Home The Bridge

How realistic is 10 billion points for community rewards?

12357

Comments

  • Kanon wrote: »
    V. wrote: »
    there are way more active players now. It's around 25,000 now who will say get enough points for the mega event gold. In the first 3 years it was closer to 10,000.
    25k? 10b requires 28571 players reaching all threshold rewards (350k)

    Anyway, I can't believe I was happy to have a chance to get CD Quark when the rerun was announced...

    Yeah, I was going to guesstimate we only needed about 30,000 more players to reach that, or have it be a Skirmish instead of Galaxy. Either way we were doomed to fail as it was structured.
    I want to become a Dilionaire...
  • MiT SanoaMiT Sanoa ✭✭✭✭✭
    AviTrek wrote: »
    AviTrek wrote: »
    Exanimus wrote: »
    It's not that I don't understand the "perspective" people. But there is a difference between "earning" an achievable goal. If I put a bowl of water outside the fence and blame the dog for not working hard enough, it's a very different thing. I don't mind people looking for the silver lining, but blaming the community for not "earning" a reward placed over 4 times farther away and with a shorter clock, is actually cruel in my opinion. Sure the world goes on, but if you want to accuse the community of failure or laziness, I think you need to prove beyond opinion success was possible. This community would have "earned" the community rewards twice over in a shorter time under the original structure. That is not failure. If you don't want to call it out, fine, I get it. But if you are going to accuse the community of failing, at that point I'm going to step up and defend it.

    To blame a community would be stupid, wouldn't it? And that is not what I meant.

    Was it mathematically possible to hit 10 billion? Pretty sure! There just was not enough incentive for the individuals of the community to contribute enough due to uninspiring threshold and ranked reward, and that is fine with me. Noone did something wrong imo, neither TP nor the community. I see it as an "offer", and we did not bite.

    If I said I would give you 10 million dollar if you climbed the K2 in 5 days and you surrendered halfway, were I to blame for the tough goal or your expectation that you could make it when you obviously could not or were not willing enough?
    If TP offered a cite for everyone if the community spent 1 million dil within 2 days and we missed that, would you blame them for even offering it? Or the community for being too stingy? Hopefully neither.

    And the comparison with earlier runs and the missing day... Our capability to burn through chrons is much higher today than back then, even with less active players figurewise. I think their estimate was not soooo wrong, it was possible in theory I assume.

    Why is there an expectation that even with half engagement every target must be obtainable?

    Every offer doesn't need to be obtainable, but to be an offer, it should be more/better than normal. If there had been a 4* at 300m and 500m with a normal 10x pull at 1b followed by a 5* at 8b and a 10x event pack at 10b then it would have been an offer on top of a normal galaxy event and something special to celebrate. As it stands now, assuming we hit 6b, we'll end up with 2 4* and 10 1x event packs that guarantee no crew. So the community rewards were worse than a standard galaxy event.

    Hmmm I was not under the impression that it was sold as special or exciting, just as a Flashback. The excitement came from the player base when they saw gold in the community rewards.

    Regarding "offer": Yes, overall it went worse than usual rewardwise. But are we entitled to 100% community reward every time? It was flashback, and that's it. And as such - like any event - can be better or worse than the average event.

    It was marketed as anticipation for the 5th anniversary.


    Marketing with a dud is not what I generally think of.

    And this was a flashback that had threshold rewards changed to reflect new thresholds, rank rewards changed to reflect the 1500 5* cutoff, rank reward changed to introduce a 4* crew not originally featured, and community rewards changed with new target levels. At this point the only thing flashback means is no new 5* added.

    So WRG modified the community rewards for this event and made them worse than normal galaxy events and harder to achieve than the previous version of this event. Flashback is not an excuse for anything.

    It was an event in anticipation of the 5 year anniversary that was the worst event in years. That's not how I'd want to celebrate 5 years.

    I had not seen any social media announcement before. "In anticipation of..." does not suggest that it was part of the celebration. But I agree that this might have raised some excitement nevertheless.

    I saw 10 zeroes and immediately thought that this would not work out after scrolling through the threshold. So I was not excited at all and therefore not disappointed later. I just shrugged and figured this would be a cheap galaxy for the - admitedly uninspiring - ranked reward only. And it was.

    sdjr0y3tnoor.png
    Wir, die Mirror Tribbles [MiT] haben freie Plätze zu vergeben. Kein Zwang und kein Stress, dafür aber Spaß, Discord und eine nette, hilfsbereite Gemeinschaft, incl. voll ausgebauter Starbase und täglich 700 ISM.
  • WaldoMag wrote: »
    I am playing two other games with what I consider big events ending today. I worked hard yesterday on those two and had some effort in Timelines. I started today with the plan of reaching threshold on both my accounts. I had to work today. Now that I am home I am too exhausted to go for more than 160k VP. All I could think of was why was I taking the time to get the rest of the threshold rewards. All there is, is a voyage supply token, a x10 premium pack, 1500 honor and what ever else and it is simply not worth my time or the Chrons used to obtain them.

    On top of this on the very beginning I knew we would not hit the top community prize of x10 event pack. I thought slim chance for CD Quark. But someone earlier explained the reason. This was a five day event the first time, I am not sure this was taken into account. Meaning I am not positive that last time the top prize was 10billion.

    And yes, this event was less rewards not more than what we have obtained in the past.

    Edit: I do not know what to think about their community thresholds this time when I find this was last time they did it.
    aqofmdvqwpwm.jpeg

    Tried to find the info in the old forum. But, I did find that we made it and a lot of people thought we would miss by 50 million. I got this from one of my posts, but I could not find the post of the predictions on making the community thresholds.

    I also saw that the name I could not recall, was Becca, who did a great job as Shan is doing now, I also saw Shan in the old forum. The same Shan??

    This reward structure would have been ok for this event because there are less players playing the game.
  • KanonKanon ✭✭✭✭✭
    I would add a legendary in the threshold (anything, like COP Picard) to make people play. If they are only in the community, many would just wait for others to put the effort.
  • ExanimusExanimus ✭✭✭✭
    If NoNameNamer is correct above, I think we need to stop and reconsider the use of terms that suggest the event had low engagement. This appears to be an assumption based entirely on not hitting 10billion. Of this was the most competitive top 25, that would seem to suggest it actually had higher than average turn out. Further undermining the idea the rewards were realisticly achievable. And undermining the idea the community chose to give up. It would seem to have been highly received and played, even if the rewards were uninspiring and over priced for their common event value.
  • WaldoMagWaldoMag ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 2021
    Exanimus wrote: »
    If NoNameNamer is correct above, I think we need to stop and reconsider the use of terms that suggest the event had low engagement. This appears to be an assumption based entirely on not hitting 10billion. Of this was the most competitive top 25, that would seem to suggest it actually had higher than average turn out. Further undermining the idea the rewards were realisticly achievable. And undermining the idea the community chose to give up. It would seem to have been highly received and played, even if the rewards were uninspiring and over priced for their common event value.

    Basically, what you are saying is the Legendary for next week was highly sought after. But, if one was not playing for top 1500 they had no incentive.


    Edit: I have to say after thinking about this, why are we getting a superrare that applies to the current event. They changed the Legendary to the next event chang the superrare crew in event rank rewards to the next week's event I do not care if it is the one that already exists. Of course, the need for this crew is questionable if the next week event is not a faction or an expedition (What's an expedition😉) if it's the new crew then everyone will need them.
  • MiT SanoaMiT Sanoa ✭✭✭✭✭
    WaldoMag wrote: »
    Exanimus wrote: »
    If NoNameNamer is correct above, I think we need to stop and reconsider the use of terms that suggest the event had low engagement. This appears to be an assumption based entirely on not hitting 10billion. Of this was the most competitive top 25, that would seem to suggest it actually had higher than average turn out. Further undermining the idea the rewards were realisticly achievable. And undermining the idea the community chose to give up. It would seem to have been highly received and played, even if the rewards were uninspiring and over priced for their common event value.

    Basically, what you are saying is the Legendary for next week was highly sought after. But, if one was not playing for top 1500 they had no incentive.


    Edit: I have to say after thinking about this, why are we getting a superrare that applies to the current event. They changed the Legendary to the next event chang the superrare crew in event rank rewards to the next week's event I do not care if it is the one that already exists. Of course, the need for this crew is questionable if the next week event is not a faction or an expedition (What's an expedition😉) if it's the new crew then everyone will need them.

    Your edit suggestion was raised in the Make It So section several times. It would have to be the existing SR for the next week. People who have it FF would not need it but it would tremendously help new players. I am totally in favor of that.
    Wir, die Mirror Tribbles [MiT] haben freie Plätze zu vergeben. Kein Zwang und kein Stress, dafür aber Spaß, Discord und eine nette, hilfsbereite Gemeinschaft, incl. voll ausgebauter Starbase und täglich 700 ISM.
  • robownagerobownage ✭✭✭✭✭
    Exanimus wrote: »
    If NoNameNamer is correct above, I think we need to stop and reconsider the use of terms that suggest the event had low engagement. This appears to be an assumption based entirely on not hitting 10billion. Of this was the most competitive top 25, that would seem to suggest it actually had higher than average turn out. Further undermining the idea the rewards were realisticly achievable. And undermining the idea the community chose to give up. It would seem to have been highly received and played, even if the rewards were uninspiring and over priced for their common event value.

    Wrong. It means that the top 25 sniffed out that this was a low participation event and seized the opportunity for a cheap rank achievement, and got pot committed to a slug fest.

    A better question would be how does the rank 1500 points compare to that of other galaxies?

    This is how I interpreted it as well. When I realized how close I was to Top 1500 after clearing threshold, I took advantage of my day off today to go for her. I haven't bothered to rank in a Galaxy in probably over a year.
  • WaldoMagWaldoMag ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 2021
    @Mirror Sanoa i am not surprised it was suggested. I am just surprised when we were talking about the Legendary change originally it was not suggested. It might have been done already, if we talked about it then.

    Edit: you do make me wonder if anything in the "make it so" section has been implemented.🤔
  • WaldoMagWaldoMag ✭✭✭✭✭
    robownage wrote: »
    Exanimus wrote: »
    If NoNameNamer is correct above, I think we need to stop and reconsider the use of terms that suggest the event had low engagement. This appears to be an assumption based entirely on not hitting 10billion. Of this was the most competitive top 25, that would seem to suggest it actually had higher than average turn out. Further undermining the idea the rewards were realisticly achievable. And undermining the idea the community chose to give up. It would seem to have been highly received and played, even if the rewards were uninspiring and over priced for their common event value.

    Wrong. It means that the top 25 sniffed out that this was a low participation event and seized the opportunity for a cheap rank achievement, and got pot committed to a slug fest.

    A better question would be how does the rank 1500 points compare to that of other galaxies?

    This is how I interpreted it as well. When I realized how close I was to Top 1500 after clearing threshold, I took advantage of my day off today to go for her. I haven't bothered to rank in a Galaxy in probably over a year.

    Did you get her?
  • RaraRacingRaraRacing ✭✭✭✭✭
    WaldoMag wrote: »
    Exanimus wrote: »
    If NoNameNamer is correct above, I think we need to stop and reconsider the use of terms that suggest the event had low engagement. This appears to be an assumption based entirely on not hitting 10billion. Of this was the most competitive top 25, that would seem to suggest it actually had higher than average turn out. Further undermining the idea the rewards were realisticly achievable. And undermining the idea the community chose to give up. It would seem to have been highly received and played, even if the rewards were uninspiring and over priced for their common event value.

    Basically, what you are saying is the Legendary for next week was highly sought after. But, if one was not playing for top 1500 they had no incentive.


    Edit: I have to say after thinking about this, why are we getting a superrare that applies to the current event. They changed the Legendary to the next event chang the superrare crew in event rank rewards to the next week's event I do not care if it is the one that already exists. Of course, the need for this crew is questionable if the next week event is not a faction or an expedition (What's an expedition😉) if it's the new crew then everyone will need them.

    To be honest, the real interesting aspect is not even shown in his figures ... my ranking the last two Galaxy events ... me slumming it to max threshold ...
    CD 2 - VP 359,115 - rank 3,183
    A night at the theatre - VP 354,795 - rank 3,001
    (Can't look back further in the Event Hub).

    i.e. it would seem that we (the community) never even had the slightest chance to hit the top community rewards if you consider the last 5 Galaxy events ... this is something that should have been known by WRG.

    The whole Legacy Legendary thing I'm always going on about is putting up new targets, difficult to achieve, but achievable for those who want to put in the time/effort.
    Ah well.
  • WaldoMagWaldoMag ✭✭✭✭✭
    WaldoMag wrote: »
    Edit: you do make me wonder if anything in the "make it so" section has been implemented.🤔
    Funny!

    In one of my former companies we had a program to incentivise improvement ideas. The more likes the idea got the higher the token rewards were, which could be exchanged for short holiday trips (lots of token) or mechandise (cheap).

    I earned a lot.

    Then I befriended the CIO who was in charge of the program and asked him if they ever implemented any of the ideas. He smiled and said that they do not even get evaluated and that the program was just there to have a room for the employees to vent.^^

    This sounds so familiar 🙂
  • ExanimusExanimus ✭✭✭✭
    WaldoMag wrote: »
    Exanimus wrote: »
    If NoNameNamer is correct above, I think we need to stop and reconsider the use of terms that suggest the event had low engagement. This appears to be an assumption based entirely on not hitting 10billion. Of this was the most competitive top 25, that would seem to suggest it actually had higher than average turn out. Further undermining the idea the rewards were realisticly achievable. And undermining the idea the community chose to give up. It would seem to have been highly received and played, even if the rewards were uninspiring and over priced for their common event value.

    Basically, what you are saying is the Legendary for next week was highly sought after. But, if one was not playing for top 1500 they had no incentive.

    I'm not making any actual statement like that. That may in fact be true, if I said it in that way it would be an assumption. All I'm saying is maybe we have assumed there was no competition simply based on not hitting the top goal.

    A lot of older players consistently have characterized the cards as old and undesirable because they have had them for a long time. Human Q was very valuable to me, I've been around less than a year and a half. Anyone in my position would have played for it. Galan may be nothing to older players, but he's a reasonable Picard to pick up for events. Established players tend to see these rewards very differently. Just because established players were fighting over the 5* doesn't exactly translate to mean newer players weren't having a similar contest below 1500. I don't know those numbers, so I wouldnt make a statement in either direction.

    I'm am simply questioning the idea these were attainable community goals to begin with. Shan also made the suggestion the rewards failed because we didn't show up. Once again, this frame of failure is based entirely on the single observation that 10bil wasn't hit. I would prefer to actually see the behind the scenes global stats for this event compared to others. If the battle for the top was more competitive than people assumed, I am forced to question all assumptions. There is certainly an effort to prove we failed by choice. Maybe it had better attendance than ever and the goals were too high.

    My point is simply to ensure the community isn't blamed for being lazy to save face for TP. Shan says they hoped it would bring us all together and by implication of not hitting the goal suggesting we failed. If it actually achieved that goal, I don't want that to get lost in an effort by fanboys and TP to avoid acknowledging it. If turn out was average or above, TP failed, not the community. Maybe it's a waste of time.
  • WaldoMagWaldoMag ✭✭✭✭✭
    Shan wrote: »
    As I've said in the event thread:

    The feedback regarding the community goals has been brought up.
    While community goals are meant to promote participation, a community effort - we'll look at participation for this event and how to balance this better in the future.

    Regarding the question whether the missed community rewards will be awarded after the facts, I do not know yet. Once I have more information, I will let you know. It is unlikely that I will know today.

    Just remember the participation had a lot to do with this being a rerun and that the event crew are not that useful anymore.
  • WaldoMagWaldoMag ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 2021
    This was from the announcement thread for the event

    pg3shjpjrdbo.jpeg
  • Cpt_insano_2k1Cpt_insano_2k1 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Calhoun wrote: »
    I’m curious as to why some people are defending TP/WRG here, we’re talking about how unrealistic the community rewards were and Shan even admitted that they’ll be looking into it. It’s totally understandable to be upset about the community rewards, I am. I’m just not sure why some people are trying to say that it’s ‘ok’ how much TP/WRG has been messing up lately. Sorry if i’m interpreting things wrong, i’m not very happy with TP/WRG right now myself. I don’t know what i’d do with my spare time if we didn’t have STT anymore, hopefully something improves soon as I would hate for no one to care about the game anymore. As i’ve been playing for 4 years (almost!) I feel how stale it has become and once again, I hope some changes happen soon, for the better. 🖖🖖🖖🖖🖖

    Not necessarily defending, but I think some of the reaction is rather over the top. The community rewards are framed as a goal, not an automatic entitlement.

    The fact that we didn’t make it half way to the top suggests they might have been an unrealistic goal, but several players here and elsewhere were confidently predicting that we’d get there.

    There are also those who seemed to have high expectations for this event as being something special, which seems to be contributing to the reaction, when it was made clear that the Convergence Day celebrations are yet to come.

    I get the general frustration with the state of the game, and share it to a degree, but the constant melodrama from some is tedious.

    Look, the community rewards were very different and easier to obtain for quite a while.

    This recent change made the rewards harder to obtain.

    The rewards were hardly even something i could consider to be a “reward”.


    All of those changes are bad from a players perspective. Thats as simple as i can make it.

    In truth, as of late the decisions made by tp/wrg seem to be purely from a stand point of people who dont play the game. Anyone who has played for 6 months would (and did) understand how poor this events rewards were.

    This thread gives feedback to wrg/tp that 10 billion community points for these sub par rewards are ridiculous.
  • This was my first top 50 finish and I am excited. But am really bummed that I missed Convergence Day Quark. I needed a copy of him for my Timelines Originals collection. Do we think there is a way to give him out to top finishers who did their part (and then some)??
This discussion has been closed.