**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.
Cayko ★
Reactions
Comments
-
You tell people why they should spend? This must be the most dimwitted thing you ever said 😅
-
Those deals were really bad 😅 I usually find an angle to understand the deals but this one, pff idk man. They just sucked. Maybe they counted on that GGC’s would carry the deals, idk.
-
Maybe you would catch the essence of my thread if you did grow up a little, lol. Ironic, isn’t it? Point is, no one forces me to do anything and somewhere down this road that gets apparent enough. There are probably alot of people that feels this way and this is concidered feedback. But then again, someone resorting to…
-
That's exactly what happened! Thanks for giving me insight
-
Nah they probably didn't lol. It was a narrative from my mcoc history of how the f2p/p2w balance was shifting. Didn't complain anything but tried to keep it honest. Anyway, just think it's weird I haven't heard anything back no matter if it got verified or not
-
So, from LINE chats this doesn't look like a bug but happens when you're below a certain percentage of health, and to all champs. Now if this were to be a corvus fix, and don't get shitting here cuz this is about a corvus EXPLOIT so stop crying, wouldn't there be better ways to fix it? Like either pause the fight timer on…
-
Hahaha some people here admitting to exploit 😂😂 The function is a fail safe to network/app crashes and certainly not to regain corvus charges at no effort. If that doesn't go without saying I lose all hope of mankind. Y'all should be happy if Kabam doesn't flail the ban hammer at you
-
I actually don't care what you call it. If you do anything to dull my experience of the champ I went for, it's a nerf. Your idea of "balancing" could only fly if there was any guarantee that people would agree... or atleast just if a marginal disagreed. History have showed us tho, that alot of people disagree with alot of…
-
Ugm
-
I actually don't care what you call it. If you do anything to dull my experience of the champ I went for, it's a nerf. Your idea of "balancing" could only fly if there was any guarantee that people would agree... or atleast just if a marginal disagreed. History have showed us tho, that alot of people disagree with alot of…
-
Oh I also did use him in variant. It was really fun but believe me it was an expensive way to play
-
4 fights done in 3.2 time after time. Not a parry missed and like 2 inevitable block hits from routing.
-
I'm expecting about 200k 5star shards, rank down tickets and 99 cosmic sig stones. Cull, as he is right now is a mistake I made. I'm responsible for all that and given what I got I decided to simply play him as a (mediocre) prestige play. But if YOU touch that I sure got my reasons to want it all back. Damn, I'll take any…
-
I just pointed out consumer act in the hierarky. Honestly I'm way more onto apples policy which preceeds kabams tos
-
At the same time apple tos most likely say that purchase apps need to maintain a certain level of expectations for what's purchased. And so does the consumer law. Those items I get robbed of through kabams bad customer support could be a straight derivative from those units. Beurocracy maybe but push that stuff too far and…
-
But it does. Take aw for instance. If I don't throw items at that war it's not about me anymore but 30 players who spent this and that for season scores. Suddenly there's much more real cash involved that Kabam affects. And I know alot of instances where people have CALLED apple and had that refund with NO lies told. Kabam…
-
You're missing the point of this thread. If I use 10 l4 alli pots cuz of their bs and then get units, but the pots back and refund it Kabam kinda took the items back before I refunded. No chance in hell I shouldn't keep that. Again and again I see you miss the point of the thread. It kabam forces me to use a bunch if items…
-
Point is that the items someone uses to push against a bug should be counted as + balance and then it would hold. It would let the consumer go to refund, rebuy said items and net out balanced. But I can't see how they'd make that happen
-
I don't really believe that the consumers act is something that could be trumped with a ToS. Neither do I believe Kabam's own ToS can override the "ToS" Kabam agreed on to use Apple's and Google's platforms. If it actually was like that you could be damn sure that refunding would have been shut down all together as a…
-
It's correct against the abusers but on the flip side we have that system to prevent Kabam from abusing customers which will now be possible
-
Well, the problem with your statement is that there are ALOT of players with legit causes who got kascammed
-
Yeah, well I just got an issue closed from an inconsistent terminology leading me to waste 11 l4 pots and 3 revives in AW while support explicably said I won't get the items back so thanks for the support in legit cases. I bet it's not easy being a forum mod when you're not on the same page as your terrible support team.…
-
At one point they become the same. When a compensation is in place and kabam refuses people could find it reasonable to BUY the stuff back, refund ans keep the items = self made compensation = legit
-
My point kinda is that surely Kabam agreed to an ToS for the platform they launch their game from. If they were legit in this "policy" I'm sure they would have been able to block the refund mechanism all together. I'm also sure that this ToS has rules about the game standard matching the costs reflected by the exchange…
-
I do agree that this is one way to nail the real cheaters and I would even support it IF they did own up to their own mistakes, which they usually don't. It's not the big stuff like that bs in act 6.2 as of now but minor ones as input losses, that sp3 bug (where your champ ran towards the opponent) etc which makes you need…
-
In a way it is. The usual ways the block have a recovery time after being hit and during that recovery time the block holds. That's why you felt a bit magnetized when you tried to evade out of a combo while blocking. The block hold (recovery) kept you. Now that recovery time is broken = block hold is broken = block is…
-
Well, if you have a phasing failed that isn't directly after a regular hit I undestand that you're sure. What makes me think that you're not is that you answer with such confidence without looking. I doubt anyone without knowledge about preventions by proxy and have been making sure back then could answer that straight ;)
-
And the dashing in afte sp3's? Jesus.. I know at one point people complained about opponent dashing in before the sp3 animation ended, opening combos on you. What if Kabam was discussing that and someone went "you known what would be fun? We make THEM dash in! :DDD TROLLOOLL!" Idk what went down, how you think or what's up…
-
Are you sure you were observant enough? I've had her since she came in the featured crystal. There's a flaw ingame where stuff gets confused and prevented by proxy. For instance if GP strikes vision when he should synthesize it registers as a defensive ability and gets prevented. This is very easy to test yourself on Symb…
-
Yeah reason I asked was that in prior testings I was pretty sure domino didn't prevent phasing on it's own but it could get prevented in combination with preventing something else, such as her cruelties ln regular hits. By that it was safe to play ghost if you only used the crit passives since you wouldn't proc anything…
