than Blade's, when they're at the same tier and in the same token pool?

Why, exactly, is a 5* being fed by multiple 4*s off the table?


I'd be fine with an update to feeders that gives no retro rewards at all, or gives diminished retro rewards.  I don't see how they could claw back old rewards -- I spent all that stuff already! -- but that would also be fine with me.  Getting something, even if it's just going forward, is better than getting nothing at all.

There are about 100 or 200 players who would absolutely lose their minds over it though, and review bombs would be the least of the devs' worries if they tried something like that again.  Based on the reaction from last time I'd expect actual physical violence to occur (seriously).

HoundofShadow

I wonder if feeders were the catalyst for our 4/5/4/5 releases. It was 4/4/5 before that. Back then, the dev publicly said that they felt they released feeders too quickly in the podcast. This caused some players to go into a meltdown and they called the dev out of touch.  Here's the thread in April 2019:

https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/comment/875286/#Comment_875286

Then, approximately 4 months later, they kicked off 4/5/4/5 releases beginning with Prof X?

In December 2019, they updated all feeders for non-Latest 5* at a huge discount.  After this shardmas saga, there wasn't any feeder for about a year. They started giving feeders more regularly this year.

As you can see, dev really dislike giving retroactive rewards for feeders. I'm not sure why some can't see this and continue to ask for feeders updates to all non-latest 5*. They tried to do that in late 2019 but they were expecting a tradeoff with fewer shards. It blew up in their face and they were forced to give the full amount. Just give up asking dev to release feeders for all non-latest 5* or even give double feeders for 5*. Their actions over the years are loud and clear: They have zero interest in that. 

On the flip side, they might have given us dual 5* feeders if players accepted the tradeoff during shardmas. Of course they didn't. So, here we are: new 4* releases feeding 5*. 

As for shuri giving "better" rewards, it's subjective. I have Okoye champed and the last time I used her were when she was boosted. Even though she's a meta, but I hardly used her nowadays. So, her "value" has dropped a lot for me.

entrailbucket

HoundofShadow said:

I wonder if feeders were the catalyst for our 4/5/4/5 releases. It was 4/4/5 before that. Back then, the dev publicly said that they felt they released feeders too quickly in the podcast. This caused some players to go into a meltdown and they called the dev out of touch.  Here's the thread in April 2019:

https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/comment/875286/#Comment_875286

Then, approximately 4 months later, they kicked off 4/5/4/5 releases beginning with Prof X?

In December 2019, they updated all feeders for non-Latest 5* at a huge discount.  After this shardmas saga, there wasn't any feeder for about a year. They started giving feeders more regularly this year.

As you can see, dev really dislike giving retroactive rewards for feeders. I'm not sure why some can't see this and continue to ask for feeders updates to all non-latest 5*. They tried to do that in late 2019 but they were expecting a tradeoff with fewer shards. It blew up in their face and they were forced to give the full amount. Just give up asking dev to release feeders for all non-latest 5* or even give double feeders for 5*. Their actions over the years are loud and clear: They have zero interest in that. 

On the flip side, they might have given us dual 5* feeders if players accepted the tradeoff during shardmas. Of course they didn't. So, here we are: new 4* releases feeding 5*. 

As for shuri giving "better" rewards, it's subjective. I have Okoye champed and the last time I used her were when she was boosted. Even though she's a meta, but I hardly used her nowadays. So, her "value" has dropped a lot for me.

Wow, that thread was great.   It explains pretty well why we've seen basically zero communication from them since then -- why would they bother telling us anything at all if that's the reaction they get?

Shuri was perhaps the wrong example to choose because of her connection to Okoye, but would you really say it's subjective that guaranteed 5* covers and shards are better than CP and tokens?  Do you think a lot of players would choose an LT over a guaranteed 5* cover?

HoundofShadow

It depends on who the 5* are. If it's Banner or Wasp, I think they would rather take CP/LTs to spend it on latest meta 5*. Given that majority of 5* are useless, I think they would prefer LTs instead. Of course, they don't mind double dipping on rewards. However, boosted 5* weeks change a lot of things, so they are more valuable for a week.

KGB

entrailbucket said:

Shuri was perhaps the wrong example to choose because of her connection to Okoye, but would you really say it's subjective that guaranteed 5* covers and shards are better than CP and tokens?  Do you think a lot of players would choose an LT over a guaranteed 5* cover?

As Hound mentioned, value is really subjective.

When they replaced straight covers with shards they spread them over 3 rewards instead of 1. That cut down the HP and CP rewards and more than a few Forum members were upset about the loss of those HP and CP. For them the HP and CP were considered every bit as good of a reward as a 5* cover to a character they were never going to use (essentially anything non-meta).

Boosted 5* has changed that calculus of course since probably 80% or more 5* are usable when boosted. Still the loss of CP and HP does matter for quite a few players who are not post HP/CP like spenders or very long time vets (6+ years) are.

IMHO, there is 0 chance they will ever have double feeders for every 5* and I'd guess the chance of retroactive feeders to be <5% after Shardmas. There is just too much downside (bad feelings depending on how it's implemented) for the Devs and so little upside for them (0 direct money, doesn't entice new spending, doesn't attract new players who might spend etc).

KGB

entrailbucket

Of course they're never going to do it.  There's no way they would do full retroactive rewards at this point, and if they gave us 1 shard less than full retroactive rewards, they'd be facing down another huge tantrum from the same 200 players who threw a huge tantrum the last time.

Those players have effectively ensured that we'll never get a proper feeder system that actually makes sense, and they've collectively cost us all thousands of covers. 

I think it's a bit ridiculous that rewards we could use are being held hostage by that small group -- the choice is not "fair" rewards vs "unfair" rewards, it's "unfair" rewards vs absolutely nothing.

Chipster22

I believe a major factor contributing to the tantrum was the lack of expectations management.  

Players were told that rewards were coming and excitedly posted about it prior to rollout.  Some of these posts belied a misunderstanding of what was to come.  At this point the developers could have tamped down expectations by pointing out misinterpretations.  They wouldn't have had to explain exactly what was going to happen, but just say some of the discussions were getting overly optimistic.   Instead on the day the rewards were released there was more of a sense of let down than bounty.

This scenario also played out when elite tokens were introduced.  I and some others assumed that elite tokens would replace standard tokens everywhere they appeared.  Instead standard tokens remained and elite tokens were just added some places.  Again, there were posts that revealed this misunderstanding prior to the launch of elite tokens, but the expectations were allowed to remain.

ThaRoadWarrior

I will say that having at least one cover of every 5* grants you 3cp from required character 5e nodes you would otherwise not have access to, so that sort of probably balances out some kind of way the split down of discreet covers to 3 slugs of shards. And there have been more than a few of those lesser shard drop levels that have been enough to finish a cover for me, so it's not like there is no advantage at all to doing it that way now that shards are full implemented.

entrailbucket

Chipster22 said:

I believe a major factor contributing to the tantrum was the lack of expectations management.  

Players were told that rewards were coming and excitedly posted about it prior to rollout.  Some of these posts belied a misunderstanding of what was to come.  At this point the developers could have tamped down expectations by pointing out misinterpretations.  They wouldn't have had to explain exactly what was going to happen, but just say some of the discussions were getting overly optimistic.   Instead on the day the rewards were released there was more of a sense of let down than bounty.

This scenario also played out when elite tokens were introduced.  I and some others assumed that elite tokens would replace standard tokens everywhere they appeared.  Instead standard tokens remained and elite tokens were just added some places.  Again, there were posts that revealed this misunderstanding prior to the launch of elite tokens, but the expectations were allowed to remain.

This is speculation, of course, but I don't think lowering expectations around the retro rewards would have reduced the intensity of the player reaction, it would have just moved the reaction forward to the announcement, rather than the reveal.

Ultimately, the problem is that a few players decided to launch a scorched-earth, totally out of proportion, Braveheart-style crusade in the name of JUSTICE, without realizing what the long-term effects of that would be (the effect is that we will never get any retro rewards again ever, and 4* feeders will lag behind forever). 

Their revolution was never going to successfully wrest control of the game away from the development team and put it in the hands of a group of players, because that's not...like, how real life works.

(Before someone accuses me of overstating the player reaction as a holy revolution in the name of justice, I was there, and this is how they were talking about it.)

BriMan2222

entrailbucket said:

Of course they're never going to do it.  There's no way they would do full retroactive rewards at this point, and if they gave us 1 shard less than full retroactive rewards, they'd be facing down another huge tantrum from the same 200 players who threw a huge tantrum the last time.

Those players have effectively ensured that we'll never get a proper feeder system that actually makes sense, and they've collectively cost us all thousands of covers. 

I think it's a bit ridiculous that rewards we could use are being held hostage by that small group -- the choice is not "fair" rewards vs "unfair" rewards, it's "unfair" rewards vs absolutely nothing.

https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/comment/905689#Comment_905689

Well, those players who threw a tantrum did so because before this we were told by the devs that any time feeders were updated we would get 100 percent of the retroactive rewards. I shared a screen shot at the time,  which for some reason doesn't seem to be viewable any more,  of the dev announcement on this forum that any time a 5 star is given a new feeder you will absolutely get all of the retroactive rewards as long as you didn't sell the 4 star.   People were understandably upset that we were told one thing and then given a different thing with no warning. 

This is what I said along with the picture showing that they had promised that we would always get 100 percent retroactive rewards when a 5 star gets a new feeder. 

"We were explicitly told that as long as we had the 4 star on our roster we would get all of the updated 5 star rewards when those changes happen.  Whether you think that is "fair" or not, this is what we were told in no uncertain terms would be the norm going forward with next to no warning that this might change."

entrailbucket

There's a massive difference between getting "upset" and the actions some players took during that time.

If the extent of the reaction was players getting upset about this and posting about it on the forum, we're not in the situation we're in today.

BriMan2222

entrailbucket said:

There's a massive difference between getting "upset" and the actions some players took during that time.

If the extent of the reaction was players getting upset about this and posting about it on the forum, we're not in the situation we're in today.

What actions are those?  I only saw people complaining on here and fb and discord.  I don't remember anyone taking it too far, like attacking the devs personally, but it's possible I may have missed that if it happened.