PSA: Update in Ascended Character feeder policy. Nico Minoru eligible until Tuesday December 19th.

123468

Comments

  • Hilk
    Hilk Posts: 131 Tile Toppler

    Hmm… I would have gotten more if I had ascended nico… perhaps I should not have worried about the original “rule” that the feeder rewards wouldn’t be given on ascended characters.

    Oh well, good for the people cleaning up… but it seems a bit strange…

    So…. For the future…. Which way is it?

  • Bowgentle
    Bowgentle Posts: 7,926 Chairperson of the Boards

    @Hilk said:
    Hmm… I would have gotten more if I had ascended nico… perhaps I should not have worried about the original “rule” that the feeder rewards wouldn’t be given on ascended characters.

    Oh well, good for the people cleaning up… but it seems a bit strange…

    So…. For the future…. Which way is it?

    No retro rewards, until the next "one time exception", of course.

  • Daredevil217
    Daredevil217 Posts: 3,990 Chairperson of the Boards

    Is this our first “slap in the face” reference in this thread? @DAZ0273?

    If you have a character ready to ascend and purposely hold them back until they are a feeder, you get to have your cake (5* version) and eat it too (retro rewards). So the system really does punish progressing your roster too fast, which to me seems backwards.

    I don’t see the equivalency to selling a dupe because burning 4s are at present the only way to obtain their 5 version. Selling a dupe and starting over to farm rewards isn’t the same at all because you can get the benefits of farming whether you keep or sell a dupe.

    Using Blackstone’s logic, why do feeders exist at all? If you go all in and raise your 4* character to level 370 in month 1 and then the devs make the character a feeder, why should you get the benefits of having the character maxed months before me, and then you get the retro rewards as well? And on top of it, you get an EXTRA 6 LTs that I will never get. You get all this cake and I get nothing!? Slaps all around!

    But if we look at the “spirit of the law” when it comes to feeders, they mostly exist to (wait for it…) not punish folks for progressing their roster fast. Ascension not granting feeders runs counter to the “spirit of the law” and thus I agree with those that say they should grant feeders. But if they can’t because of tech issues, that I get, and appreciate the one time exception.

  • GrimSkald
    GrimSkald Posts: 2,657 Chairperson of the Boards

    @Blackstone said:
    I think the retro rewards back peddle is complete ****.

    I get what the "shouldn't be punished for ascending a character" crowd is trying to say, it's just not a relevant argument.

    It's a great excuse for eating your cake---ascending when told there won't be retro rewards for ascended characters---and having it too---getting those retro covers, and then some, anyway---it just isn't reasonable.

    4* Nico was changed to give rewards. If you no longer have 4* Nico (whether you sold her to start over, or Ascended her for 5* Nico, you got something different in exchange for your 4* and aren't owed anything) you shouldn't expect rewards. If you get them, great for you... But recognize you're on the positive end of unfair treatment.

    Even if you disagree with the above paragraph (and there is a reasonable opposing argument to be made) it's still not fair to those that waited due to the over compensation.

    For those that retained 4* Nico, because they were told there would be no retro rewards if they ascended her, this is a slap in the face.

    Not only did they delay progression on a character in order to get those retro rewards...
    ... They aren't even getting equal rewards to those that didn't wait, because the early ascenders are getting more then they would have gotten if they waited.

    It's like Bob eating his cake, Joe waiting until later, then mom giving Bob two extra slices with sprinkles, while Joe just gets a few sprinkles on his dried out old piece of cake.

    If they really chose to break their stated policy in order to avoid upsetting a few people who really had no legitimate complaint, while simultaneously giving a whole other group of players a very legitimate complaint, somebody needs to reevaluate their decision making abilities.

    For the record: I'm not affected by this either way. I have a champed Nico but not maxed and no intention of focusing on her anytime soon. This fiasco doesn't change what I got from her update.

    For those arguing for the retro reward exception, I urge you to consider if you only think it's right because you get something out of it. FYI:You can get those covers and still recognize it's objectively a bad move and unfair to those that waited. (Reminder: those that waited to get any possible retro rewards, will never get the over compensation that's being given out right now)

    Anyway, I really don't understand why there's even a question as to whether or not this is fair.

    If it "isn't fair" to give rewards for an ascended 4*, then it isn't fair to give retroactive rewards at all. You got the benefits of leveling the character and the rewards for leveling the character -- isn't a "a slap in the face" to everyone who hasn't leveled the character yet? After all, you're getting extra Legendary Tokens?

    This was in fact the logic they applied after Shards were implemented, and they gave vastly reduced shards as retro rewards. As I recall, it was 1 1/2 covers worth, instead of 6. Maybe 2. The player base rebelled and they relented. To be honest, I strongly suspect if they didn't relent then the game would have died within two or three months - everyone I knew stopped spending money on the game.

    Ascending characters has opened up all kinds of possibilities, and those possibilities are absolutely meaningless if you daren't ascend 3/4 of the character base because you don't want to miss out on future rewards. It's a bad system and inherently contradictory.

  • KGB
    KGB Posts: 3,278 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited December 2023

    @Daredevil217 said:
    Is this our first “slap in the face” reference in this thread? @DAZ0273?

    If you have a character ready to ascend and purposely hold them back until they are a feeder, you get to have your cake (5* version) and eat it too (retro rewards). So the system really does punish progressing your roster too fast, which to me seems backwards.

    As I understood it, the point he was making was that there was an official announcement of no retro feeders if you ascended your 4 stars.

    So many players chose NOT to ascend in order to get feeders from their 4 stars. Then when they relented, they not only awarded feeders but awarded 12.5 covers worth whether or not you ascended a 370+370 or a 370+270.

    So for the players who decided not to ascend (because they were explicitly told what would happened) they got shaft-ed by:
    1) They were not able to use a 450+ Nico for the past few weeks (minor issue)
    2) They potentially missed out on 6 extra covers if they would have ascended a 370+270 (bigger issue).

    Unfortunately this game has a long history of randomly shafting players who happened to make the wrong decision (Nico) or have unfortunate timing (ie many of us who ascended early on the 1st batch got triple ISO/LTs/CPs/HPs etc) and those are only the recent examples in the last 6 months. It's been happening almost since day 1.

    Note: He also said he has no issue with awarding retro feeders for ascended characters, just an issue with how this was done given the announcement to the contrary.

    KGB

  • Daredevil217
    Daredevil217 Posts: 3,990 Chairperson of the Boards

    @KGB said:)
    2) They potentially missed out on 6 extra covers if they would have ascended a 370+270 (bigger issue).

    This is the one point I agree with. The extra rewards were a mistake and it sucks for those who didn’t benefit. Idk how that even happened honestly. I max/max ascended so most folks are getting MANY more covers than they should compared to me. I’m not going to cry about it though. Like you said, the game has a long history of glitches/mistakes.

  • Blackstone
    Blackstone Posts: 603 Critical Contributor

    @KGB said:

    @Daredevil217 said:
    Is this our first “slap in the face” reference in this thread? @DAZ0273?

    If you have a character ready to ascend and purposely hold them back until they are a feeder, you get to have your cake (5* version) and eat it too (retro rewards). So the system really does punish progressing your roster too fast, which to me seems backwards.

    As I understood it, the point he was making was that there was an official announcement of no retro feeders if you ascended your 4 stars.

    So many players chose NOT to ascend in order to get feeders from their 4 stars. Then when they relented, they not only awarded feeders but awarded 12.5 covers worth whether or not you ascended a 370+370 or a 370+270.

    So for the players who decided not to ascend (because they were explicitly told what would happened) they got shaft-ed by:
    1) They were not able to use a 450+ Nico for the past few weeks (minor issue)
    2) They potentially missed out on 6 extra covers if they would have ascended a 370+270 (bigger issue).

    Unfortunately this game has a long history of randomly shafting players who happened to make the wrong decision (Nico) or have unfortunate timing (ie many of us who ascended early on the 1st batch got triple ISO/LTs/CPs/HPs etc) and those are only the recent examples in the last 6 months. It's been happening almost since day 1.

    Note: He also said he has no issue with awarding retro feeders for ascended characters, just an issue with how this was done given the announcement to the contrary.

    KGB

    This. This is my issue.

    Several people are replying to my post, but entirely missing the point I was trying to make.

    I even said there were reasonable arguments to be made for retro rewards for Ascended characters. Perhaps I didn't communicate clearly. That or people just see what they want.

    Anyway... My issue is them making a statement, then not only reversing themselves immediately but over doing it. It's great for those that ignored the claim for no retro rewards... But it's a direct violation of trust for those that listened to that statement. Which is something I assumed everyone could recognize, even those that benefitted from it.

  • Blackstone
    Blackstone Posts: 603 Critical Contributor

    @Daredevil217 said:
    Is this our first “slap in the face” reference in this thread? @DAZ0273?

    If you have a character ready to ascend and purposely hold them back until they are a feeder, you get to have your cake (5* version) and eat it too (retro rewards). So the system really does punish progressing your roster too fast, which to me seems backwards.

    I don’t see the equivalency to selling a dupe because burning 4s are at present the only way to obtain their 5 version. Selling a dupe and starting over to farm rewards isn’t the same at all because you can get the benefits of farming whether you keep or sell a dupe.

    Using Blackstone’s logic, why do feeders exist at all? If you go all in and raise your 4* character to level 370 in month 1 and then the devs make the character a feeder, why should you get the benefits of having the character maxed months before me, and then you get the retro rewards as well? And on top of it, you get an EXTRA 6 LTs that I will never get. You get all this cake and I get nothing!? Slaps all around!

    But if we look at the “spirit of the law” when it comes to feeders, they mostly exist to (wait for it…) not punish folks for progressing their roster fast. Ascension not granting feeders runs counter to the “spirit of the law” and thus I agree with those that say they should grant feeders. But if they can’t because of tech issues, that I get, and appreciate the one time exception.

    You've completely missed my logic.

    Regardless of what makes sense based on what has come before, purpose of progression, spirit of this or that.... All very good points, but nothing to do with what I talked about.

    They made a statement. A statement that, whether it makes sense or not/meets the needs of the players or not/spirit of the law/etc didn't matter. All those things could be argued against what was said it the statement, amber that's fine. That's a conversation that needs to be had.

    But the statement was still made and some people made decisions based on that statement.

    And nothing you said in your response about my "logic" actually addressed this.

    To put it bluntly: I don't care that they're giving out retro rewards. I care that many players are going to be left getting as though they were directly lied to and punished for acting according to that lie.

    I don't think they intended to lie... But I think they need to plan ahead better to avoid these situations... Or, at least, respond to them in a more effective way.

    Ignoring what I'm actually saying (or unintentionally missing the point) to make a bunch of adjacent arguments doesn't fix that issue.

  • Blackstone
    Blackstone Posts: 603 Critical Contributor

    @GrimSkald said:

    @Blackstone said:
    I think the retro rewards back peddle is complete ****.

    I get what the "shouldn't be punished for ascending a character" crowd is trying to say, it's just not a relevant argument.

    It's a great excuse for eating your cake---ascending when told there won't be retro rewards for ascended characters---and having it too---getting those retro covers, and then some, anyway---it just isn't reasonable.

    4* Nico was changed to give rewards. If you no longer have 4* Nico (whether you sold her to start over, or Ascended her for 5* Nico, you got something different in exchange for your 4* and aren't owed anything) you shouldn't expect rewards. If you get them, great for you... But recognize you're on the positive end of unfair treatment.

    Even if you disagree with the above paragraph (and there is a reasonable opposing argument to be made) it's still not fair to those that waited due to the over compensation.

    For those that retained 4* Nico, because they were told there would be no retro rewards if they ascended her, this is a slap in the face.

    Not only did they delay progression on a character in order to get those retro rewards...
    ... They aren't even getting equal rewards to those that didn't wait, because the early ascenders are getting more then they would have gotten if they waited.

    It's like Bob eating his cake, Joe waiting until later, then mom giving Bob two extra slices with sprinkles, while Joe just gets a few sprinkles on his dried out old piece of cake.

    If they really chose to break their stated policy in order to avoid upsetting a few people who really had no legitimate complaint, while simultaneously giving a whole other group of players a very legitimate complaint, somebody needs to reevaluate their decision making abilities.

    For the record: I'm not affected by this either way. I have a champed Nico but not maxed and no intention of focusing on her anytime soon. This fiasco doesn't change what I got from her update.

    For those arguing for the retro reward exception, I urge you to consider if you only think it's right because you get something out of it. FYI:You can get those covers and still recognize it's objectively a bad move and unfair to those that waited. (Reminder: those that waited to get any possible retro rewards, will never get the over compensation that's being given out right now)

    Anyway, I really don't understand why there's even a question as to whether or not this is fair.

    If it "isn't fair" to give rewards for an ascended 4*, then it isn't fair to give retroactive rewards at all. You got the benefits of leveling the character and the rewards for leveling the character -- isn't a "a slap in the face" to everyone who hasn't leveled the character yet? After all, you're getting extra Legendary Tokens?

    This was in fact the logic they applied after Shards were implemented, and they gave vastly reduced shards as retro rewards. As I recall, it was 1 1/2 covers worth, instead of 6. Maybe 2. The player base rebelled and they relented. To be honest, I strongly suspect if they didn't relent then the game would have died within two or three months - everyone I knew stopped spending money on the game.

    Ascending characters has opened up all kinds of possibilities, and those possibilities are absolutely meaningless if you daren't ascend 3/4 of the character base because you don't want to miss out on future rewards. It's a bad system and inherently contradictory.

    If they said "we're no longer giving any retro rewards at all" then gave retro rewards a few weeks later, you'd have a point.

    I'm not arguing against retro rewards. I'm not even saying retro rewards for Ascended characters is unfair.

    I'm saying putting out a statement they're going to do a certain thing, then completely reversing it at the first opportunity is unfair to those that listened to them.

    No offense meant, but you replied to me while nothing in your counter argument actually addressed what I had an issue with.

    Perhaps I wasn't clear.

    They said no... Then they changed their minds. They affected people. Some got extras because they didn't listen when the devs said no. Those that did listen lost out... Not because of ascension, nor progress, nor anything else you mentioned... They lost out because they were told something by the people making the game. That's not ok.

    "It's a bad system and inherently contradictory" that's the flipping problem. That's what leads to making a statement and having to walk it back. They're making bad decisions and doing contradictory things.

    The fact that you know people that have stopped spending money on the game illustrates the point I'm trying to make. They are making poor decisions that are negatively affecting players. If they don't make better decisions, it won't be long until a similar situation arises again in the future and you're predicting the imminent death of the game once again.

  • TheXMan
    TheXMan Posts: 188 Tile Toppler

    Turns out that no one missed out. If you can ascend Nico by Tuesday, put in a ticket and they will send the extra covers and shards. Poorly communicated yes but you get the covers either way.

  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 10,342 Chairperson of the Boards

    @Daredevil217 said:
    Is this our first “slap in the face” reference in this thread? @DAZ0273?

    If you have a character ready to ascend and purposely hold them back until they are a feeder, you get to have your cake (5* version) and eat it too (retro rewards). So the system really does punish progressing your roster too fast, which to me seems backwards.

    I don’t see the equivalency to selling a dupe because burning 4s are at present the only way to obtain their 5 version. Selling a dupe and starting over to farm rewards isn’t the same at all because you can get the benefits of farming whether you keep or sell a dupe.

    Using Blackstone’s logic, why do feeders exist at all? If you go all in and raise your 4* character to level 370 in month 1 and then the devs make the character a feeder, why should you get the benefits of having the character maxed months before me, and then you get the retro rewards as well? And on top of it, you get an EXTRA 6 LTs that I will never get. You get all this cake and I get nothing!? Slaps all around!

    But if we look at the “spirit of the law” when it comes to feeders, they mostly exist to (wait for it…) not punish folks for progressing their roster fast. Ascension not granting feeders runs counter to the “spirit of the law” and thus I agree with those that say they should grant feeders. But if they can’t because of tech issues, that I get, and appreciate the one time exception.

    Oh am I in charge of deciding that now? Such power!!!! Bwah ha ha!!! I'll allow it!

  • Scofie
    Scofie GLOBAL_MODERATORS Posts: 1,396 Chairperson of the Boards

    Mod mode off - continuing the discussion from the Hunter character thread.

    Here's my assessment for what is worth.

    The "no retro feeders rule" wasn't in the original Q&A, it was a post in the thread shortly after it was published. Given the amount of information published, it was most likely an oversight. This has been recognised and Q&A note features this prominently. To be clear, this case relates to the one 4* character that was in the first batch and didn't have a feeder at the time.

    As others mentioned, wanting to ascend is a fairly natural thing to do, so some would have ascended before the "rule" was known or understood. They have been disadvantaged because the Q&A was incomplete at launch so compensation is fair.

    Those that knew and understood the rule have now received retro rewards of at least 6 Hunter covers. Maybe even 12. They can now ascend Nico and all is fair.

    Those that didn't understand it (or didn't care) got the compensation of what seems to be a blanket 10.5 covers. In my opinion, that is very high. Some people might have had between 6 and 12 though, so in that way, it is potentially 75% more or 25% fewer than they would have got if they'd waited.

    Initially I was a bit "harrumph" about the level of compensation. But then there is a history of overcompensation which we've all benefited from now and again, sometimes when others have not. I remembered the Samsung problem and similar arguments.

    This must be a one-off though. The policy is clear, there is no ambiguity and no more exceptions.

  • Daredevil217
    Daredevil217 Posts: 3,990 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited December 2023

    @DAZ0273 said:
    Oh am I in charge of deciding that now? Such power!!!! Bwah ha ha!!! I'll allow it!

    Not an authority per se. But you were the one finding it “hilarious” that the MPQ “Karens” strong-armed the devs into going back on their policy with their “whining”. Here is every anti-post up until the devs made their announcement. Tell me where the swarms of Karens/whiners are… I’ll wait.

    @Bowgentle said:

    @BlackBoltRocks said:
    Nico Minoru feeds Hunter hmmm. Wonder how all those with ascended Nicos will feel about that.

    Not great but eh.

    -

    @liminal_lad said:

    @BlackBoltRocks said:
    Nico Minoru feeds Hunter hmmm. Wonder how all those with ascended Nicos will feel about that.

    We feel upset.

    -

    @jp1 said:

    @liminal_lad said:

    @BlackBoltRocks said:
    Nico Minoru feeds Hunter hmmm. Wonder how all those with ascended Nicos will feel about that.

    We feel upset.

    Was it ever confirmed ascension will result in no retro feeder rewards? Seems like a harsh punishment for progressing in the game.

    -

    @jp1 said:

    @Bowgentle said:
    Yes they said no retro rewards.

    Yeah, not a fan of that. I’m sure an argument will be made that it’s fair somehow…there should be no downside to ascension.

    -

    @GrimSkald said:

    @jp1 said:

    @Bowgentle said:
    Yes they said no retro rewards.

    Yeah, not a fan of that. I’m sure an argument will be made that it’s fair somehow…there should be no downside to ascension.

    No, it is 100% not fair. Giving up the extra covers you did/could get from the extra 4* levels you used in the second "ascension" character is arguably fair. Giving up the 6 you would get from a max champ 370 4* is most definitely not.

    I'll be thinking about this the next time I'm tempted to spend money on the game. I may go FTP from now on, I definitely don't have to get my VIP and the occasional lightning deal, I just thought I'd kick something back to the game.

    -

    @liminal_lad said:
    As someone said above, I can see not getting covers for the lower level character that’s wasted to ascend a character, but logically it seems like it would be easy to code a way to give retro rewards for the first.

    -

    @GrimSkald said:
    It's a decision, but it's a decision the game itself guides you into making. Let's face facts, when they implemented this system in the first place, people said "Hey, it would suck to ascend a 4* and since you used up a max-champ 4* to make the new 5* you'd lose out on 6 covers because you burned it up," they replied "Actually you'd lose out on all of them, since you won't get retroactive rewards." No one would have even guessed that would be the case because it's completely opposite from the way the game worked otherwise.

    They're going to get trouble tickets when this goes through, because people who don't read the forums or Discord closely are going to have no idea this is the case because it is completely counter-intuitive.

    This is not even including players like bigjojo04, ThaRoadWarrior, and Tony_Foot who were supportive/understanding of the original policy and folks like Codex and Omegased who made neutral comments. If you’re going to lob insults at players or even the developers, do so on things that are actually happening. That’s all I’m saying. I said it seems like the early ascenders were mostly tame with the exception of maybe one post and I stand by that. The salty energy really started once the devs decided to do something nice, which seemed… odd. Projection is when you are doing the thing you are accusing others of doing and can’t see it in yourself.

  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 10,342 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited December 2023

    @Daredevil217 said:
    Not an authority per se. But you were the one finding it “hilarious” that the MPQ “Karens” strong-armed the devs into going back on their policy with their “whining”. Here is every anti-post up until the devs made their announcement. Tell me where the swarms of Karens/whiners are… I’ll wait.

    @Bowgentle said:

    @BlackBoltRocks said:
    Nico Minoru feeds Hunter hmmm. Wonder how all those with ascended Nicos will feel about that.

    Not great but eh.

    -

    @liminal_lad said:

    @BlackBoltRocks said:
    Nico Minoru feeds Hunter hmmm. Wonder how all those with ascended Nicos will feel about that.

    We feel upset.

    -

    @jp1 said:

    @liminal_lad said:

    @BlackBoltRocks said:
    Nico Minoru feeds Hunter hmmm. Wonder how all those with ascended Nicos will feel about that.

    We feel upset.

    Was it ever confirmed ascension will result in no retro feeder rewards? Seems like a harsh punishment for progressing in the game.

    -

    @jp1 said:

    @Bowgentle said:
    Yes they said no retro rewards.

    Yeah, not a fan of that. I’m sure an argument will be made that it’s fair somehow…there should be no downside to ascension.

    -

    @GrimSkald said:

    @jp1 said:

    @Bowgentle said:
    Yes they said no retro rewards.

    Yeah, not a fan of that. I’m sure an argument will be made that it’s fair somehow…there should be no downside to ascension.

    No, it is 100% not fair. Giving up the extra covers you did/could get from the extra 4* levels you used in the second "ascension" character is arguably fair. Giving up the 6 you would get from a max champ 370 4* is most definitely not.

    I'll be thinking about this the next time I'm tempted to spend money on the game. I may go FTP from now on, I definitely don't have to get my VIP and the occasional lightning deal, I just thought I'd kick something back to the game.

    -

    @liminal_lad said:
    As someone said above, I can see not getting covers for the lower level character that’s wasted to ascend a character, but logically it seems like it would be easy to code a way to give retro rewards for the first.

    -

    @GrimSkald said:
    It's a decision, but it's a decision the game itself guides you into making. Let's face facts, when they implemented this system in the first place, people said "Hey, it would suck to ascend a 4* and since you used up a max-champ 4* to make the new 5* you'd lose out on 6 covers because you burned it up," they replied "Actually you'd lose out on all of them, since you won't get retroactive rewards." No one would have even guessed that would be the case because it's completely opposite from the way the game worked otherwise.

    They're going to get trouble tickets when this goes through, because people who don't read the forums or Discord closely are going to have no idea this is the case because it is completely counter-intuitive.

    This is not even including players like bigjojo04, ThaRoadWarrior, and Tony_Foot who were supportive/understanding of the original policy and folks like Codex and Omegased who made neutral comments. If you’re going to lob insults at players or even the developers, do so on things that are actually happening. That’s all I’m saying. I said it seems like the early ascenders were mostly tame with the exception of maybe one post and I stand by that. The salty energy really started once the devs decided to do something nice, which seemed… odd.

    Lol! Still laughing! 😂😒😂😂😂

    Edit: Oh and by the way I attempted to put this thread back on track, you decided to @ me on another forumites post which had nothing to do with me nor did I comment on. So I dunno why you did that or what agenda is at play but as far as I am concerned this is a dead topic in terms of anything other than discussing The Hunter.

  • Daredevil217
    Daredevil217 Posts: 3,990 Chairperson of the Boards

    It’s the little things I guess (shrug).

    It’s cool if you find it amusing. I was just helping you get that what’s happening in your mind (the Karens, the whining, the strong-arming, etc) is not reflective of the reality of the situation by a long shot. Now that this was all moved to the compensation thread it’s on topic once again. I pretty much agree with > @Scofie said:

    Mod mode off - continuing the discussion from the Hunter character thread.

    Here's my assessment for what is worth.

    The "no retro feeders rule" wasn't in the original Q&A, it was a post in the thread shortly after it was published. Given the amount of information published, it was most likely an oversight. This has been recognised and Q&A note features this prominently. To be clear, this case relates to the one 4* character that was in the first batch and didn't have a feeder at the time.

    As others mentioned, wanting to ascend is a fairly natural thing to do, so some would have ascended before the "rule" was known or understood. They have been disadvantaged because the Q&A was incomplete at launch so compensation is fair.

    Those that knew and understood the rule have now received retro rewards of at least 6 Hunter covers. Maybe even 12. They can now ascend Nico and all is fair.

    Those that didn't understand it (or didn't care) got the compensation of what seems to be a blanket 10.5 covers. In my opinion, that is very high. Some people might have had between 6 and 12 though, so in that way, it is potentially 75% more or 25% fewer than they would have got if they'd waited.

    Initially I was a bit "harrumph" about the level of compensation. But then there is a history of overcompensation which we've all benefited from now and again, sometimes when others have not. I remembered the Samsung problem and similar arguments.

    This must be a one-off though. The policy is clear, there is no ambiguity and no more exceptions.

    Feels much more reasonable an explanation than the mutiny that never occurred forcing the devs to buckle. Whatever the actual reason I guess I’ll say thank you to the developers for trying to make this right as best they could given the limitations they face with staff and technology.

    I also would suggest posting something in game if at all possible because not everyone reads the forums.

  • Scofie
    Scofie GLOBAL_MODERATORS Posts: 1,396 Chairperson of the Boards

    @Daredevil217 said:

    I also would suggest posting something in game if at all possible because not everyone reads the forums.

    It's also on Discord and Reddit, I think. I'm not sure how many people who had ascendable Nicos are not on any of those or are in alliances that wouldn't mention it.

    I think an in-game message would just confuse everyone.

  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 10,342 Chairperson of the Boards

    @Daredevil217 said:
    It’s the little things I guess (shrug).

    It’s cool if you find it amusing. I was just helping you get that what’s happening in your mind (the Karens, the whining, the strong-arming, etc) is not reflective of the reality of the situation by a long shot. Now that this was all moved to the compensation thread it’s on topic once again. I pretty much agree with > @Scofie said:

    Mod mode off - continuing the discussion from the Hunter character thread.

    Here's my assessment for what is worth.

    The "no retro feeders rule" wasn't in the original Q&A, it was a post in the thread shortly after it was published. Given the amount of information published, it was most likely an oversight. This has been recognised and Q&A note features this prominently. To be clear, this case relates to the one 4* character that was in the first batch and didn't have a feeder at the time.

    As others mentioned, wanting to ascend is a fairly natural thing to do, so some would have ascended before the "rule" was known or understood. They have been disadvantaged because the Q&A was incomplete at launch so compensation is fair.

    Those that knew and understood the rule have now received retro rewards of at least 6 Hunter covers. Maybe even 12. They can now ascend Nico and all is fair.

    Those that didn't understand it (or didn't care) got the compensation of what seems to be a blanket 10.5 covers. In my opinion, that is very high. Some people might have had between 6 and 12 though, so in that way, it is potentially 75% more or 25% fewer than they would have got if they'd waited.

    Initially I was a bit "harrumph" about the level of compensation. But then there is a history of overcompensation which we've all benefited from now and again, sometimes when others have not. I remembered the Samsung problem and similar arguments.

    This must be a one-off though. The policy is clear, there is no ambiguity and no more exceptions.

    Feels much more reasonable an explanation than the mutiny that never occurred forcing the devs to buckle. Whatever the actual reason I guess I’ll say thank you to the developers for trying to make this right as best they could given the limitations they face with staff and technology.

    I also would suggest posting something in game if at all possible because not everyone reads the forums.

    I feel bad that you went to the length you did with all that quoting to essentially make me not care any more about what you were saying. Sorry man. Thanks for helping me though! This brings me back to our good old days of the Bishop nerf!

    I think this has affected you far more than it has me! I have had more fun. I feel bad that you went off the deep end with al that quoting for my ben fit when I had already n

  • Daredevil217
    Daredevil217 Posts: 3,990 Chairperson of the Boards

    I appreciate that. But it wasn’t that hard (so you can rest easy). I legitimately re-read the first 2 pages (before the policy change) and hit the quote button. And I’ll be honest. At first I did it because I understand mu own memory can be faulty and was genuinely curious if was misremembering all the outrage. So hitting quote While rereading two pages wasn’t hard. And honestly I didn’t think it would be hard for anyone who frequents these message boards to do in less than 3 minutes, but I shouldn’t assume what’s simple for me would be easy for you.

    As far as the “off the deep end” comment… another narrative that’s in your head. I can assure you. Where you seemingly have fun laughing at things that aren’t really happening (this being yet another example) I do have a history and admittedly derive some enjoyment from picking apart bad faith takes. I can’t help it. (okay, I probably could… but I’m choosing not to).

    You spend a LOT of time talking about how you don’t care about any of this and now spinning some narrative about me (which trust me.. I knew was coming next). If that’s a narrative that helps you feel better (regardless of it it’s true), that’s fine. You don’t have to convince me though. It really is okay.

  • Scofie
    Scofie GLOBAL_MODERATORS Posts: 1,396 Chairperson of the Boards

    @Daredevil217 / @DAZ0273 - grateful if we can keep on the topic of the discussion, rather than interpreting each other's responses.

Categories