Potential Delay to v44.1 Launch

We are currently working through some issues that may affect the release window of v44.1. This means that the update may not release on Monday as it usually does. We are working to resolve the issue holding us up as quickly as possible, but will keep you all updated, especially if the delay results in any changes to the content release schedule.
Options

Update: Erroneous 'Bundle 1' for Thronebreakers in GWBB

123468

Comments

  • Options
    DemonzfyreDemonzfyre Posts: 21,102 ★★★★★
    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    legenWFIdary said:

    Usagicassidy said:

    The *only* way to make this right is to make the erroneous bundle 1 the actual real bundle.

    But they won’t do that because they recognize how “dangerous” it is.

    So they reward a few and punish the rest. How very Kabam.

    How are they punishing you? That is SUCH an overreaction
    Putting you in a disadvantage
    How do you know you're at a disadvantage? You don't know who got the shards. You don't know what champs were pulled, if any. You don't know if they play BG's hardcore or are casual. You don't have any information other than some people got extra shards. You may never come across any of these players period in your time. And you'll never know exactly because they are just regular accounts. You aren't at a disadvantage. It's just something you've made up in your mind to cope with this.
    It doesnt matter lol, 20 6* are more than 2 6*, thats disadvantage enough
    Not everyone got 20. Some only got what they had for F2p as well. Again, your FOMO is causing you to exaggerate again.
    Dude, Im talking about the chance of having X, its not hard to understand but you choose to dont, If anyone has the chance to get 20, and you dont have that chance, you can only get 2, because of a mistake, you are in disadvantage, and thats not debatable, thats just a fact
    You aren't. That's a fact. Remember, the game knows what you want according to the community and it will never give you the good champs.

    Your "logic" is full of assumptions. You assume a huge mass of people got 20 6*s. You are assuming they all pulled every champ they wanted and they are all rank 4 now. You assume they are going straight to Masters in AW and going to the top of the leaderboards in BGs.

    It's all assumptions. It was probably a couple hundred people given that it was only available for a very short time. It's no different than the people spending money to buy all the offers and you not being able to spend a dime.
  • Options
    JefechutaJefechuta Posts: 1,212 ★★★★
    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    legenWFIdary said:

    Usagicassidy said:

    The *only* way to make this right is to make the erroneous bundle 1 the actual real bundle.

    But they won’t do that because they recognize how “dangerous” it is.

    So they reward a few and punish the rest. How very Kabam.

    How are they punishing you? That is SUCH an overreaction
    Putting you in a disadvantage
    How do you know you're at a disadvantage? You don't know who got the shards. You don't know what champs were pulled, if any. You don't know if they play BG's hardcore or are casual. You don't have any information other than some people got extra shards. You may never come across any of these players period in your time. And you'll never know exactly because they are just regular accounts. You aren't at a disadvantage. It's just something you've made up in your mind to cope with this.
    It doesnt matter lol, 20 6* are more than 2 6*, thats disadvantage enough
    Not everyone got 20. Some only got what they had for F2p as well. Again, your FOMO is causing you to exaggerate again.
    Dude, Im talking about the chance of having X, its not hard to understand but you choose to dont, If anyone has the chance to get 20, and you dont have that chance, you can only get 2, because of a mistake, you are in disadvantage, and thats not debatable, thats just a fact
    You aren't. That's a fact. Remember, the game knows what you want according to the community and it will never give you the good champs.

    Your "logic" is full of assumptions. You assume a huge mass of people got 20 6*s. You are assuming they all pulled every champ they wanted and they are all rank 4 now. You assume they are going straight to Masters in AW and going to the top of the leaderboards in BGs.

    It's all assumptions. It was probably a couple hundred people given that it was only available for a very short time. It's no different than the people spending money to buy all the offers and you not being able to spend a dime.
    It is different since the in this case the game itself does not let you do that, but it let others to do before the removal of that bundle, its not even about what they do with the shards, the fact that they could have the chance to have all dupes and you dont is disadvantage enough dude, dont look for excuses, it is not fair and thats that.
  • Options
    Crine60Crine60 Posts: 1,391 ★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Crine60 said:

    I just find it ridiculous that they can make, and allow to stand, a mistake like that based on the justification that it was only a small number of people but then don't back that up with real numbers they must have to be able to honestly make that statement. They make the periodic promises of more transparency and then more recently invoked it again with them saying they wanted to start providing us some actual numbers with things like cheaters detected and dealt with etc. Why doesn't that apply here?

    It is pretty hard to trust a statement like that without real numbers being provided.

    It was open for 40 minutes, limited to the amount of people who were Thronebreaker, and online at that moment. Not hard to see how it was a small number.
    You have absolutely no idea of how many people potentially fit those criteria because Kabam didn't provide actual numbers. You can assume it was a "small" number based on that and can state for a fact that it was less than if it had been available to all progression levels but that's as far as you can go based on not being provided actual data.

    Small, or whatever wording the actual post used, is a subjective term. Actual numbers are what they are without all the assumptions and guessing currently going on. If they honestly looked at all the data involved to make this determination then they should have had it readily available before making that post and should have been able to provide us with at least some of the relevant numbers.
  • Options
    DemonzfyreDemonzfyre Posts: 21,102 ★★★★★
    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    legenWFIdary said:

    Usagicassidy said:

    The *only* way to make this right is to make the erroneous bundle 1 the actual real bundle.

    But they won’t do that because they recognize how “dangerous” it is.

    So they reward a few and punish the rest. How very Kabam.

    How are they punishing you? That is SUCH an overreaction
    Putting you in a disadvantage
    How do you know you're at a disadvantage? You don't know who got the shards. You don't know what champs were pulled, if any. You don't know if they play BG's hardcore or are casual. You don't have any information other than some people got extra shards. You may never come across any of these players period in your time. And you'll never know exactly because they are just regular accounts. You aren't at a disadvantage. It's just something you've made up in your mind to cope with this.
    It doesnt matter lol, 20 6* are more than 2 6*, thats disadvantage enough
    Not everyone got 20. Some only got what they had for F2p as well. Again, your FOMO is causing you to exaggerate again.
    Dude, Im talking about the chance of having X, its not hard to understand but you choose to dont, If anyone has the chance to get 20, and you dont have that chance, you can only get 2, because of a mistake, you are in disadvantage, and thats not debatable, thats just a fact
    You aren't. That's a fact. Remember, the game knows what you want according to the community and it will never give you the good champs.

    Your "logic" is full of assumptions. You assume a huge mass of people got 20 6*s. You are assuming they all pulled every champ they wanted and they are all rank 4 now. You assume they are going straight to Masters in AW and going to the top of the leaderboards in BGs.

    It's all assumptions. It was probably a couple hundred people given that it was only available for a very short time. It's no different than the people spending money to buy all the offers and you not being able to spend a dime.
    It is different since the in this case the game itself does not let you do that, but it let others to do before the removal of that bundle, its not even about what they do with the shards, the fact that they could have the chance to have all dupes and you dont is disadvantage enough dude, dont look for excuses, it is not fair and thats that.
    "Could have". I'll look for excuses. It's fun poking holes in your flimsy logic.
  • Options
    JefechutaJefechuta Posts: 1,212 ★★★★
    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    legenWFIdary said:

    Usagicassidy said:

    The *only* way to make this right is to make the erroneous bundle 1 the actual real bundle.

    But they won’t do that because they recognize how “dangerous” it is.

    So they reward a few and punish the rest. How very Kabam.

    How are they punishing you? That is SUCH an overreaction
    Putting you in a disadvantage
    How do you know you're at a disadvantage? You don't know who got the shards. You don't know what champs were pulled, if any. You don't know if they play BG's hardcore or are casual. You don't have any information other than some people got extra shards. You may never come across any of these players period in your time. And you'll never know exactly because they are just regular accounts. You aren't at a disadvantage. It's just something you've made up in your mind to cope with this.
    It doesnt matter lol, 20 6* are more than 2 6*, thats disadvantage enough
    Not everyone got 20. Some only got what they had for F2p as well. Again, your FOMO is causing you to exaggerate again.
    Dude, Im talking about the chance of having X, its not hard to understand but you choose to dont, If anyone has the chance to get 20, and you dont have that chance, you can only get 2, because of a mistake, you are in disadvantage, and thats not debatable, thats just a fact
    You aren't. That's a fact. Remember, the game knows what you want according to the community and it will never give you the good champs.

    Your "logic" is full of assumptions. You assume a huge mass of people got 20 6*s. You are assuming they all pulled every champ they wanted and they are all rank 4 now. You assume they are going straight to Masters in AW and going to the top of the leaderboards in BGs.

    It's all assumptions. It was probably a couple hundred people given that it was only available for a very short time. It's no different than the people spending money to buy all the offers and you not being able to spend a dime.
    It is different since the in this case the game itself does not let you do that, but it let others to do before the removal of that bundle, its not even about what they do with the shards, the fact that they could have the chance to have all dupes and you dont is disadvantage enough dude, dont look for excuses, it is not fair and thats that.
    "Could have". I'll look for excuses. It's fun poking holes in your flimsy logic.
    It must be fun for you lol, Im pretty calm, you are wrong and you are trying to be right when you are not, in a RNG game its all about assumptions, the chance to get something is difference enough
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,269 ★★★★★
    Crine60 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Crine60 said:

    I just find it ridiculous that they can make, and allow to stand, a mistake like that based on the justification that it was only a small number of people but then don't back that up with real numbers they must have to be able to honestly make that statement. They make the periodic promises of more transparency and then more recently invoked it again with them saying they wanted to start providing us some actual numbers with things like cheaters detected and dealt with etc. Why doesn't that apply here?

    It is pretty hard to trust a statement like that without real numbers being provided.

    It was open for 40 minutes, limited to the amount of people who were Thronebreaker, and online at that moment. Not hard to see how it was a small number.
    You have absolutely no idea of how many people potentially fit those criteria because Kabam didn't provide actual numbers. You can assume it was a "small" number based on that and can state for a fact that it was less than if it had been available to all progression levels but that's as far as you can go based on not being provided actual data.

    Small, or whatever wording the actual post used, is a subjective term. Actual numbers are what they are without all the assumptions and guessing currently going on. If they honestly looked at all the data involved to make this determination then they should have had it readily available before making that post and should have been able to provide us with at least some of the relevant numbers.
    I'd like to know where it was implied that their every decision needs to be verified with data on here. Incase you haven't been keeping track, it's their call. History has shown when something was game breaking in cases like these, they've always taken action. You can debate what small means, but it's clear whatever comparison they've made, it was shows as insignificant enough not to take action. Relative to the number of Players who benefitted, the amount they got, and the effect on the game overall would be my guess. Regardless, it isn't a democracy. Even if they said a couple hundred, they've made their decision.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,269 ★★★★★
    Jefechuta said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Crine60 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Crine60 said:

    I just find it ridiculous that they can make, and allow to stand, a mistake like that based on the justification that it was only a small number of people but then don't back that up with real numbers they must have to be able to honestly make that statement. They make the periodic promises of more transparency and then more recently invoked it again with them saying they wanted to start providing us some actual numbers with things like cheaters detected and dealt with etc. Why doesn't that apply here?

    It is pretty hard to trust a statement like that without real numbers being provided.

    It was open for 40 minutes, limited to the amount of people who were Thronebreaker, and online at that moment. Not hard to see how it was a small number.
    You have absolutely no idea of how many people potentially fit those criteria because Kabam didn't provide actual numbers. You can assume it was a "small" number based on that and can state for a fact that it was less than if it had been available to all progression levels but that's as far as you can go based on not being provided actual data.

    Small, or whatever wording the actual post used, is a subjective term. Actual numbers are what they are without all the assumptions and guessing currently going on. If they honestly looked at all the data involved to make this determination then they should have had it readily available before making that post and should have been able to provide us with at least some of the relevant numbers.
    I'd like to know where it was implied that their every decision needs to be verified with data on here. Incase you haven't been keeping track, it's their call. History has shown when something was game breaking in cases like these, they've always taken action. You can debate what small means, but it's clear whatever comparison they've made, it was shows as insignificant enough not to take action. Relative to the number of Players who benefitted, the amount they got, and the effect on the game overall would be my guess. Regardless, it isn't a democracy. Even if they said a couple hundred, they've made their decision.
    Its called Ethics and Transparecy
    They were transparent. They discovered an issue, came up with a plan, and when they checked the data they realized it wasn't worth going to that length. They communicated along the way.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,269 ★★★★★
    Jefechuta said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Jefechuta said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Crine60 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Crine60 said:

    I just find it ridiculous that they can make, and allow to stand, a mistake like that based on the justification that it was only a small number of people but then don't back that up with real numbers they must have to be able to honestly make that statement. They make the periodic promises of more transparency and then more recently invoked it again with them saying they wanted to start providing us some actual numbers with things like cheaters detected and dealt with etc. Why doesn't that apply here?

    It is pretty hard to trust a statement like that without real numbers being provided.

    It was open for 40 minutes, limited to the amount of people who were Thronebreaker, and online at that moment. Not hard to see how it was a small number.
    You have absolutely no idea of how many people potentially fit those criteria because Kabam didn't provide actual numbers. You can assume it was a "small" number based on that and can state for a fact that it was less than if it had been available to all progression levels but that's as far as you can go based on not being provided actual data.

    Small, or whatever wording the actual post used, is a subjective term. Actual numbers are what they are without all the assumptions and guessing currently going on. If they honestly looked at all the data involved to make this determination then they should have had it readily available before making that post and should have been able to provide us with at least some of the relevant numbers.
    I'd like to know where it was implied that their every decision needs to be verified with data on here. Incase you haven't been keeping track, it's their call. History has shown when something was game breaking in cases like these, they've always taken action. You can debate what small means, but it's clear whatever comparison they've made, it was shows as insignificant enough not to take action. Relative to the number of Players who benefitted, the amount they got, and the effect on the game overall would be my guess. Regardless, it isn't a democracy. Even if they said a couple hundred, they've made their decision.
    Its called Ethics and Transparecy
    They were transparent. They discovered an issue, came up with a plan, and when they checked the data they realized it wasn't worth going to that length. They communicated along the way.
    Thats not transparency, thats not ignoring a bug lol

    Transparency would be saying something like "Only X amount of players out of Y were affected so we are not taking any actions"
    No. That's expecting them to be total disclosure just because some people got something that others won't get. When they say a small number that means a small number. We don't have to check their math.
  • Options
    JefechutaJefechuta Posts: 1,212 ★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Jefechuta said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Jefechuta said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Crine60 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Crine60 said:

    I just find it ridiculous that they can make, and allow to stand, a mistake like that based on the justification that it was only a small number of people but then don't back that up with real numbers they must have to be able to honestly make that statement. They make the periodic promises of more transparency and then more recently invoked it again with them saying they wanted to start providing us some actual numbers with things like cheaters detected and dealt with etc. Why doesn't that apply here?

    It is pretty hard to trust a statement like that without real numbers being provided.

    It was open for 40 minutes, limited to the amount of people who were Thronebreaker, and online at that moment. Not hard to see how it was a small number.
    You have absolutely no idea of how many people potentially fit those criteria because Kabam didn't provide actual numbers. You can assume it was a "small" number based on that and can state for a fact that it was less than if it had been available to all progression levels but that's as far as you can go based on not being provided actual data.

    Small, or whatever wording the actual post used, is a subjective term. Actual numbers are what they are without all the assumptions and guessing currently going on. If they honestly looked at all the data involved to make this determination then they should have had it readily available before making that post and should have been able to provide us with at least some of the relevant numbers.
    I'd like to know where it was implied that their every decision needs to be verified with data on here. Incase you haven't been keeping track, it's their call. History has shown when something was game breaking in cases like these, they've always taken action. You can debate what small means, but it's clear whatever comparison they've made, it was shows as insignificant enough not to take action. Relative to the number of Players who benefitted, the amount they got, and the effect on the game overall would be my guess. Regardless, it isn't a democracy. Even if they said a couple hundred, they've made their decision.
    Its called Ethics and Transparecy
    They were transparent. They discovered an issue, came up with a plan, and when they checked the data they realized it wasn't worth going to that length. They communicated along the way.
    Thats not transparency, thats not ignoring a bug lol

    Transparency would be saying something like "Only X amount of players out of Y were affected so we are not taking any actions"
    No. That's expecting them to be total disclosure just because some people got something that others won't get. When they say a small number that means a small number. We don't have to check their math.
    Total disclosure would be showing how many people got how many amount of shards, what they got, and how benefitable the bug was for them.

    Just showing the numbers is not total disclosure
  • Options
    DemonzfyreDemonzfyre Posts: 21,102 ★★★★★
    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    legenWFIdary said:

    Usagicassidy said:

    The *only* way to make this right is to make the erroneous bundle 1 the actual real bundle.

    But they won’t do that because they recognize how “dangerous” it is.

    So they reward a few and punish the rest. How very Kabam.

    How are they punishing you? That is SUCH an overreaction
    Putting you in a disadvantage
    How do you know you're at a disadvantage? You don't know who got the shards. You don't know what champs were pulled, if any. You don't know if they play BG's hardcore or are casual. You don't have any information other than some people got extra shards. You may never come across any of these players period in your time. And you'll never know exactly because they are just regular accounts. You aren't at a disadvantage. It's just something you've made up in your mind to cope with this.
    It doesnt matter lol, 20 6* are more than 2 6*, thats disadvantage enough
    Not everyone got 20. Some only got what they had for F2p as well. Again, your FOMO is causing you to exaggerate again.
    Dude, Im talking about the chance of having X, its not hard to understand but you choose to dont, If anyone has the chance to get 20, and you dont have that chance, you can only get 2, because of a mistake, you are in disadvantage, and thats not debatable, thats just a fact
    You aren't. That's a fact. Remember, the game knows what you want according to the community and it will never give you the good champs.

    Your "logic" is full of assumptions. You assume a huge mass of people got 20 6*s. You are assuming they all pulled every champ they wanted and they are all rank 4 now. You assume they are going straight to Masters in AW and going to the top of the leaderboards in BGs.

    It's all assumptions. It was probably a couple hundred people given that it was only available for a very short time. It's no different than the people spending money to buy all the offers and you not being able to spend a dime.
    It is different since the in this case the game itself does not let you do that, but it let others to do before the removal of that bundle, its not even about what they do with the shards, the fact that they could have the chance to have all dupes and you dont is disadvantage enough dude, dont look for excuses, it is not fair and thats that.
    "Could have". I'll look for excuses. It's fun poking holes in your flimsy logic.
    It must be fun for you lol, Im pretty calm, you are wrong and you are trying to be right when you are not, in a RNG game its all about assumptions, the chance to get something is difference enough
    Nah. You are wrong. We can both do this little game. I don't even know what your RNG analogy even means. It's like you're just tapping on the first word your phone suggests, either that or you're drunk.
  • Options
    DemonzfyreDemonzfyre Posts: 21,102 ★★★★★
    Jefechuta said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Jefechuta said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Jefechuta said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Crine60 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Crine60 said:

    I just find it ridiculous that they can make, and allow to stand, a mistake like that based on the justification that it was only a small number of people but then don't back that up with real numbers they must have to be able to honestly make that statement. They make the periodic promises of more transparency and then more recently invoked it again with them saying they wanted to start providing us some actual numbers with things like cheaters detected and dealt with etc. Why doesn't that apply here?

    It is pretty hard to trust a statement like that without real numbers being provided.

    It was open for 40 minutes, limited to the amount of people who were Thronebreaker, and online at that moment. Not hard to see how it was a small number.
    You have absolutely no idea of how many people potentially fit those criteria because Kabam didn't provide actual numbers. You can assume it was a "small" number based on that and can state for a fact that it was less than if it had been available to all progression levels but that's as far as you can go based on not being provided actual data.

    Small, or whatever wording the actual post used, is a subjective term. Actual numbers are what they are without all the assumptions and guessing currently going on. If they honestly looked at all the data involved to make this determination then they should have had it readily available before making that post and should have been able to provide us with at least some of the relevant numbers.
    I'd like to know where it was implied that their every decision needs to be verified with data on here. Incase you haven't been keeping track, it's their call. History has shown when something was game breaking in cases like these, they've always taken action. You can debate what small means, but it's clear whatever comparison they've made, it was shows as insignificant enough not to take action. Relative to the number of Players who benefitted, the amount they got, and the effect on the game overall would be my guess. Regardless, it isn't a democracy. Even if they said a couple hundred, they've made their decision.
    Its called Ethics and Transparecy
    They were transparent. They discovered an issue, came up with a plan, and when they checked the data they realized it wasn't worth going to that length. They communicated along the way.
    Thats not transparency, thats not ignoring a bug lol

    Transparency would be saying something like "Only X amount of players out of Y were affected so we are not taking any actions"
    No. That's expecting them to be total disclosure just because some people got something that others won't get. When they say a small number that means a small number. We don't have to check their math.
    Total disclosure would be showing how many people got how many amount of shards, what they got, and how benefitable the bug was for them.

    Just showing the numbers is not total disclosure
    You aren't owed total disclosure.
  • Options
    Darth_StewieDarth_Stewie Posts: 390 ★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Crine60 said:

    I just find it ridiculous that they can make, and allow to stand, a mistake like that based on the justification that it was only a small number of people but then don't back that up with real numbers they must have to be able to honestly make that statement. They make the periodic promises of more transparency and then more recently invoked it again with them saying they wanted to start providing us some actual numbers with things like cheaters detected and dealt with etc. Why doesn't that apply here?

    It is pretty hard to trust a statement like that without real numbers being provided.

    It was open for 40 minutes, limited to the amount of people who were Thronebreaker, and online at that moment. Not hard to see how it was a small number.
    You don't know that?!?!? You just make assumptions...what's considered a "small number" anyway?
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,269 ★★★★★
    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    legenWFIdary said:

    Usagicassidy said:

    The *only* way to make this right is to make the erroneous bundle 1 the actual real bundle.

    But they won’t do that because they recognize how “dangerous” it is.

    So they reward a few and punish the rest. How very Kabam.

    How are they punishing you? That is SUCH an overreaction
    Putting you in a disadvantage
    How do you know you're at a disadvantage? You don't know who got the shards. You don't know what champs were pulled, if any. You don't know if they play BG's hardcore or are casual. You don't have any information other than some people got extra shards. You may never come across any of these players period in your time. And you'll never know exactly because they are just regular accounts. You aren't at a disadvantage. It's just something you've made up in your mind to cope with this.
    It doesnt matter lol, 20 6* are more than 2 6*, thats disadvantage enough
    Not everyone got 20. Some only got what they had for F2p as well. Again, your FOMO is causing you to exaggerate again.
    Dude, Im talking about the chance of having X, its not hard to understand but you choose to dont, If anyone has the chance to get 20, and you dont have that chance, you can only get 2, because of a mistake, you are in disadvantage, and thats not debatable, thats just a fact
    You aren't. That's a fact. Remember, the game knows what you want according to the community and it will never give you the good champs.

    Your "logic" is full of assumptions. You assume a huge mass of people got 20 6*s. You are assuming they all pulled every champ they wanted and they are all rank 4 now. You assume they are going straight to Masters in AW and going to the top of the leaderboards in BGs.

    It's all assumptions. It was probably a couple hundred people given that it was only available for a very short time. It's no different than the people spending money to buy all the offers and you not being able to spend a dime.
    It is different since the in this case the game itself does not let you do that, but it let others to do before the removal of that bundle, its not even about what they do with the shards, the fact that they could have the chance to have all dupes and you dont is disadvantage enough dude, dont look for excuses, it is not fair and thats that.
    "Could have". I'll look for excuses. It's fun poking holes in your flimsy logic.
    It must be fun for you lol, Im pretty calm, you are wrong and you are trying to be right when you are not, in a RNG game its all about assumptions, the chance to get something is difference enough
    Nah. You are wrong. We can both do this little game. I don't even know what your RNG analogy even means. It's like you're just tapping on the first word your phone suggests, either that or you're drunk.
    Dude, by your logic, it doesnt matter if Kabam just gives Cav Nexus Crystals to X players just because, because they could get 3* so it is not enough reason to give it equally to everyone.

    The main problem is THE CHANCE to get something, giving THE CHANCE to have something to an AMOUNT OF PLAYERS but NOT TO THE REST its NOT FAIR.

    If the amount of players affected was THAT SMALL, they would BE ABLE to remove the difference between the bugged Bundle and the right one.

    So it means that the amount of players affected was BIG ENOUGH so they are unable to do that.

    No. It means the overall numbers were small enough that it wasn't necessary to create more work to penalize Players for an error. Penalize in a sense that they take it back. What you have is a situation where they actually did people a favor because it was an error on their part. We're not owed something for an issue that didn't even affect us. We can branch out and talk about abstract effects like the pulls they might get, but the amount of people who got more is not significant enough to be a large issue and ipso facto it has nothing to do with us any more than people having more Champs than me. The game doesn't have an even distribution clause.
  • Options
    JefechutaJefechuta Posts: 1,212 ★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    legenWFIdary said:

    Usagicassidy said:

    The *only* way to make this right is to make the erroneous bundle 1 the actual real bundle.

    But they won’t do that because they recognize how “dangerous” it is.

    So they reward a few and punish the rest. How very Kabam.

    How are they punishing you? That is SUCH an overreaction
    Putting you in a disadvantage
    How do you know you're at a disadvantage? You don't know who got the shards. You don't know what champs were pulled, if any. You don't know if they play BG's hardcore or are casual. You don't have any information other than some people got extra shards. You may never come across any of these players period in your time. And you'll never know exactly because they are just regular accounts. You aren't at a disadvantage. It's just something you've made up in your mind to cope with this.
    It doesnt matter lol, 20 6* are more than 2 6*, thats disadvantage enough
    Not everyone got 20. Some only got what they had for F2p as well. Again, your FOMO is causing you to exaggerate again.
    Dude, Im talking about the chance of having X, its not hard to understand but you choose to dont, If anyone has the chance to get 20, and you dont have that chance, you can only get 2, because of a mistake, you are in disadvantage, and thats not debatable, thats just a fact
    You aren't. That's a fact. Remember, the game knows what you want according to the community and it will never give you the good champs.

    Your "logic" is full of assumptions. You assume a huge mass of people got 20 6*s. You are assuming they all pulled every champ they wanted and they are all rank 4 now. You assume they are going straight to Masters in AW and going to the top of the leaderboards in BGs.

    It's all assumptions. It was probably a couple hundred people given that it was only available for a very short time. It's no different than the people spending money to buy all the offers and you not being able to spend a dime.
    It is different since the in this case the game itself does not let you do that, but it let others to do before the removal of that bundle, its not even about what they do with the shards, the fact that they could have the chance to have all dupes and you dont is disadvantage enough dude, dont look for excuses, it is not fair and thats that.
    "Could have". I'll look for excuses. It's fun poking holes in your flimsy logic.
    It must be fun for you lol, Im pretty calm, you are wrong and you are trying to be right when you are not, in a RNG game its all about assumptions, the chance to get something is difference enough
    Nah. You are wrong. We can both do this little game. I don't even know what your RNG analogy even means. It's like you're just tapping on the first word your phone suggests, either that or you're drunk.
    Dude, by your logic, it doesnt matter if Kabam just gives Cav Nexus Crystals to X players just because, because they could get 3* so it is not enough reason to give it equally to everyone.

    The main problem is THE CHANCE to get something, giving THE CHANCE to have something to an AMOUNT OF PLAYERS but NOT TO THE REST its NOT FAIR.

    If the amount of players affected was THAT SMALL, they would BE ABLE to remove the difference between the bugged Bundle and the right one.

    So it means that the amount of players affected was BIG ENOUGH so they are unable to do that.

    No. It means the overall numbers were small enough that it wasn't necessary to create more work to penalize Players for an error. Penalize in a sense that they take it back. What you have is a situation where they actually did people a favor because it was an error on their part. We're not owed something for an issue that didn't even affect us. We can branch out and talk about abstract effects like the pulls they might get, but the amount of people who got more is not significant enough to be a large issue and ipso facto it has nothing to do with us any more than people having more Champs than me. The game doesn't have an even distribution clause.
    Since when getting the same that everybody else is penalize?
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,269 ★★★★★
    Usagicassidy said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Crine60 said:

    I just find it ridiculous that they can make, and allow to stand, a mistake like that based on the justification that it was only a small number of people but then don't back that up with real numbers they must have to be able to honestly make that statement. They make the periodic promises of more transparency and then more recently invoked it again with them saying they wanted to start providing us some actual numbers with things like cheaters detected and dealt with etc. Why doesn't that apply here?

    It is pretty hard to trust a statement like that without real numbers being provided.

    It was open for 40 minutes, limited to the amount of people who were Thronebreaker, and online at that moment. Not hard to see how it was a small number.
    A *small* number but a SIGNIFICANT advantage.
    A small number of people spend more than 100k on the game each year.
  • Options
    DemonzfyreDemonzfyre Posts: 21,102 ★★★★★
    edited April 2023
    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Demonzfyre said:

    Jefechuta said:

    legenWFIdary said:

    Usagicassidy said:

    The *only* way to make this right is to make the erroneous bundle 1 the actual real bundle.

    But they won’t do that because they recognize how “dangerous” it is.

    So they reward a few and punish the rest. How very Kabam.

    How are they punishing you? That is SUCH an overreaction
    Putting you in a disadvantage
    How do you know you're at a disadvantage? You don't know who got the shards. You don't know what champs were pulled, if any. You don't know if they play BG's hardcore or are casual. You don't have any information other than some people got extra shards. You may never come across any of these players period in your time. And you'll never know exactly because they are just regular accounts. You aren't at a disadvantage. It's just something you've made up in your mind to cope with this.
    It doesnt matter lol, 20 6* are more than 2 6*, thats disadvantage enough
    Not everyone got 20. Some only got what they had for F2p as well. Again, your FOMO is causing you to exaggerate again.
    Dude, Im talking about the chance of having X, its not hard to understand but you choose to dont, If anyone has the chance to get 20, and you dont have that chance, you can only get 2, because of a mistake, you are in disadvantage, and thats not debatable, thats just a fact
    You aren't. That's a fact. Remember, the game knows what you want according to the community and it will never give you the good champs.

    Your "logic" is full of assumptions. You assume a huge mass of people got 20 6*s. You are assuming they all pulled every champ they wanted and they are all rank 4 now. You assume they are going straight to Masters in AW and going to the top of the leaderboards in BGs.

    It's all assumptions. It was probably a couple hundred people given that it was only available for a very short time. It's no different than the people spending money to buy all the offers and you not being able to spend a dime.
    It is different since the in this case the game itself does not let you do that, but it let others to do before the removal of that bundle, its not even about what they do with the shards, the fact that they could have the chance to have all dupes and you dont is disadvantage enough dude, dont look for excuses, it is not fair and thats that.
    "Could have". I'll look for excuses. It's fun poking holes in your flimsy logic.
    It must be fun for you lol, Im pretty calm, you are wrong and you are trying to be right when you are not, in a RNG game its all about assumptions, the chance to get something is difference enough
    Nah. You are wrong. We can both do this little game. I don't even know what your RNG analogy even means. It's like you're just tapping on the first word your phone suggests, either that or you're drunk.
    Dude, by your logic, it doesnt matter if Kabam just gives Cav Nexus Crystals to X players just because, because they could get 3* so it is not enough reason to give it equally to everyone.

    The main problem is THE CHANCE to get something, giving THE CHANCE to have something to an AMOUNT OF PLAYERS but NOT TO THE REST its NOT FAIR.

    If the amount of players affected was THAT SMALL, they would BE ABLE to remove the difference between the bugged Bundle and the right one.

    So it means that the amount of players affected was BIG ENOUGH so they are unable to do that.

    Here's what I want you to do... Tag me in this thread when you lose a BG match or AW match to one or more of these players who are putting you at such a disadvantage since you think it's a big enough issue to cause widespread panic.
  • Options
    FlippFlipp Posts: 52 ★
    I’d be willing to bet those who have an issue with this, only do so as they did not benefit. They’d be quiet as a mouse if they did. I benefited and as soon as they made a comment, I assumed I’d lose my champs, which I was ok with l, even though it sucked.
  • Options
    FlippFlipp Posts: 52 ★
    At the end of the day it is what it is. Keep complaining or move on or “boycott” and whatever else you wanna do. Instead of complaining you could just quit posting and quit playing the game if it is that big an issue.
  • Options
    HughreynoldsHughreynolds Posts: 18 ★
    Moneyclip said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Moneyclip said:

    Yesterday I read through the disappointments of some players who spent money to get the bundle.

    It’s very nice from Kabam to let the people keep the shards.

    BUT:
    - it is nearly impossible to take the shards back from the people, because this would mean to get signature levels lower, compensate iso and many more things. So it would be anyhow nearly impossible regarding the effort for Kabam would have to put into this topic.
    - The people who bought packages to spend them for these amazing offer and didn’t have the chance to buy the bundle should be compensated with more bubbles or something else. Most of the people bought the bundle just because of this offer.

    This would be fair in my point of view. Because all the other players wouldn’t have bought the offer anyhow because they were either saving for something else or just weren’t aware of it in the first place.

    This solution would meet both interests and wouldn’t harm anyone.
    Just be aware that it was a mistake and you all can’t request to get an offer back which would change the game immediately. It would be unfair for paragon and thronebreaker players who worked hard to achieve the amount of champions they have right now and would completely change the dynamics, if anyone could get like 10 6* champs within one day.

    Just think of it as an early sign up bonus and congrat the players who were able to be so fast.

    You all wouldn’t blame legend titles for being fast.

    The problem is that this is a bug, a bug that affected a determinated amount of people in the best way, a bug that, as you say yourself, they cant fix since it is very complicated and basically impossible since it affects Shards, Rank Up resources, Sigs and Awakening Gems, so they cant do nothing to get that Shards back, but the fact that they aint going to do anything about it is not a fix, and this is not even something just free, is something you have to pay for, so it is not that bad to enable that Bundle again for the rest of the players, both TB and Paragon, so people can pay for that bundle the same way that "small" amount of players did, THAT would be a fix.

    What would be your solution?
    How should the make it fair for all?

    If anyone would get like 100k 6*shards it would effect more than just rosters. It would effect battlegrounds, alliance wars and many more.

    As it was an error we all can’t blame them for not giving the offer back to everyone. I’m also upset that I wasn’t fast enough. But it is how it is. It would just infect to much and would also make things like completing 8.2 or something else completely irrelevant for a specific time, because all the players would have more champs to rank up and get their rosters on a specific level.

    It would just change the main rosters of all the players (instead of long term paragons).

    Anyhow - the offers the give us these days are pretty damn good and it should help you anyhow!
    You are right but then again paragon had the same offer but with sigstines they would get 500 generic Sig stones with that offer that's a **** ton. And thronebreaker only got 10% t5 CC crystal so thats like 200% t5cc crystal personally the amount of Sig stones out weighs fairness in m regard and the offer should have stayed how it was.
  • Options
    HughreynoldsHughreynolds Posts: 18 ★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Crine60 said:

    I just find it ridiculous that they can make, and allow to stand, a mistake like that based on the justification that it was only a small number of people but then don't back that up with real numbers they must have to be able to honestly make that statement. They make the periodic promises of more transparency and then more recently invoked it again with them saying they wanted to start providing us some actual numbers with things like cheaters detected and dealt with etc. Why doesn't that apply here?

    It is pretty hard to trust a statement like that without real numbers being provided.

    It was open for 40 minutes, limited to the amount of people who were Thronebreaker, and online at that moment. Not hard to see how it was a small number.
    It for sure wasn't a small number maybe like at least 100k people.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,269 ★★★★★
    Hughreynolds said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Crine60 said:

    I just find it ridiculous that they can make, and allow to stand, a mistake like that based on the justification that it was only a small number of people but then don't back that up with real numbers they must have to be able to honestly make that statement. They make the periodic promises of more transparency and then more recently invoked it again with them saying they wanted to start providing us some actual numbers with things like cheaters detected and dealt with etc. Why doesn't that apply here?

    It is pretty hard to trust a statement like that without real numbers being provided.

    It was open for 40 minutes, limited to the amount of people who were Thronebreaker, and online at that moment. Not hard to see how it was a small number.
    It for sure wasn't a small number maybe like at least 100k people.
    Highly doubtful.
  • Options
    DemonzfyreDemonzfyre Posts: 21,102 ★★★★★
    Hughreynolds said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Crine60 said:

    I just find it ridiculous that they can make, and allow to stand, a mistake like that based on the justification that it was only a small number of people but then don't back that up with real numbers they must have to be able to honestly make that statement. They make the periodic promises of more transparency and then more recently invoked it again with them saying they wanted to start providing us some actual numbers with things like cheaters detected and dealt with etc. Why doesn't that apply here?

    It is pretty hard to trust a statement like that without real numbers being provided.

    It was open for 40 minutes, limited to the amount of people who were Thronebreaker, and online at that moment. Not hard to see how it was a small number.
    It for sure wasn't a small number maybe like at least 100k people.
    No
  • Options
    OKAYGangOKAYGang Posts: 524 ★★★
    Wanda304 said:

    Wow kabam being generous

    Being generous they would have just admitted the mistake and kept it in place for all to claim imo
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,269 ★★★★★
    OKAYGang said:

    Wanda304 said:

    Wow kabam being generous

    Being generous they would have just admitted the mistake and kept it in place for all to claim imo
    20 6*s for all TB Players wouldn't be generous. It would be Bedlam.
Sign In or Register to comment.