The pros and cons of Gree awarding TAW a prize they didn't earn (finishing streaks)

[Ajones]

Verifiable, would have compensated.... These are just spin doctor words/phrases for when Gree makes a big mistake in overcompensating ONE team. Do either taw or sc always complete 11/11 streaks? NO, so this is overcompensation. Perception is not what you tells us but what we perceive.

[kimberleyj]

None of those are verifiable issues based on our game logs except for the missing purchase. The big qualifier in my post is that the issue has to be something that we can identify and locate everyone affected in our game logs. For missing purchases, we credit the gold, but no further compensation is available. This action is maintained for all players/syndicates in the game.




It was not a server or connection issue. It was a specific issue that affected these two syndicates. If other syndicates were affected by it, they would have been offered the same compensation.

so being locked out of your game for upto a day was acceptable for a big company then?.
When people was being kicked out their own team it took gree 2 weeks to sort this problem out (it was sorted 1 day before the war) and that was only because a load of people came on here , you think that was fine nothing to bat an eye lid about? .

when people was being shut out during war for up to a day , are you saying that was acceptable as well?.


Gree took weeks to get back to my email about missing gold , any other big company would refund you your money within 48 hours or would send you the replacement straight away.

it just seems odd that when ever the has been past gaming issues no reward was offered but when the is an issue with a top team you jump at the chance of giving them an extra weapon. if the is gaming issues due to gree then those teams should get the reward and not just gree's fav team

[nooch]

Actually, in previous cases of lockouts or other major verifiable interruptions during a WD event, we have either adjusted the goals if a global problem or adjusted things for the syndicates effected, regardless of who those syndicates are. The fact is that this time it was just two syndicates affected by the technical issues, but it wouldn't have mattered who it was.

EDIT: Seriously, Montecore, tone done the flaming / trolling please. If SAS had been hit the same way by the issue, we would have done the same thing because it is completely fair to adjust the goal when it is potentially impossible to complete due to an issue on our side.

That's a reply you can't take back... You guys say, you can't verify past issues, this battle was two teams eth issues. And you could verify that. I gaurentee, the battle before, you know for a fact, there was a one hour pairing halt... Right? So... When sas2, who was on 10/11, runs out of time, by ten minutes for the last win, you won't do anything for us? Every team was affected then, don't say you weren't aware, because you were. You appoligised for the inconvienence, when I say missed by 10 minutes, I mean, 28 minutes left, and you wouldn't pair us. But, we said nothing, because of what your answers always are..... no!!!! Well, now, you should probably award us, the same thing, because we were much closer. And, when a team matches and loses on 8/9, its usually safe to say, ur not coming back from that. Sc earned it, and they are third place. So, you would expect the almighty taw to be able to as well. It's a pixel vest, thst sas put up 16million ip, to ensure they didn't get, and u gave it to them anyways, unreal.... Lmk when I will be treated the same as taw, and given my prior streak prize for my syndicate. Thanks, well be waiting. Lmk if u need anymore info on where to find sas2

[lucky83]

Actually, in previous cases of lockouts or other major verifiable interruptions during a WD event, we have either adjusted the goals if a global problem or adjusted things for the syndicates effected, regardless of who those syndicates are. The fact is that this time it was just two syndicates affected by the technical issues, but it wouldn't have mattered who it was.

Now this is interesting. I remember when SC were stuck in pairing for 7 hours straight and ended up with 49(!!!) total wins. Where were you then? Truth is, we asked for a compensation. What did we get? A middle finger.

Oh, and just to get the facts straight, SC were offered the same amount of "wins" by Gree. Me personally did not trust them as iv'e been f*cked so many times in the past by them, so we made sure to make it on our own.

Oh, and by the way. I'm retired. Didn't even play last war in SC. But i am still very familiar with what's going on there since I've been in the syn from when SC fought their first war.

[CJ54]

If there is one absolute truth I have found over the last three years, it is that no one minds when they are the ones with the problem (when it is resolved), but they can't stand it when it is someone else. This is true regardless of who has the problem and who doesn't, and many of the people posting in this thread have been on both sides of that fence. I understand that part of this is due to this being a highly competitive game (which is good), but when things go wrong we sometimes have to make them right.

To that end, there isn't much constructive direction that this discussion can take (and in fact, it has not been constructive at all so far). Two teams had a problem serious problem during the event, we addressed that problem as best we could without, and this is important, *giving an advantage DURING the event* that would have impacted the time and effort of other teams in that event. I realize that many people will have wildly different versions of what constitutes "fairness", but this was the fairest solution that was available.

EDIT: Guys, I have to ask politely, please do not post new threads on this or make new accounts to try and get around existing bans. We WILL be aggressively moderating.