Discussion on retro rewards policy in regard to character ascension

13567

Comments

  • 47quinn
    47quinn Posts: 2 Just Dropped In

    I have a suggestion. How about if the devs just gave anyone with an ascended 5* character a championed 4* of that same character. It's at least an attempt to satisfy both sides.

  • Codex
    Codex Posts: 304 Mover and Shaker

    @liminal_lad said:

    @Codex said:

    @St_Bernadus said:

    @Codex said:

    I saw so many ascended nico players complaining about that compensation.sarcasm

    Here is a solution maybe get rid of all retro rewards completely.

    Are you a new player? There’s no other real explanation for why you’re so hot to penalize veterans.

    Not a new player. I am a day 3500+ player. I am definitely a vet and I have benefited immensely for retro rewards. This is probably not a popular opinion, but I feel with the many changes BCS has made to the game economy they can get rid of retro rewards.

  • St_Bernadus
    St_Bernadus Posts: 637 Critical Contributor

    @Daredevil217 said:

    @DrClever said:

    @Daredevil217 said:

    The people who would get upset if they went back on this and awarded covers crack me up. That’s some next level spite for something that doesn’t even impact them.

    I'm not sure there actually are any of those, but wouldn't they have a point given the competitive nature of the game?

    If the stated rule is that there's a potential future downside to something and they chose the short term disadvantage of not doing it only to find that the rule changes on the fly, isn't their pathetic whinge at least as valid as the pathetic whinge of those who did the opposite knowing they might suffer some barely perceptible slowing of their inexorable advance in their favourite toilet game and who are now faced with precisely that consequence of their action?

    The very first post the person said they’d be legit angry if the devs cave. So those people do exist.

    Let me be clear. I don’t think anyone who ascended is entitled to retro rewards for X-23 under the current policy. What I am arguing is that it’s a stupid policy that actively discourages utilizing a feature that I’m sure the devs spent a lot of time on. Again, I agree with everyone who said the devs were clear and a choice was given to players. I just think if a person with a fairly logical feeder already in place isn’t safe, then no one is. And that sucks. I’m not demanding anything or threatening anyone (before the hyperbole gang comes rolling around). In fact having not ascended I’ll actively benefit. I just believe that my “competition” should too. I know the idea of advocating for what I believe is fair to players who invested probably more time and money then me is a crazy concept in this fierce competitive landscape known as MPQ, but I’m still doing it.

    @CHRISJN said:
    I would love to see and hope for another future one time exception for the retro rewards for us who ascended her... fingers-crossed.

    No more one time exceptions. Just do away with the rule altogether. This will be the test though. If they don’t go back on this particular character then it would feel like a pretty hard line in the sand. If they do a second one-time exception then it’d be hard to take the policy seriously at all. So really they need to just remove it altogether. If not, then yeah, it’s here to stay folks. Ascend at your own peril.

    If this was another 4 that was not feeding anyone I would agree that twice makes a trend. But because X-23 did already feed a 5, I think it is legit to give retro rewards to those that ascended her.
    Of course they could just not reassign feeders any more. They could do that. Save them and their CS folks some trouble.

  • entrailbucket
    entrailbucket Posts: 5,820 Chairperson of the Boards

    @ThisisClemFandango said:
    Additional
    Abuse? Really

    Lots of people just use it as a "disagree" button. I wouldn't read anything into it beyond that.

  • Seph1roth5
    Seph1roth5 Posts: 426 Mover and Shaker

    Eh I think they were super generous with Nico already, despite having "no retro reward" as the rule day 1. It's buyer beware. New systems can come out and things can change at any time. You can't go to the grocery store every week and yell at the manager because things are on sale now and if you had waited you'd have saved $5.

    No one made anyone ascend now, everyone knew the batch was incomplete, and there's no reason people couldn't wait a few months for everyone to be done. And the whole "She had a feeder she should've been safe!" is meaningless too. That was never a rule or precedent or mentioned at all.

    I just hope the devs realize that just because the angriest people are also the loudest doesn't mean it's a huge problem. I mean, I won't be upset if they end up giving retros for x23 too (I don't have any 4s ascended), I just think THAT sets a bad precedent, catering to people that complain about wanting compensation for every last thing.

    Side note: I think the 5 looks pretty good and could be fun. I'd totally pull for her+goose, assuming there's no last minute changes...

  • Daredevil217
    Daredevil217 Posts: 3,965 Chairperson of the Boards

    @St_Bernadus said:

    @Daredevil217 said:

    @DrClever said:

    @Daredevil217 said:

    The people who would get upset if they went back on this and awarded covers crack me up. That’s some next level spite for something that doesn’t even impact them.

    I'm not sure there actually are any of those, but wouldn't they have a point given the competitive nature of the game?

    If the stated rule is that there's a potential future downside to something and they chose the short term disadvantage of not doing it only to find that the rule changes on the fly, isn't their pathetic whinge at least as valid as the pathetic whinge of those who did the opposite knowing they might suffer some barely perceptible slowing of their inexorable advance in their favourite toilet game and who are now faced with precisely that consequence of their action?

    The very first post the person said they’d be legit angry if the devs cave. So those people do exist.

    Let me be clear. I don’t think anyone who ascended is entitled to retro rewards for X-23 under the current policy. What I am arguing is that it’s a stupid policy that actively discourages utilizing a feature that I’m sure the devs spent a lot of time on. Again, I agree with everyone who said the devs were clear and a choice was given to players. I just think if a person with a fairly logical feeder already in place isn’t safe, then no one is. And that sucks. I’m not demanding anything or threatening anyone (before the hyperbole gang comes rolling around). In fact having not ascended I’ll actively benefit. I just believe that my “competition” should too. I know the idea of advocating for what I believe is fair to players who invested probably more time and money then me is a crazy concept in this fierce competitive landscape known as MPQ, but I’m still doing it.

    @CHRISJN said:
    I would love to see and hope for another future one time exception for the retro rewards for us who ascended her... fingers-crossed.

    No more one time exceptions. Just do away with the rule altogether. This will be the test though. If they don’t go back on this particular character then it would feel like a pretty hard line in the sand. If they do a second one-time exception then it’d be hard to take the policy seriously at all. So really they need to just remove it altogether. If not, then yeah, it’s here to stay folks. Ascend at your own peril.

    If this was another 4 that was not feeding anyone I would agree that twice makes a trend. But because X-23 did already feed a 5, I think it is legit to give retro rewards to those that ascended her.
    Of course they could just not reassign feeders any more. They could do that. Save them and their CS folks some trouble.

    Then the policy essentially changes to “no retro rewards except the one time exception and unless we make someone a feeder who is currently feeding someone else”. And if they can give retro rewards anytime they change a feeder they should be able to do it when creating a new one as well. You see where it gets dicey? Not to mention that if the first two times the policy should be enforced it isn’t… it sets a precedent and isn’t a good look for the policy.

    Tinfoil me could see this being intentional. Let’s create a character with a feeder that most probably thought was safe to ascend and were incentivized to do so by running a PVP featuring her. Then we can make a real statement by holding firm when folks complain, so they know we’re serious.

    That’s tinfoil me. In reality they plan these characters out like a year in advance and it’s more likely just a timing issue.

  • meadowsweet
    meadowsweet Posts: 257 Mover and Shaker
    edited 9 January 2024, 07:04

    You should get credit for at least one Max Champ's retro rewards. There's really no reason (other than "because we already said so!") that the devs can't or shouldn't treat an Ascended character as the equivalent of one Max Champ character.

    It's probably too complicated to ask them to keep track of whether the second X-23 you used in Ascension was at:

    • Level 370 (cover + 2500 shards)
    • 270 (nothing)
    • Any other number 270-370, e.g. 316 (cover + 600 shards)

    But if you have a Level 450+ X-23, then we know for a fact that you already had at least one Max Champ at Level 370, right? So why do something that leaves your most loyal players upset?

    For the record, my only X-23 is at Level 364 so this doesn't affect me, but fair's fair, and if history's any indication this probably won't be the last time this happens.

  • Chrynos1989
    Chrynos1989 Posts: 342 Mover and Shaker

    As I stated before, it would be good if there was a list of chars, that have the potential to become future feeders or double feeders, not who they gonna feed, but if there are thoughts about making them feeders.
    Also no, that doesn’t spoiler anything since we have feeders that are totally unrelated to who they feed

  • Bowgentle
    Bowgentle Posts: 7,926 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited 9 January 2024, 10:34

    @Chrynos1989 said:
    As I stated before, it would be good if there was a list of chars, that have the potential to become future feeders or double feeders, not who they gonna feed, but if there are thoughts about making them feeders.
    Also no, that doesn’t spoiler anything since we have feeders that are totally unrelated to who they feed

    That's easy, it's the whole 4* tier.
    There.

    Seriously, they don't even know which chars they will release 2025, how would they know about feeders.
    Assume every 4 can be changed at any time.

  • Crowl
    Crowl Posts: 1,580 Chairperson of the Boards

    @Carnage1484 said:

    @Tiger_Wong said:
    It disappoints me that the new X-23 will be fed by my AsX-23. Especially since AsX-23 is really nothing special at all. Now I actually wish I hadn’t ascended her.

    But oh well. Life goes on. I made the decision and I knew the consequences.

    There shouldn’t be “consequences” for utilizing a marketed game feature. It’s a very strange take that people keep throwing out there.

    Having a bad policy on day 1 doesn’t make it a good policy by day 100. The policy of “no retro rewards” is a bad policy and is not a sustainable position. It takes too much money and/or time to build these to tell those that do so they’re out of luck for being in position to use the system designed specifically for them.

    This is the crucial point really, it was a flawed policy from the outset and remains so today, if they want there to be some opportunity cost for ascending then just cap the feeder covers to the 6 that would be earned for the maxed 4* that was the primary in the new ascended character.

    Obviously the question that should be asked though is why there needs to be additional discouragement of players from using a fundamental new feature, there is already enough of that with the max/max vs max/champed decision anyway, simply no need for more than that.

    When you consider just how many of the offers in the store seem related to ascending characters these days, it would also seem like a poor financial choice on their part to discourage players from using the system too, such offers become much less tempting if the player is entirely disengaged from the ascension system.

  • revskip
    revskip Posts: 1,010 Chairperson of the Boards

    Some folks ascended early and reaped the benefits of that by being able to use those characters. I did with Medusa, my dupe was baby champed but I wanted at least one ascended in each power tier so I bit the bullet and eschewed the extra rewards for a more powerful version. And it has been great. I have used her and she has helped me get better rewards.

    I also knew that if her feeder got changed I might not get those covers and certainly would miss out on a few Black Bolt covers if I just waited. It's just a couple of covers and I figured the benefit of having a 5* Medusa outweighed any rewards I might get down the road.

    Anyone who has ascended a character has gotten a benefit from it already in having additional boosted characters available for both PvE and PvP leading to easier climbs and placements. I'm not going to riot if they go back on their stated policy but I do really feel like the entitlement is over the top for those who want to both have their cake by ascending immediately and eat it as well by receiving covers they were already told were off the menu.

    Don't want to ascend characters out of fears that you might miss out on a couple of covers at some indeterminate time? Awesome, don't. Those that do ascend will have it easier than you will but you'll get the extra covers.

  • SourCream
    SourCream Posts: 104 Tile Toppler

    First of all, let's get it out of the way. This is not about the retro rewards of primary5 (1 cover + 2500 shards) or secondary5 (1250 shards). If the 5* is any good, I'll be glad to use the resources (time or money) needed to get it.

    Take the following scenario as an example:

    • Quake = 0 feeder

    1. Wait 5 more weeks or years for 5* Jimmy Woo ?

    • 1,600 shards available

    1. Buy it to level Quake to 476 or 284 ? Or avoid all together ?

    2. Ascend and penalize for having more when Jimmy Woo is released ? How ? A lesser roster with 370 + 360 is rewarded with 12 possible covers for having less. Less is more, why ascend or even progress ?

    Lastly, Champions 2.0 should be "a way to further empower" our roster and increase the playability of every character. As of now, it is creating restriction and roadblock for players. It's might not be a widespread issue, but it's fair amount of players. If you're one, then you understand why it's a disheartening feature and if you're not, have fun getting there.

  • meadowsweet
    meadowsweet Posts: 257 Mover and Shaker
    edited 9 January 2024, 19:27

    I'm not sure why so many people are so invested in carrying water for the devs and defending a dumb, arbitrary, unfair, anti-player policy (that either doesn't affect them, or they're using to justify why they will NEVER Ascend any characters, and anyone who does is reckless or stupid?):

    • They told us this was the policy
    • If you have Ascended character, you're already elite and shouldn't complain about missing out
    • Worth it for Ascension rewards already received
    • Worth it for having Ascended character available to use in play
    • You should have Max Champed 3 characters, not 2

    They're acting like professional economists who are worried about real problems: inflation, unemployment, or foreclosures that affect real people's lives. But this is a silly, make-believe, match-three mobile game. Why can't you just say "That's a real bummer; I could see what that would be upsetting for a player like you, even though it doesn't affect me. There's really no reason they can't update their bad policy and give players retro rewards."

    There's no advantage for the devs to be stingy. I would argue their only goal is to keep players happy and engaged: either a small number of players spending a large amount of money, or a large number of players spending a small amount of money. Anything they do that upsets players puts the entire game at existential risk. We're the customers here, but some players' attitude is "the customer is never right; whatever the devs decide is always best"?

    It's just absurd to say that someone who had two Level 370's and Ascended yesterday should get nothing, while someone with two Level 370's today should get 12 covers for a 5★ (and can then Ascend the 370's tomorrow.) To take the most extreme possible case, there's nothing stopping the devs from saying "Gee, this game has changed so much over the years, we really need to start all over and swap out the 5★ feeders for all 147 different 4★ characters. Everyone with two Max Champs will be receiving 1,764 covers for 5★ characters. Everyone with Ascended 4★ characters will receive nothing." You're telling me you'd be cool with missing 1,764 covers if it happened to you?

  • entrailbucket
    entrailbucket Posts: 5,820 Chairperson of the Boards

    @DAZ0273 said:
    I don't understand how ascending a roster doesn't empower a roster or increase playability? Those things have nothing to do with getting free covers of a completely different character surely? Coulson is still an awesome 5* regardless of whether he does or doesn't give out covers to Turner D Century.

    Especially because it's highly likely that 5* Coulson will be significantly more useful than Turner D Century. I think it's kind of neat that Ascension forces you to make that calculation/trade-off. Having more strategic decisions in roster building makes the game deeper and more interesting.

    Of course, they are 100% going to cave and reverse this policy, but still...

  • MegaBee
    MegaBee Posts: 1,040 Chairperson of the Boards

    @DAZ0273 said:
    I don't understand how ascending a roster doesn't empower a roster or increase playability? Those things have nothing to do with getting free covers of a completely different character surely? Coulson is still an awesome 5* regardless of whether he does or doesn't give out covers to Turner D Century.

    Your signature is delightful. Just wanted to say that.

Categories