Kabir - Why did you (Unintentionally?) mislead us?

Roswulf

GothicKratos wrote:

Sorry, but to me, even with that emphasis, it's pretty obvious that "this issue" of "inter-Alliance combat" was being cause by overarching problem of "issue Alliances are experiencing where the main Avengers vs Ultron sub-chapter is closed after Round 8 is done", and that was what they were addressing. That's kind of how paragraphs work - the first sentence generally sets the pace and subject of the rest of the paragraph. I think I hear an avocado calling your name!

Now, I think I said this in this thread, but yeah, there is a tiny, miniscule bit of validity because maybe they "should have" told us that the event was going to be harder (read: have more health), but do I think they're in some way mandated to? No, I don;t think so at all - it woulda been nice to know though.

But the issue IS thoroughly resolved in this second go around by having no alliances actually clear Round 8. Do you actually think Kabir would have made this post had he been conscious of the fact that in practice nobody would be locked out of receiving the one million point reward? If not, your point is purely semantic. If so, you have a much lower opinion of Kabir than I.

Of course D3 isn't mandated to share any information. But they did. Kadir posted information that read in good faith caused players to make strategic decisions that ended up screwing players over. That was an error, which joined with a number of other errors D3 has made in the past week- technical and player management- forms the basis of a legitimate complaint.

GothicKratos

Roswulf wrote:

GothicKratos wrote:

Sorry, but to me, even with that emphasis, it's pretty obvious that "this issue" of "inter-Alliance combat" was being cause by overarching problem of "issue Alliances are experiencing where the main Avengers vs Ultron sub-chapter is closed after Round 8 is done", and that was what they were addressing. That's kind of how paragraphs work - the first sentence generally sets the pace and subject of the rest of the paragraph. I think I hear an avocado calling your name!

Now, I think I said this in this thread, but yeah, there is a tiny, miniscule bit of validity because maybe they "should have" told us that the event was going to be harder (read: have more health), but do I think they're in some way mandated to? No, I don;t think so at all - it woulda been nice to know though.

But the issue IS thoroughly resolved in this second go around by having no alliances actually clear Round 8. Do you actually think Kabir would have made this post had he been conscious of the fact that in practice nobody would be locked out of receiving the one million point reward? If not, your point is purely semantic. If so, you have a much lower opinion of Kabir than I.

They literally said no fix could be made or be put into place for round two. This post was in regards to "issue Alliances are experiencing where the main Avengers vs Ultron sub-chapter is closed after Round 8 is done".This was an issue because not everyone could hit the 1mil Prog Rewards. How in the world do you draw from that statement - one that said nothing would be fixed - that things regarding points would be better? I'm completely baffled.

Yeah, I feel bad for the guys that presumed the rerun would be a copy/paste job for a 4*, and yes, this is legitimate reasoning for assuming that, to a degree, but your presumption is anyone's fault but D3's. Precedence is only arguable so far, and when it really comes down to it, it's your own fault for running on presumptions.

Vhailorx

GothicKratos wrote:

Yeah, I feel bad for the guys that presumed the rerun would be a copy/paste job for a 4*, and yes, this is legitimate reasoning for assuming that, to a degree, but your presumption is anyone's fault but D3's. Precedence is only arguable so far, and when it really comes down to it, it's your own fault for running on presumptions.

I strongly disagree with you Gothic. The incorrect assumptions that many players made about Ultron 2 were not merely buyer-beware assumptions based on wishful thinking. As many others have argued in this and other threads, they were very reasonable assumptions based upon the statements made by demiurge leading up to the event. When some idiot player says "demiurge said we would get awesome prizes in the ultron packs, but I haven't gotten a single IMHB from a token yet!!!! I deserve compensation!!!" demiurge can and should deny those complaints. But that isn't what happened here. I don't understand why you have such a hard time admitting that it might be reasonable for Demiurge to accept some responsibility for reasonable assumptions based on Demiurge's own statements.

That's not saying that demiurge is mean, or stupid, or incompetent, or deceitful (to that extent I disagree with the OP). It just means that when demiurge makes statements about their game that players can reasonably interpret in one way, and when players DO make that interpretation and are subsequently disadvantaged by that interpretation, demiurge should provide compensation for the players. Demiurge probably doesn't HAVE to do so, depending on what's in the EULA, but they certainly should do it in the interest of preserving community goodwill.

This is especially true with new game content, where no matter what players choose to do, they will be acting on guesses or "running on presumptions." In the absence of actual information/experience, dev comments are even more important and will have more impact on player choices. I would argue that the devs should be more generous with compensation for new content in exchange for the higher risk of technical/logistical frustrations that comes with such event.

Nooneelsesname

daibar wrote:

No one looked at what he said, and then asked "Ok, so Ultron will still be gone after round 8, but will Ultron's health be any higher for the 4* Hulkbuster?"

Yes, we did. Stax and I both did that in the thread after Kabir's statement.

Gothic Kratos wrote:

Because that's not a fix really

Yes, it is. It is exactly a fix for the issue that was being discussed in the thread, which was the inability of all alliance members to reach progression rewards.



DrStrange-616's post is completely right, so I won't say much more. In the context of the thread, the issue was the inability I just mentioned. Having Round 8 not close, or having a Round 9 were solutions proposed in the thread to that issue.

Kabir's post was ambiguous. Taken out of context, your reading looks more valid. In context of the thread, I think my reading is more valid.

Whatever, it happened. I'm frustrated, but I'm not mad. I don't want the devs to stop commenting and interacting, I'm glad they do.

I wish Kabir had been more clear in his post or had clarified it later in the thread when it was asked of him.

fmftint

this thread is not at all productive and should not continue. and for a mod to allow himself to get roped into a debate of semantics is frankly embarassing

Unknown

Let's say we were invited to two parties. In the first party, there weren't enough cookies to go around. We asked the host if there will be more cookies. The host did not say, "Don't worry, there are enough cookies in the next party." Instead, the host says, "we will think about how to fix this in the future, but we won't fix the next party in time."

Many of us, hearing that they can't fix the problem, naturally assumed that the there's still not enough cookies in the next party. After all, why would the host need to fix anything if there's no problem with the next party?

We ended up not inviting the big eaters to the party so there's just enough cookies for everyone. Turns out there are WAY TOO MANY COOKIES. And the last thing that anyone wants to see is big piles of cookies thrown away when there are starving children all over the world.

JVReal

I think the problem now is that people are reading the message with the current knowledge we have and pretending they had that knowledge at the time it was first written.

Hindsight is 20/20. Now that we know what the event looks like we read different meaning into it.

At the time of the writing, with no knowledge of the content of the second run, it does give expectations that were detrimental to players.

I expect a second run of something to be identical to the first unless specified. When i go to the movies, i expect to see the same film on Saturday that i saw on Friday because it is a second run of the same film.

Spoit

GothicKratos wrote:

Spoit wrote:

daibar wrote:

I agree there's a little bit of validity in the OP. No one looked at what he said, and then asked "Ok, so Ultron will still be gone after round 8, but will Ultron's health be any higher for the 4* Hulkbuster?" which devs may or may not have answered anyways. A lot of us guessed at this hp increase but just decided to roll with what happens, figuring we couldn't change it either way, so there wasn't any point in asking. There's still the possibility in quite competitive alliances that some members will get locked out of the final progression reward, though it's probably unlikely enough such that no one one will complain for that particular issue this round.

Except why wouldn't he go and say that the problem would be (somewhat) mitigated by the extra health? That's actually a positive statement, that people would have liked hearing

Because that's not a fix really (especially if they didn't change anything to begin with and that's how it was just supposed to be), it does help alleviate the problem at the top. If this was how they would have chose to fix it, it would have been a stopgap that helped the rich get richer, so to speak.

But... it is? The problem only occurred at the top, and I'm pretty sure the math works out that it's pretty darn hard to an alliance to even finish round 7, much less 8, without everyone being able to at least approach the progression rewards?

I mean by that definition, the only people finishing round 8 in the first place was "the rich" (I forget the exact numbers, but probably like 6-7 people in my alliance were like 100k, one refresh?, away from 1M)

Unknown

Spoit wrote:

daibar wrote:

Corrected quoted post

Except why wouldn't he go and say that the problem would be (somewhat) mitigated by the extra health? That's actually a positive statement, that people would have liked hearing

Are you sure? Sure the top alliances would love that, but many people who didn't clear all nodes first run would be put off trying entirely. Most people didn't clear all 8 waves. Not much more than half (57%) of forumites, the elite, cleared wave 8: poll. The majority of comments would be negative. Any comment either way would cause angst, so it's in Demiurge's interests to leave it ambiguous. I think they have the right, even though it sucks to be us and have assumed wrongly.

Also, I couldn't see giving nearly >83% of forumites 4* covers in a single pve. (57%+13%+13). Would be even more (90%?) with reduced server issues.

To make it clearer, let's tell the people who got locked out of a SW reward because they beat Ultron 6 too late (not because it didn't happen) that the next version will have even more health! Without SW they have 0 chance at getting the better hulkbuster reward! Don't know why there aren't more of those people raging already, clamoring for a free HB cover; maybe they already quit the game.

evil panda

Davyx wrote:

Let's say we were invited to two parties. In the first party, there weren't enough cookies to go around. We asked the host if there will be more cookies. The host did not say, "Don't worry, there are enough cookies in the next party." Instead, the host says, "we will think about how to fix this in the future, but we won't fix the next party in time."

Many of us, hearing that they can't fix the problem, naturally assumed that the there's still not enough cookies in the next party. After all, why would the host need to fix anything if there's no problem with the next party?

We ended up not inviting the big eaters to the party so there's just enough cookies for everyone. Turns out there are WAY TOO MANY COOKIES. And the last thing that anyone wants to see is big piles of cookies thrown away when there are starving children all over the world.

Now I want cookies.

David [Hi-Fi] Moore

Locking thread. Discussion has been noted. Please keep comments productive and respectful.

Please also keep in mind that the developers are people too.

Thanks.