Change of heart??

First off I just want to say this is in no way meant to be a "bashing of Kabam" I Love this game. I have played it for over 6 years now and I play it faithfully everyday. I see good things and bad things but I always just keep playing.

This whole Trade in Store topic has been hotly talked about for the past few days. I have seen posts from people that are angry, sad, and mad. People who are happy and excited and I've also seen some of the worst and that's the trolls who move in and out of chat rooms just to push people's buttons to get a reaction they are on neither side of the debate they are just there to see how mad they can make you to get a response that's all.

So I wanted to make a post just about how I feel about this whole thing. So here goes. I have a big roster of 6* that I have worked hard and spent my money on to collect. This game has given me some amazing highs and some pretty low lows at different points. And I have met some amazing friends that I never would have just by playing this game so to that I say Thank You to Kabam.

Now usually this time of year I like so many other summoners am gearing up for my favorite event, the gifting event. I have always felt there aren't too many other times during the year you can improve your roster better than gifting. But this year because of this store I have this bad taste in my mouth right now and it's all because of one thing....RNG!!

Kabam without letting anyone know ahead of time took one of the rarest items in the game for Cavalier and Thronebreaker players. And made it available by having 5-5* Generic awakening gems to trade for it. And if you didn't have enough you had a chance to trade 3 class 5* gems for 1 generic which was steep but ok. But then if you didn't have that you were able to obtain 5-5* AG crystals to open to get it and that's where everything went wrong in my opinion. Technically you could of had to players A and B both at the same hero rating, prestige and place in the game with 4 Generics and 1 each of each class. And player A could have opened their 5 crystals and got 2 skill and 2 Mutant and 1 tech and boom now they can trade for the last Generic they needed but Player B gets the same 5 crystals spins them out and gets an even spread 1 each in 5 different classes. And boom now they are done they have no other way to obtain this 6* AG crystal. How is that a fair thing? Kabam put out a post saying they wanted to give people who had an overflow of items with no purpose a opportunity to turn them into something with a purpose and they succeeded but only for the people who had the RNG on their side! The rest were basically left with more gems that have no purpose to stare at and remind them every time they looked at them how they got a bad break. Players who got 6* AG from the 4th of July or Cyber weekend paid for their gems. Players who got their 6* AG in 6.4 or Abyss earned theirs. None of that was RNG based. Like I said this is just my feelings on the whole thing and honestly it did open my eyes about certain things going into 2022 on how I play the game and what I do with resources. So Kabam thank you for that. And I'll end this long basically opinion on one note. I truly hope this game keeps going. I hope the community sticks together and it gets better because I feel this is the best mobile gaming community I have ever been a part of. Thanks for listening!!

Comments

Zeraphan

It is fair because RNG does not discriminate. Both player A and B in your example had the same odds.

I do not think the store was done the best way it could be, but as to what seems to be the main point, it is at least done fairly.

Fuskie

I get that it was fair to both A and B. What I'm saying is it shouldn't have been left up to that. That's all.

Zeraphan

Well, I answered the way I did because you asked in your OP "How is that a fair thing?" so I thought I would offer my thoughts.

I do not disagree that this implementation was far from perfect. Hopefully the next version of the trade in store will be better.

Fuskie

What I was trying to say is that all the people talking about who finished this content or that content. Or the people saying this one or that one didn't deserve it. None of that mattered, it basically came down to a coin flip per person who needed it. And yes I didn't get it I was one class based gem short in 4 different classes. But I have 2 Generic gems and sig stones are so hard to get it made me angry but not enough to quit the game like I've seen people say in other posts. l felt that the 5* Crystals should have been the 5* Nexus AG crystals we have seen in the past. I also felt that the 6* reroll crystals should have been a 6* Nexus AG because I felt that the people who traded in a 6* class to get the same class back were done wrong to. But let's get one thing straight everyone is entitled to their own opinion as long as people aren't trying to just push people to anger them just to get a reaction. So I respect your opinion Thank You!

DNA3000

First of all, I respect your opinion, and more importantly your desire to express your opinion in a reasonable and fair manner. If you read nothing else below, just know that even though I'm about to challenge a part of your post, I still appreciate your overall tenor and desire to express your opinion level headedly, even if it is something you feel strongly about.

Kabam put out a post saying they wanted to give people who had an overflow of items with no purpose a opportunity to turn them into something with a purpose and they succeeded but only for the people who had the RNG on their side!

The same issue came up when the Thronebreaker title came up. People said Thronebreaker was unfair because only people who had RNG on their side could become Thronebreaker: either lucky 6* pulls or lucky T5CC fragment drops or both. But that was completely false. Thronebreaker required no luck of any kind. Thronebreaker was targeted at players who had expansive 6* rosters and thus lots of rank up options, and players who were earning lots of T5CC and were in a position to do *multiple* rank 3 rank ups.

Any player within the target audience for the Thronebreaker title would have lots of T5CC and lots of rank up options and the odds of them having no reasonable options was basically zero. They did not need any luck. Luck was only involved for the players *not* in the target group for Thronebreaker. There were many Cavalier players who were on the borderline between Cav and the new Thronebreaker title. They were not overflowing with 6* champion rank up options and not swimming in T5CC. They had maybe one or two solid rank up options (in their opinion) and a lot of fragments but no fully formed T5CC, or a formed T5CC in a class they didn't have a good rank up options in. For those players, good luck could have pushed them just over the line, while bad luck could keep them from reaching TB. But that doesn't mean TB was dependent on luck. TB was reachable without luck by every player that was intended to reach TB. It was *also* reachable by players *not* the intended target for TB *if* they were lucky enough. And in a game with random chance, this will *always* happen.

The trade in store was intended to allow players who had lots of the targeted resources an opportunity to spend them on something beneficial. Everyone who had five 5* generic AGs could just spend them on a 6* AG: no luck required. Everyone who had three or four 5* generic AGs and were loaded with 5* class AGs would also have no problem trading up for the 6* AG. Only players who had very few generic 5* AGs or very few 5* class AGs or both would need luck to form enough 5* generic AGs to make the trade. But they were not the intended target of the store. Just like with TB, there is an intended target group of players who all get there without luck (or without extraordinarily bad luck). Then there is the group of players that is almost there, but just need a tiny bit of luck to get there. And then there is the group of players that is nowhere near, and would need a lot of luck to get there. There's nothing inherently unfair about that.

It wasn't only lucky people who could get the AG. Everyone with five generic 5* AGs did not need luck. Everyone with four generic 5* AGs and at least three of any one class of 5* AGs also did not need luck. Anyone with no generics but at least three of five different classes needed no luck. Luck only mattered to the players who did not have enough generics, did not have enough class AGs, and needed to trade 4s into 5s into generics (or some other sparce trade sequence) because they were basically short of multiple critical resources. But it wasn't bad luck that kept them out. Not having enough AGs kept them out. Good luck that let some of those people back in.

That's entirely fair. As long as the game contains random chance, no hurdle will target players with precision. Some players will need less luck than others, because some players will have more required resources than others, but random chance can both erase that gap and also expand that gap. And in a game without this element of random chance you don't have bad luck work against you, but you also don't have good luck work for you. If you're short, you always have no hope of overcoming that shortage. Consider that we can remove the RNG from the store by eliminating all ways to trade up for class 5* AGs. Either you have them or you don't, period. Is that better than having a second chance if you're short?

In this case I see the random element of the store as offering players a second chance, when they miss the first chance. It is 100% beneficial to the players. And anyone who thinks it isn't fair should be prepared to explain how an alternate version of the store that has all RNG removed from the 6* AG by simply removing the trade up options would be better for the players.

Fuskie

When Thronebreaker was announced people had time to make arrangements and choose to purchase different offers. Cavalier players at the time were given plenty of opportunities to get T5CC to get to Thronebreaker and in that argument at that time there were over 150 champions so people simply chose not to take up certain champs and wait for ones that they liked better. I think you are definitely right in what you are saying. But too have an offer like this just sprung upon us and then have RNG play a part in it is just not right in my opinion. I heard numerous stories of people using 5* gems just to test out champions they got after Cyber weekend never thinking they would regret it a few weeks later and that's because we had never seen anything like this before. I feel if something like this was in the works the community should have been told so scenarios like that would not have happened. But in the end there is nothing that will be done about it. Part of my original post was also about the numerous people in the last few days that I have seen just jumping from post to post bashing people about their opinions so I want that to be known that I wasn't just talking about the store. We are all entitled to an opinion on it right, wrong or indifferent. Because in the end even though it's a great game it's still just a game.

redsoxpatsfan89

I absolutely agree. I also just think my biggest issue is, i had some 5* class ag with no champs i really needed to awaken since i mostly use my 6* now. So what i figured was i would use them on interesting champs to test out since there wernt any other champs i really wanted to use them on. And i left 1 ag of each class just in case. Now i did this thinking that why would i save them except maybe the one of each class, as an AG trade in was not on my mind a month ago even. So in my opinion part of the issue is this was just put in for one of the rarest items in the game without any precedence. Just wish maybe they has an ag trade in store maybe for lower ag a while back or something to make some decide maybe they should save their AG, just in case. Im not mad or upset overall. The trade in store is great. Just disappointed that i will miss out on this due to not knowing there would be a trade in store for AG.

DNA3000

But too have an offer like this just sprung upon us and then have RNG play a part in it is just not right in my opinion. I heard numerous stories of people using 5* gems just to test out champions they got after Cyber weekend never thinking they would regret it a few weeks later and that's because we had never seen anything like this before.

Like I said: would you feel better if the random chance was completely eliminated, by eliminating the trade up opportunities? If the only trades that existed were the 6* AG for five generics and the 5* generic for three class AGs, random chance would be almost eliminated. If you also eliminated the 5* generic for three class AGs, random chance would be completely eliminated. You say that you feel RNG plays too strong a role in the store. Would removing these trades make the store better in your opinion? Either you have the generics, or you don't?

BitterSteel

First of all, I respect your opinion, and more importantly your desire to express your opinion in a reasonable and fair manner. If you read nothing else below, just know that even though I'm about to challenge a part of your post, I still appreciate your overall tenor and desire to express your opinion level headedly, even if it is something you feel strongly about.
Kabam put out a post saying they wanted to give people who had an overflow of items with no purpose a opportunity to turn them into something with a purpose and they succeeded but only for the people who had the RNG on their side!
The same issue came up when the Thronebreaker title came up. People said Thronebreaker was unfair because only people who had RNG on their side could become Thronebreaker: either lucky 6* pulls or lucky T5CC fragment drops or both. But that was completely false. Thronebreaker required no luck of any kind. Thronebreaker was targeted at players who had expansive 6* rosters and thus lots of rank up options, and players who were earning lots of T5CC and were in a position to do *multiple* rank 3 rank ups.

Any player within the target audience for the Thronebreaker title would have lots of T5CC and lots of rank up options and the odds of them having no reasonable options was basically zero. They did not need any luck. Luck was only involved for the players *not* in the target group for Thronebreaker. There were many Cavalier players who were on the borderline between Cav and the new Thronebreaker title. They were not overflowing with 6* champion rank up options and not swimming in T5CC. They had maybe one or two solid rank up options (in their opinion) and a lot of fragments but no fully formed T5CC, or a formed T5CC in a class they didn't have a good rank up options in. For those players, good luck could have pushed them just over the line, while bad luck could keep them from reaching TB. But that doesn't mean TB was dependent on luck. TB was reachable without luck by every player that was intended to reach TB. It was *also* reachable by players *not* the intended target for TB *if* they were lucky enough. And in a game with random chance, this will *always* happen.

The trade in store was intended to allow players who had lots of the targeted resources an opportunity to spend them on something beneficial. Everyone who had five 5* generic AGs could just spend them on a 6* AG: no luck required. Everyone who had three or four 5* generic AGs and were loaded with 5* class AGs would also have no problem trading up for the 6* AG. Only players who had very few generic 5* AGs or very few 5* class AGs or both would need luck to form enough 5* generic AGs to make the trade. But they were not the intended target of the store. Just like with TB, there is an intended target group of players who all get there without luck (or without extraordinarily bad luck). Then there is the group of players that is almost there, but just need a tiny bit of luck to get there. And then there is the group of players that is nowhere near, and would need a lot of luck to get there. There's nothing inherently unfair about that.

It wasn't only lucky people who could get the AG. Everyone with five generic 5* AGs did not need luck. Everyone with four generic 5* AGs and at least three of any one class of 5* AGs also did not need luck. Anyone with no generics but at least three of five different classes needed no luck. Luck only mattered to the players who did not have enough generics, did not have enough class AGs, and needed to trade 4s into 5s into generics (or some other sparce trade sequence) because they were basically short of multiple critical resources. But it wasn't bad luck that kept them out. Not having enough AGs kept them out. Good luck that let some of those people back in.

That's entirely fair. As long as the game contains random chance, no hurdle will target players with precision. Some players will need less luck than others, because some players will have more required resources than others, but random chance can both erase that gap and also expand that gap. And in a game without this element of random chance you don't have bad luck work against you, but you also don't have good luck work for you. If you're short, you always have no hope of overcoming that shortage. Consider that we can remove the RNG from the store by eliminating all ways to trade up for class 5* AGs. Either you have them or you don't, period. Is that better than having a second chance if you're short?

In this case I see the random element of the store as offering players a second chance, when they miss the first chance. It is 100% beneficial to the players. And anyone who thinks it isn't fair should be prepared to explain how an alternate version of the store that has all RNG removed from the 6* AG by simply removing the trade up options would be better for the players.

You're comparing the two situations 1 to 1, but I'd argue that you're forgetting one characteristic that makes them unable to be compared exactly in the way you are doing. Time, or availability of the opportunity.

Thronebreaker is an indefinite goal, you can work towards it if you are not there. You know I agree on your theory of luck can get you there faster, but not hold you back - we've discussed it in the past. But in my opinion that only applies to the TB situation because over time, you can make up the difference in luck that you didn't have by opening more T5CC crystals and filling out the rest of your classes. I.e. you could open 4 25% and get the same class sure, but you could equally open 12 and get 50% in each class.

However, this awakening gem is not something that bad luck can slow you down on but you'll eventually get there. Someone could have 4 generics, open 12 class gems and get 2 of each class, but then just lose out on this offer full stop. This isn't something that is here as an indefinite target. If the store was a permanent feature and over time you could use RNG to fill out your class gems and eventually get there, but with a bit of luck, get there sooner - then perhaps your comparison would be a little more accurate. As it stands, TB isn't a timed offer you can lose out on with bad luck.

I believe there should have been a trade in option for 5* gems to either re-roll your gem (which would still have some RNG involved, but offer another life-line for those cruelly struck by RNG), or flat out allow generic 5* gems to be purchased for 3 5* gem crystals (which would remove the RNG).

Fuskie

No I don't feel removing the trade up opportunities would have been better at all. Like I had mentioned in the earlier post if the 5 crystals would have been 5* Nexus AG crystals I felt that would have been the best way to go. The same with the reroll 6* Crystals and people getting the same class back. You don't want to trade in something you don't need to get the same thing back right? You wouldn't take your car to a dealership and trade it in for the exact same thing would you? RNG is fine. Just like in crystals. I feel that because we are dealing with something so rare and also something we have never seen before meaning Awakening Gem trade ups. That's where most of the issues are coming from. I do think the idea is great and I for one hope it does return in the future. I just hope we have a warning of when it's coming and the RNG aspect is just toned down a bit. I'm a firm believer there has to be good with bad both. For every Hercules there has to be a Groot or the game wouldn't be fun if every champ was OP and every summoner got every resource. I'm still going to stand by my original feeling though and that's I feel this store wasn't done in the best way it could have been done. But once again that's over now it is what is. All we can do is hope for next time.

DNA3000

First of all, I respect your opinion, and more importantly your desire to express your opinion in a reasonable and fair manner. If you read nothing else below, just know that even though I'm about to challenge a part of your post, I still appreciate your overall tenor and desire to express your opinion level headedly, even if it is something you feel strongly about.
Kabam put out a post saying they wanted to give people who had an overflow of items with no purpose a opportunity to turn them into something with a purpose and they succeeded but only for the people who had the RNG on their side!
The same issue came up when the Thronebreaker title came up. People said Thronebreaker was unfair because only people who had RNG on their side could become Thronebreaker: either lucky 6* pulls or lucky T5CC fragment drops or both. But that was completely false. Thronebreaker required no luck of any kind. Thronebreaker was targeted at players who had expansive 6* rosters and thus lots of rank up options, and players who were earning lots of T5CC and were in a position to do *multiple* rank 3 rank ups.

Any player within the target audience for the Thronebreaker title would have lots of T5CC and lots of rank up options and the odds of them having no reasonable options was basically zero. They did not need any luck. Luck was only involved for the players *not* in the target group for Thronebreaker. There were many Cavalier players who were on the borderline between Cav and the new Thronebreaker title. They were not overflowing with 6* champion rank up options and not swimming in T5CC. They had maybe one or two solid rank up options (in their opinion) and a lot of fragments but no fully formed T5CC, or a formed T5CC in a class they didn't have a good rank up options in. For those players, good luck could have pushed them just over the line, while bad luck could keep them from reaching TB. But that doesn't mean TB was dependent on luck. TB was reachable without luck by every player that was intended to reach TB. It was *also* reachable by players *not* the intended target for TB *if* they were lucky enough. And in a game with random chance, this will *always* happen.

The trade in store was intended to allow players who had lots of the targeted resources an opportunity to spend them on something beneficial. Everyone who had five 5* generic AGs could just spend them on a 6* AG: no luck required. Everyone who had three or four 5* generic AGs and were loaded with 5* class AGs would also have no problem trading up for the 6* AG. Only players who had very few generic 5* AGs or very few 5* class AGs or both would need luck to form enough 5* generic AGs to make the trade. But they were not the intended target of the store. Just like with TB, there is an intended target group of players who all get there without luck (or without extraordinarily bad luck). Then there is the group of players that is almost there, but just need a tiny bit of luck to get there. And then there is the group of players that is nowhere near, and would need a lot of luck to get there. There's nothing inherently unfair about that.

It wasn't only lucky people who could get the AG. Everyone with five generic 5* AGs did not need luck. Everyone with four generic 5* AGs and at least three of any one class of 5* AGs also did not need luck. Anyone with no generics but at least three of five different classes needed no luck. Luck only mattered to the players who did not have enough generics, did not have enough class AGs, and needed to trade 4s into 5s into generics (or some other sparce trade sequence) because they were basically short of multiple critical resources. But it wasn't bad luck that kept them out. Not having enough AGs kept them out. Good luck that let some of those people back in.

That's entirely fair. As long as the game contains random chance, no hurdle will target players with precision. Some players will need less luck than others, because some players will have more required resources than others, but random chance can both erase that gap and also expand that gap. And in a game without this element of random chance you don't have bad luck work against you, but you also don't have good luck work for you. If you're short, you always have no hope of overcoming that shortage. Consider that we can remove the RNG from the store by eliminating all ways to trade up for class 5* AGs. Either you have them or you don't, period. Is that better than having a second chance if you're short?

In this case I see the random element of the store as offering players a second chance, when they miss the first chance. It is 100% beneficial to the players. And anyone who thinks it isn't fair should be prepared to explain how an alternate version of the store that has all RNG removed from the 6* AG by simply removing the trade up options would be better for the players.
You're comparing the two situations 1 to 1, but I'd argue that you're forgetting one characteristic that makes them unable to be compared exactly in the way you are doing. Time, or availability of the opportunity.

Thronebreaker is an indefinite goal, you can work towards it if you are not there. You know I agree on your theory of luck can get you there faster, but not hold you back - we've discussed it in the past. But in my opinion that only applies to the TB situation because over time, you can make up the difference in luck that you didn't have by opening more T5CC crystals and filling out the rest of your classes. I.e. you could open 4 25% and get the same class sure, but you could equally open 12 and get 50% in each class.

However, this awakening gem is not something that bad luck can slow you down on but you'll eventually get there. Someone could have 4 generics, open 12 class gems and get 2 of each class, but then just lose out on this offer full stop. This isn't something that is here as an indefinite target. If the store was a permanent feature and over time you could use RNG to fill out your class gems and eventually get there, but with a bit of luck, get there sooner - then perhaps your comparison would be a little more accurate. As it stands, TB isn't a timed offer you can lose out on with bad luck.

I believe there should have been a trade in option for 5* gems to either re-roll your gem (which would still have some RNG involved, but offer another life-line for those cruelly struck by RNG), or flat out allow generic 5* gems to be purchased for 3 5* gem crystals (which would remove the RNG).

That's true, and this was also discussed at the time. Because Thronebreaker is a permanent title, in the sense of acquiring the title RNG would only be a temporary set back. But I think that's not as relevant to the context of the discussion for two reasons. First, people aren't arguing that RNG is okay if it can be time mitigated. They are arguing that RNG affecting players negatively is bad, period. In that sense, the two situations are sufficiently analogous. If the primary argument being made was that RNG needs an avenue where it can be time mitigated, that would enter more complex territory. That's not territory I would voluntarily enter all on my own to tackle a much simpler topic, because that would predictably go into the weeds.

But the other aspect to Thronebreaker that makes it more analogous than the time aspect would imply is that there were permanent penalties for not achieving TB on day one, for the players in that specific situation (things are different now of course). They lost out on TB rewards and TB offers which they can never get back. The *title* is achievable eventually, but anyone who argued that they were "held back by RNG" has a case to be made that this effect had permanent repercussions. In fact, this was one of the points brought up at the time: people were predicting that the reason why TB was introduced at that time was to open the door for TB players to have better CW offers. There's also TB daily crystals that have substantially better rewards than Cav daily crystals.

More recently there were people complaining that the "luck element" to TB disqualified them from the extended TB rewards in Summer of Pain, and they considered the RNG element of that gate to be unfair. This would also be a case where the difference between achieving TB on one day or another makes an irreversible difference. I'm not saying I agree this difference is unfair, but I am acknowledging that the difference itself does exist in a non-trivial to mitigate way.

TB is not a perishable reward, but it gates perishable opportunities. In that sense, TB can indirectly function as the trade in store does, by gating other things that function like the trade in store does (in terms of being temporary opportunities).

BitterSteel

First of all, I respect your opinion, and more importantly your desire to express your opinion in a reasonable and fair manner. If you read nothing else below, just know that even though I'm about to challenge a part of your post, I still appreciate your overall tenor and desire to express your opinion level headedly, even if it is something you feel strongly about.
Kabam put out a post saying they wanted to give people who had an overflow of items with no purpose a opportunity to turn them into something with a purpose and they succeeded but only for the people who had the RNG on their side!
The same issue came up when the Thronebreaker title came up. People said Thronebreaker was unfair because only people who had RNG on their side could become Thronebreaker: either lucky 6* pulls or lucky T5CC fragment drops or both. But that was completely false. Thronebreaker required no luck of any kind. Thronebreaker was targeted at players who had expansive 6* rosters and thus lots of rank up options, and players who were earning lots of T5CC and were in a position to do *multiple* rank 3 rank ups.

Any player within the target audience for the Thronebreaker title would have lots of T5CC and lots of rank up options and the odds of them having no reasonable options was basically zero. They did not need any luck. Luck was only involved for the players *not* in the target group for Thronebreaker. There were many Cavalier players who were on the borderline between Cav and the new Thronebreaker title. They were not overflowing with 6* champion rank up options and not swimming in T5CC. They had maybe one or two solid rank up options (in their opinion) and a lot of fragments but no fully formed T5CC, or a formed T5CC in a class they didn't have a good rank up options in. For those players, good luck could have pushed them just over the line, while bad luck could keep them from reaching TB. But that doesn't mean TB was dependent on luck. TB was reachable without luck by every player that was intended to reach TB. It was *also* reachable by players *not* the intended target for TB *if* they were lucky enough. And in a game with random chance, this will *always* happen.

The trade in store was intended to allow players who had lots of the targeted resources an opportunity to spend them on something beneficial. Everyone who had five 5* generic AGs could just spend them on a 6* AG: no luck required. Everyone who had three or four 5* generic AGs and were loaded with 5* class AGs would also have no problem trading up for the 6* AG. Only players who had very few generic 5* AGs or very few 5* class AGs or both would need luck to form enough 5* generic AGs to make the trade. But they were not the intended target of the store. Just like with TB, there is an intended target group of players who all get there without luck (or without extraordinarily bad luck). Then there is the group of players that is almost there, but just need a tiny bit of luck to get there. And then there is the group of players that is nowhere near, and would need a lot of luck to get there. There's nothing inherently unfair about that.

It wasn't only lucky people who could get the AG. Everyone with five generic 5* AGs did not need luck. Everyone with four generic 5* AGs and at least three of any one class of 5* AGs also did not need luck. Anyone with no generics but at least three of five different classes needed no luck. Luck only mattered to the players who did not have enough generics, did not have enough class AGs, and needed to trade 4s into 5s into generics (or some other sparce trade sequence) because they were basically short of multiple critical resources. But it wasn't bad luck that kept them out. Not having enough AGs kept them out. Good luck that let some of those people back in.

That's entirely fair. As long as the game contains random chance, no hurdle will target players with precision. Some players will need less luck than others, because some players will have more required resources than others, but random chance can both erase that gap and also expand that gap. And in a game without this element of random chance you don't have bad luck work against you, but you also don't have good luck work for you. If you're short, you always have no hope of overcoming that shortage. Consider that we can remove the RNG from the store by eliminating all ways to trade up for class 5* AGs. Either you have them or you don't, period. Is that better than having a second chance if you're short?

In this case I see the random element of the store as offering players a second chance, when they miss the first chance. It is 100% beneficial to the players. And anyone who thinks it isn't fair should be prepared to explain how an alternate version of the store that has all RNG removed from the 6* AG by simply removing the trade up options would be better for the players.
You're comparing the two situations 1 to 1, but I'd argue that you're forgetting one characteristic that makes them unable to be compared exactly in the way you are doing. Time, or availability of the opportunity.

Thronebreaker is an indefinite goal, you can work towards it if you are not there. You know I agree on your theory of luck can get you there faster, but not hold you back - we've discussed it in the past. But in my opinion that only applies to the TB situation because over time, you can make up the difference in luck that you didn't have by opening more T5CC crystals and filling out the rest of your classes. I.e. you could open 4 25% and get the same class sure, but you could equally open 12 and get 50% in each class.

However, this awakening gem is not something that bad luck can slow you down on but you'll eventually get there. Someone could have 4 generics, open 12 class gems and get 2 of each class, but then just lose out on this offer full stop. This isn't something that is here as an indefinite target. If the store was a permanent feature and over time you could use RNG to fill out your class gems and eventually get there, but with a bit of luck, get there sooner - then perhaps your comparison would be a little more accurate. As it stands, TB isn't a timed offer you can lose out on with bad luck.

I believe there should have been a trade in option for 5* gems to either re-roll your gem (which would still have some RNG involved, but offer another life-line for those cruelly struck by RNG), or flat out allow generic 5* gems to be purchased for 3 5* gem crystals (which would remove the RNG).
That's true, and this was also discussed at the time. Because Thronebreaker is a permanent title, in the sense of acquiring the title RNG would only be a temporary set back. But I think that's not as relevant to the context of the discussion for two reasons. First, people aren't arguing that RNG is okay if it can be time mitigated. They are arguing that RNG affecting players negatively is bad, period. In that sense, the two situations are sufficiently analogous. If the primary argument being made was that RNG needs an avenue where it can be time mitigated, that would enter more complex territory. That's not territory I would voluntarily enter all on my own to tackle a much simpler topic, because that would predictably go into the weeds.

In that case, I'd agree with you that RNG affecting negatively is not bad, period. If people are saying that, you wouldn't find me on their side of the argument, just as I haven't been when those people argue TB RNG is unfair. I've had my fair share of debates with Cav players.

So no, RNG is not bad full stop, just that in this particular case, I don't think RNG was the way to go. And I'm not saying that this store should be there permanently, I think of the two aspects (time mitigation and RNG), the RNG should be the one changed.

Really, I'm just saying that though you put forward that there are these two situations where RNG can prevent someone getting something (TB and the Store), and if one is ok, then the other should be; to me, I think that's an oversimplification. As someone who is not making the argument that all RNG is bad, and someone who is actually making the argument that the length of time that the store is available is the issue, I feel that it's a pretty important distinction to make.

And in regards to your second point, with losing out on real rewards by not being TB. I would argue that there are simply many more ways to get TB than to get this gem, and there wasn't just a blanket impossibility if you didn't have the needed resources. Even at the start of of TB, you could explore all of Act 6, or do an abyss path. Whatever your situation, whatever your resource level, you could grind arena, you could buy offers, you could do it FTP/P2P or whatever you wanted, but you could go out and get TB if you put your mind to it. There was no scenario where it was impossible to get TB. And now, there are even more ways to get it. Besides, even if hypothetically, TB was a once off offer, and it was only available for a week, someone could go and grind out an abyss path if they wanted to get it and that would guarantee them TB (and act 6 completion evidently).

If there was something you needed to be TB for, you could go and grind TB and guarantee yourself getting it. You didn't need to miss out on the rewards, there was always an option to guarantee it.

With the gem though, there was a potential flat out impossibility to get this gem. If you didn't have the resources, you couldn't go out and get the resources. Unless you hadn't already completed the content and used those resources, and even then, unlike an abyss path - it would not guarantee you getting the gem. It would still be down to RNG.

Not to mention one required resources that can be used up before the event was announced (gems), and one didn't (T5CC). Well, strictly speaking they could be used, but you would still be TB if you'd used a T5CC before it was announced. All these factors makes it two very different situations that you're comparing.

These two situations on the surface may seem similar, but I just don't think if you scratch even a millimetre below the surface, that they are comparable for anything more than two events that have some level of RNG. One is indefinite, one lasted a week. One gives you no opportunity to earn the rewards unless you have the resources already, the other has a guarantee to earn them. One had resources that can be used up before the event therefore leaving you high and dry, the other would allow you to complete it when announced even having used said resources before the announcement.

I hope I've explained why I view one as fair and the other not, I feel there are a great many factors that show these situations are not comparable.