**WE ARE NO LONGER Temporarily Reverting Tier 1 War Ban System**
After further discussion, the game team has made the decision not make adjustements to the ban system.
The previously proposed fix would have resolved the issue for Summoners who are on the cusp of T1/T2 play, and negatively impacted Alliances more securely in T1. Instead, we recommend that cusp Alliances switch to Manual Placement to your members to place the allotted 5 Ban Champions limit there.
Apologies for the back and forth, and for any confusion.
After further discussion, the game team has made the decision not make adjustements to the ban system.
The previously proposed fix would have resolved the issue for Summoners who are on the cusp of T1/T2 play, and negatively impacted Alliances more securely in T1. Instead, we recommend that cusp Alliances switch to Manual Placement to your members to place the allotted 5 Ban Champions limit there.
Apologies for the back and forth, and for any confusion.
Options
Wrong Featured Crystal?
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
That's not what happened at all. Nor is it part of the false advertisement (which btw, didn't happen to start with, I'll elaborate in a minute). The Sentry crystal contained Void. This was clearly stated in the ingame message. The Void crystal earlier this month contained Sentry. So the crystal with the name "Sentry" is what we call void his crystal since you can pull void. Confusing, yes, but the Balde crystal isn't named Blade either. What makes it confusing is that the name of Void his crystal is the name of another champion.
Now they didn't message us there was a Void crystal available, they messaged us a crystal containing Void, The Sentry crystal, was available. Which it was not. It's like saying the new iPhone is available but being out of stock before even 1 person buys it.
We can claim that there was false advertisement since what they told us was there wasn't, but the whole crystal wasn't there. They didn't give us a box from the new iPad with the old model in it, they gave us the wrong box. We walked out with the wrong box, used it and then went back and said "this isn't what I wanted, I wanted the newest model". We should have seen this before paying for it.
They did not put "The Sentry" crystal online with Sentry in it instead of the Void, they put their old model in the store, with the right name on the box and the right phones in it, but the new phones where still in the back, not in the store.
The moment they realized this they moved the old models to the back and the new model to the front, so that people that didn't read the box would not be stuck with the wrong version.
To me it sounds like he pulled a featured Sentry (which should have been Void) and then pulled a Void from a 300 unit crystal, but wanting to dupe him, he kept opening 300 unit crystals. Which obviously he wouldn't have done had he pulled Void instead of Sentry.
Oh you’re just being silly now. You didn’t look what you bought, you didn’t read the email saying what the crystal contained, your bad. Not theirs, yours. It was really clear that they where doing this whole Sentry/Void Jakyll/Hyde thing.
Also, make your own thread, you’re off topic here. This has nothing to do with the wrong crystal being put out.
This line of thinking has a critical flaw, and that is that it depends on the notion that the people who bought the Void crystal (that contained Sentry) got the wrong crystal entirely. But that's a matter of semantics. It is entirely a matter of perspective whether those players got the wrong crystal or got the right crystal with the wrong contents. If the devs accidentally set the attack of a new champion incorrectly we don't say we got the wrong champion, we say we got the right champion with the wrong attack value. The difference between the Void crystal and the Sentry crystal is that the Sentry crystal has the wrong featured champion data and one more subfeatured champion.
This would be just a sematic difference until you decide that everyone who bought the Void crystal whether they dropped Sentry or not was somehow wronged for getting the wrong crystal. That would mean that if Kabam wanted to invalidate your argument instead of swapping crystal definitions in the game they could edit that crystal's data to include the proper featured and add the proper subfeatured entry. In that case, everyone would always be getting the same crystal, both before and after the fix, and your argument that anyone got the wrong crystal would be false - everyone would be getting the same crystal always. Instead, the problem was that the crystal originally contained the wrong featured champion, and the only people affected were the people who pulled that featured champion. Everyone else got what they were supposed to get, because every one else would be getting the same thing that everyone else was getting even after the fix.
But that's nonsensical. Any perspective that allows Kabam to decide who is affected by altering which data they edit in the game is obviously a wrong perspective. The right perspective must factor in only what the crystal offered to players and the degree to which that offer was incorrect, and not factor in how the fix is implemented, something that should have no impact on the decision of who to remedy. What the crystal offers is a random chance at certain champions. If you did not pull Sentry, the random chance you were offered is identical to what was intended. If you did pull Sentry, then the random chance you were offered generated a result impossible under the correct crystal. Those people who pulled Sentry were the only ones offered something other than intended. Regardless of whether the crystal was wrong or the crystal contents were wrong is irrelevant to that.
As far as I'm aware I was the first to suggest something like that in the thread, and at the time I did not suggest a remedy for champion duping because no one had yet brought it up. We're discussing the problem after days of reflection, but Kabam decided to discuss and implement a fix within a single day. They may have decided that allowing people to keep Sentry was safer than trying to figure out all the ways they would have to account for Sentry swaps as well as building the mechanism for the swap which itself would have to implement all of those options.
It is easy to second guess how easy or difficult these kinds of changes are to implement, until you're the one that has to do so after only a few hours of thinking through the situation and only one opportunity to get it right and often no opportunity to test your solution carefully. The guy responsible for implementing the Void fix almost certainly has no direct access to the live server data, only test servers populated by limited test data. And in most MMOs I'm aware of the developer that writes the scripts to address problems like this isn't allowed to directly run them on the live servers either: they are required to package them up and give to operations people to run.
So you have a few hours to think the problem through, and then propose a fix that management will approve. Whatever they approve, you will have to write in such a way that someone else who knows almost nothing about the code you're running will be able to run this fix against the live servers without your help, and it must work the first time. Under those circumstances, how aggressively will you try to make a complex fix that addresses all possible circumstances?
The issues been sorted! Let it be
Uh you get nothing. If you pulled 2 more sentrys then you would get a total of 3 Void. What is there not to understand
Score in top 10% in featured aren 75 Times. Piece of cake.
No, someone is moaning because he pulled Sentry out of the crystal when Sentry was actually the featured. When the right crystal containing the right champs was online. He's trying to use this to get a free Void.
"No it's completely reasonable for these players to be awarded 15k red shards because kabam said so".
But all they had to do was swap the champs.
"No, no, no you don't even understand. That would be impossible because *lists made up reasons that almost sound legit, waits for another to move the conversation along in another direction*"
Idky kabam chose this so-called fix, I'll never know. I'm leaning towards a certain group of players being the main ones affected. That's usually the case when it comes to head-scratchers like this. As for the rhetoric in this thread.. that part I totally get. It's very transparent. The names change but the content remains the same.
Who is this “you” you’re talking too? Me, Hubris? Maybe tag or quote, it would help.
They need to make one asap. I pulled the featured but I didn't get Maned. I wouldn't have opened any if I'd known Maned wasn't in there!
You have a twisted view mate. I do agree calling you a liar is uncalled for. As far as I can tell you're very honest about having made a mistake yourself. And yes, making a mistake is human, you're allowed. But Kabam can't and shouldn't help you with this. If they do, it would break the dam. Everybody could message saying they opened the wrong crystal, there wouldn't be an end to it.
You made a mistake and it sucks, but this is not the thread for you. This thread is about people that pulled a crystal when Kabam put a different one online then their ingame message said. That's not you.
So I'm asking you again, stop going of topic. Make your own thread about this separate issue. You might find more people in the same situation and that actually gives you a bigger chance of getting help.