GrimSkald said: gascangascan said: Mikbro81 said: Still no response? Ok.... You also need to factor in - how much of their time is devoted to discussing this. Do they have a meeting with key decision-makers later today? This week? If they are still deciding what to do - and they have no deadline - then there is nothing to report.In addition: they want to keep players happy - but they also don't want to appear as if they fold to discontent - so their silence is somewhat strategic. I'm annoyed by the lack of response too (I keep checking the boards to see if there is one,) but this is a really short time frame, and I'd have been surprised if they got back to us this quickly. I'd like for them to get back to us this quickly, but I wouldn't expect it.I really don't think they expected to get that negative a response, which is a bit surprising in and of itself - I think the mistake is that they think of shards as an in-game commodity as opposed to a partial cover, as I stated either here or in the other thread.
gascangascan said: Mikbro81 said: Still no response? Ok.... You also need to factor in - how much of their time is devoted to discussing this. Do they have a meeting with key decision-makers later today? This week? If they are still deciding what to do - and they have no deadline - then there is nothing to report.In addition: they want to keep players happy - but they also don't want to appear as if they fold to discontent - so their silence is somewhat strategic.
Mikbro81 said: Still no response? Ok....
Anon said: And the devs were never heard from again.
shadow2999 said: Ice and Dev team, there was a request YOU made to the community for it not to flood the Customer Service with tickets. The Community has requested at least some form of update/insight so we dont all feel like we're out in the cold with no clue that this is even being taken seriously. At some pt patience on both sides will dry up. Is it really that much to ask if you could provide some kind of update, that contains some form of information that the community can use to guage how things are going? Radio silence is not helping anyone. Respect has to be a two way street.
Bryan Lambert said: GrimSkald said: gascangascan said: Mikbro81 said: Still no response? Ok.... You also need to factor in - how much of their time is devoted to discussing this. Do they have a meeting with key decision-makers later today? This week? If they are still deciding what to do - and they have no deadline - then there is nothing to report.In addition: they want to keep players happy - but they also don't want to appear as if they fold to discontent - so their silence is somewhat strategic. I'm annoyed by the lack of response too (I keep checking the boards to see if there is one,) but this is a really short time frame, and I'd have been surprised if they got back to us this quickly. I'd like for them to get back to us this quickly, but I wouldn't expect it.I really don't think they expected to get that negative a response, which is a bit surprising in and of itself - I think the mistake is that they think of shards as an in-game commodity as opposed to a partial cover, as I stated either here or in the other thread. Yeah, it’s not like we can expect them to get up at one in the morning and post an update to retroactive rewards...
DAZ0273 said: I would also like some clarification moving forward. For example - what happens when Beta Ray Bill gets a feeder? Is it going to be the exact same chaos as this where if an existing 4* is chosen a whole bunch of players might miss out on retroactive rewards? bluewolf said: CAttitude said: Practically asking, how far should we promote a new, non-feeder 4 in this shard hellscape? 279? 297? I am worried about CapWorthy in this upcoming Civil War event. This probably needs to be a separate thread but yes, the underlying message for players who care more about eventual 5's than using a high level 4 is to stop at 299.It's just amazing that they are telling us that it hurts us to level people too much. It is a pretty crazy situation. Can they even really risk making any of the old 4* feeders ongoing without getting absolutely murdered? Or does it mean they would need to immediately announce who the feeder is going to be for every new 5*?Hey Devs - who is going to be feeding Beta Ray Bill please?
bluewolf said: CAttitude said: Practically asking, how far should we promote a new, non-feeder 4 in this shard hellscape? 279? 297? I am worried about CapWorthy in this upcoming Civil War event. This probably needs to be a separate thread but yes, the underlying message for players who care more about eventual 5's than using a high level 4 is to stop at 299.It's just amazing that they are telling us that it hurts us to level people too much.
CAttitude said: Practically asking, how far should we promote a new, non-feeder 4 in this shard hellscape? 279? 297? I am worried about CapWorthy in this upcoming Civil War event.
Captain_Carlman said: With all this silence from the devs, I figure I will give it probably through the weekend to see if anything is either fixed or some kind of communication regarding this whole issue here on these forums. If there's no word, then I'm out. I am done with being disrespected by this company and history has taught me no follow-up from these guys means nothing is going to change and they really don't care. Let us whine long enough and eventually status quo will restored again, right? No, sorry guys. Not this time.Also, if I see a new post on this forum about a new character, a costume bundle, or anything of the ilk, before ANY of this is officially addressed, it just reinforces my point and the point of everyone else in this thread and I will be done right then and there.
PinkoMcFlyToo said: Anon said: Is this the biggest backlash in the games history? There's been some big ones, this is definitely the most justified of the backlashes.Fa
Anon said: Is this the biggest backlash in the games history?
Daredevil217 said: HoundofShadow said: That post by Brigby actually works against the players because the definition of shard has been stated. If this case were to be presented to the jury, it's highly likely that the jury will award the win to the dev.1. Players can apply comic covers to their characters to increase or unlock their power levels.2. Shard is a system or feature where it allows players to be able to work towards the heroes they have favorited, but also see exactly how far they are away from getting that next cover.Shard is similar to points earned when consumers use credit cards. When the consumers reach a certain milestone, like 8000 reward points, they can use it to redeem things like shopping vouchers. However, they can't go around saying that shopping vouchers are 8000 rewards points.In this case, the players can redeem a selected 5* cover with 500 character-specific shards.However, based on some of the cases that I came across, the devs loses if they decided to go down this route of technicality.My guess would be elder players will get an additional 1000 5* shards, if they decided to choose the middle ground. (6 covers / 2 = 3 covers).4* and below players will get their Mighty Tokens and their secondary 4* shards.I guess they could separate the rewards based on shield rank. If shards don’t equate to covers then where are my Parker shards for Vulture being level 320? I’m currently chasing him so I’d love to know where my shards went! I definitely didn’t receive them even though they are checked off as received. Oh right... I’ve been told I don’t get those because I got the equivalent covers already! Equivalent being the key word. Can’t have it both ways.
HoundofShadow said: That post by Brigby actually works against the players because the definition of shard has been stated. If this case were to be presented to the jury, it's highly likely that the jury will award the win to the dev.1. Players can apply comic covers to their characters to increase or unlock their power levels.2. Shard is a system or feature where it allows players to be able to work towards the heroes they have favorited, but also see exactly how far they are away from getting that next cover.Shard is similar to points earned when consumers use credit cards. When the consumers reach a certain milestone, like 8000 reward points, they can use it to redeem things like shopping vouchers. However, they can't go around saying that shopping vouchers are 8000 rewards points.In this case, the players can redeem a selected 5* cover with 500 character-specific shards.However, based on some of the cases that I came across, the devs loses if they decided to go down this route of technicality.My guess would be elder players will get an additional 1000 5* shards, if they decided to choose the middle ground. (6 covers / 2 = 3 covers).4* and below players will get their Mighty Tokens and their secondary 4* shards.I guess they could separate the rewards based on shield rank.
gascangascan said: I drew this up to explain why we have not heard from them. They just need to have a meeting. I hope this helps.
HoundofShadow said: Let's clear things up. A forum is a place for people to share their opinions. It's not a place to to determine whose opinion is right or wrong. Opinions are subjectives. It represents how someone views situations. I'm aware that my opinions are unpopular because most of the time, I take into accounts the viewpoints of other parties who are involved in the decision making process. I'm also aware that there are some posters hot on my tail and accuses me of "regularly engaging in flame-baiting". Besides, it's not that I don't want to continue "debating", but when someone else pops up and label my opinions as trolling, then I don't see the point of continuing the conversation. Anyway, most of the players got what they want in this saga and there's a happy closure, more or less.
The problem is that most of your arguments go something like:
You: Because A is true, I believe X is trueOthers: A is not trueYou: Because B is true, I believe X is trueOthers: B is not trueYou: Because C is true, I believe X is true...
It gives the appearance that you've started with a conclusion and are searching for premises. And that you don't actually care whether those premises hold up to scrutiny: they only matter for exactly as long as they might support the conclusion.
So it's not worth expending any effort analysing any premise you put forward: disproving it won't change your mind, because it isn't actually the reason you've come to your conclusion. That's what I mean by arguing in bad faith.