**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Options
Nexus Cav drop rates [Merged]
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
On the other hand, setting that aside, if it was me if I *intended* the Cav crystals to not be "true Nexus" crystals in terms of overall intent - if I was using the technology of Nexus crystals to actually just release a better basic crystal with most of the 3* champs removed - I would have clearly disclosed that. It falls into a grey area I would try to eliminate myself, as I myself believe that is responsible design. Also, it would have taken no effort at all to highlight this fact, at least up to a point.
To me, there's no such thing as a tie. If players have a responsibility and fail, but the designers also have a responsibility and fail, it is ultimately the professional's fault. They are the ones with the professional responsibility. I'm not sure if I would say the designers had a professional responsibility to clarify this situation, but I *lean* in that direction. I could be biased though, because that's what I would have done.
I'm kind of wondering if disclosing this fact would have even helped, though. I was genuinely amazed at how many players were completely surprised by the fact the J4 2020 Nexus contained ten options. It was clearly stated in the offer, in the info for the crystal, and explicitly stated in the in-game announcement for the offer. And yet an amazing number of players completely missed both, even players I would ordinarily think were observant players. Which makes me wonder, *if* this was not an error (we don't yet know: it could have been which would make this discussion moot, as compensation would then be absolutely necessary) what would clear disclosure have been?
If only I got something of value for the tears…
Dr. Zola
Maybe this is something most people think is perfectly fine because they spend their whole lives being advocates, but to an objective observer this is an irreconcilable admission of bias. If I was acting as an arbiter between you and Kabam (and I am not) that one statement would probably make it basically impossible for me to rule in your favor.
It is also an unforced error because it is, or at least should be obvious that my entire discussion of that situation was only to speculate on what the effect of a disclosure would be, not on whether the disclosure was sufficient or not. It is really important to follow the logic being presented, and not just skim it looking for things to disagree with. In this case, that worked to your detriment.