IronJaw has struck once again in the banking district!
Thanks to him, you can multiply your Clintz X10 from 5pm (GMT+2) until tomorrow at 12pm (GMT+2).
This boost is only valid in Survivor, ELO and Classic mode! Your Clintz will be multiplied for each fight that you have IronJaw in your hand.
edited by ghelas wednesday 22/07/2015, 10:56
It's not like filling a deck with IronJaw copies is gonna beat most decks. And anyway, copies would only work in Classic, since you can't use them in Survivor or ELO (the other two modes this offer applies to). If you're indeed playing Surv/ELO and have chosen IronJaw, there's no guarantee you'll draw him every match. This game is far from P2W, which is good.... though, yeah, a little more shop diversity would be fine as long as it would not mean payer dominance. I'm actually surprised it's not a BP bonus like almost always when this kind of thing happens (remember the most recent BP bonus for using certain RBs).
(as I was saying...)
his/her disapointment due to another offer that does not target the whole community as should be. As do I. It doesn't matter if anyone with 2, 3 or 4 IronJaw wil get "sligthly" wealthy then me (or a few others, as you put it yourself), because this slightly will be added to other gap-widening decisions made by you guys in the staff. The people who doesn't need any boost to keep on playing are those who keep receveing it...I find it a little bit counter-productive, but hey..it is your call after all.
I know this is a business, and so on. But that argument goes both sides. For example, you lack of professionalism in yesterday annoucement of LW was quite huge. Do you understand my point here? You cannot always throw "we're a businees" card every time and then, when critique like those appears and get back to some more "layback ways" of doing things after that. If you are professional, be professional, always. Jus saying
Can you understand now? Hope it was reasonable enough and help to improve your (staff) understanding of the situation a little bit more, cause as I said, currently I do not see much of a point in elaborating to much my comments here (It is some time since the last time I did one). It feels like we are doing it over and over again and getting nowhere.
Sorry to say so.
1st: I'm glad to see you respond. I am hoping that you can understand that my main interest here is leading a good and reasonable discussion. As you have been a strong opponent of some of these offers and the way they have been designed, I find your contributions to be very valuable, even on points where we disagree.
2st: Our goal is to improve the design of these offers, making them more lucrative, and at the same time, more fair for all of our players. I think this particular offer is a big improvement on some of the offers in the past.
3rd: You've raised several separate points here, so I will try to respond accordingly:
A) "You had a point raised, for example in post 11, and you chose to just dismiss it."
I explicitly addressed this point in post 13.
B) "I personally think that SIlva-69 was expressing his/her disapointment due to another offer that does not target the whole community as should be."
Can you explain why you feel this is "as it should be?" UR offers a variety of very different activities and motivating factors, as we have a variety of very different players with different goals. It would be extremely difficult, perhaps impossible, to design everything in UR to appeal to every individual member of the community.
C) "It doesn't matter if anyone with 2, 3 or 4 IronJaw wil get "sligthly" wealthy then me (or a few others, as you put it yourself), because this slightly will be added to other gap-widening decisions made by you guys in the staff." Again: a player who is playing at a higher level of skill than you would collect more rewards than even someone who participated in every offer we put out. The big wealth gaps in this game favor skilled long-term players, and the easy "counter-measure" for a typical player to improve his wealth vs someone who purchases cards frequently is simply to nurture his skill, and participate in rewarding events.
D) "For example, you lack of professionalism in yesterday annoucement of LW was quite huge." There was a lack of explicit listing of start date, something which most players correctly interpreted to mean "today," especially based on previous announcements. I made the post a little more clear as soon as I saw your response, but I see that someone explained the correct schedule to you even before that. At any rate, it was a small correction that needed to be made (and thank you for pointing that out, by the way.) Perhaps we disagree on the magnitude of the error, but even the biggest news publications in the world publish errata sections to clarify on points where they were incorrect or not clear enough; I find it difficult to see as a "huge lack of professionalism," personally.
Last of all, instead of looking at this offer in such a critical light, I invite you to examine it from a different angle. We have offers like this, which continue to improved and become more fair partially because of the feedback of players like yourself and Myeltd. We are always striving to improve in this regard.
So, think of this offer in mathematical terms. Try to imagine someone who spends some extra time playing in this 1.5 day duration (perhaps 4 hours? 5 hours?) Try to imagine this player with multiple copies of IronJaw, playing well, in favorable conditions, achieving a pretty good win/loss ratio and averaging about 3.5-4 minutes per game. Then give us your honest opinion on whether this offer is designed more fairly than some of the ones that we have discussed previously.
I'm talking like MAYBE every card goes up 1 clintz, and that's the absolute worst case scenario. This honestly adds a very marginal ammount of cash to the economy. It's a nice gesture by the staff, but it won't have any damaging effects on card prices like people seem to think.
(Quote from ghelas)
"If there is really a good argument with a logical basis against this kind of offer, I would love to hear it, so I can advise the rest of the team."
This is gonna take a few posts to do, and I'm like 99% sure I already discussed why offers like these are bad as a whole in multiple other posts on here, but sure, I'll take another crack at this boulder.