**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.

Something i don't think anyone caught on about with this the recent 6* crystal error

NOOOOOOOOPEEEEENOOOOOOOOPEEEEE Posts: 2,803 ★★★★★
in General Discussion
So we've been informed that when a summoner would have gotten 1 of 6 champions they would get an error message and then not get a champ. But this reminded me of when the 6*s first came out and the same thing happened with Cap WW2 but then they said he was in the crystal. But this situation with the literal same exact scenario basically confirms that he was not in that crystal.

Comments

  • CoatHang3rCoatHang3r Posts: 4,965 ★★★★★
    People caught on, it just doesn’t matter as that is water under the bridge. Stuff happens, nobody’s perfect and nobody incurred bodily harm. C’est la vie.
  • NOOOOOOOOPEEEEENOOOOOOOOPEEEEE Posts: 2,803 ★★★★★
    CoatHang3r wrote: »
    People caught on, it just doesn’t matter as that is water under the bridge. Stuff happens, nobody’s perfect and nobody incurred bodily harm. C’est la vie.

    Well nobody that you know of.
  • Maat1985Maat1985 Posts: 2,237 ★★★★
    It does give a very good indication that it was the same situation.
    But it does not confirm anything.
    The same error could be for many reasons.

    It does seem very likely that the two issues are infact the same.
    But it is far from conclusive proof.
  • HulksmasshhHulksmasshh Posts: 742 ★★★
    Whether he really was or was not in the crystal doesn’t matter cause there was no error message popping up. Kabam needs hard evidence like that to act on anything RNG related. Otherwise they can chalk it up to random being random. I think the 5* punisher example was much more obvious though.
  • CoatHang3rCoatHang3r Posts: 4,965 ★★★★★
    Hulksmasshh wrote: »
    Whether he really was or was not in the crystal doesn’t matter cause there was no error message popping up. Kabam needs hard evidence like that to act on anything RNG related. Otherwise they can chalk it up to random being random. I think the 5* punisher example was much more obvious though.
    There was the error message though.

    m98m5uvmze05.png

  • HulksmasshhHulksmasshh Posts: 742 ★★★
    CoatHang3r wrote: »
    Hulksmasshh wrote: »
    Whether he really was or was not in the crystal doesn’t matter cause there was no error message popping up. Kabam needs hard evidence like that to act on anything RNG related. Otherwise they can chalk it up to random being random. I think the 5* punisher example was much more obvious though.
    There was the error message though.

    m98m5uvmze05.png

    Oh damn you're right. It does look like the same exact case with the featured 6*. But I guess what's done is done by now and Kabam being a bit shady giving no explanation back then.
  • DTMelodicMetalDTMelodicMetal Posts: 2,785 ★★★★★
    These players should have the champion they should have pulled replace the champion they ended up pulling. Simple as that.
  • WalkinhighlightWalkinhighlight Posts: 134 ★
    CoatHang3r wrote: »
    Hulksmasshh wrote: »
    Whether he really was or was not in the crystal doesn’t matter cause there was no error message popping up. Kabam needs hard evidence like that to act on anything RNG related. Otherwise they can chalk it up to random being random. I think the 5* punisher example was much more obvious though.
    There was the error message though.

    m98m5uvmze05.png

    oh snap its coathang3r ! lmao
  • Kabam LyraKabam Lyra Posts: 2,936 ★★★
    NOOOOOOOOPEEEEE wrote: »
    So we've been informed that when a summoner would have gotten 1 of 6 champions they would get an error message and then not get a champ. But this reminded me of when the 6*s first came out and the same thing happened with Cap WW2 but then they said he was in the crystal. But this situation with the literal same exact scenario basically confirms that he was not in that crystal.

    Hello,

    The situation with the 6-Star Crystal on June 19 was a different issue and the handling of the situation as noted in our statement about it only applies in that specific situation.
This discussion has been closed.