Want two of the same legendary from the Daily Deal?

*whines* But we were having the discussion today...

Also, that was sudden. No pre-warning or anything, my brain stem has whiplash now!

 

My sincere apologies, edited to prevent further harm or injury.

 

Whew, that's a lot better. Thank you for putting safety first!

 

However rarely it happens, douple-dippers get twice as much. I certainly have benefited from this.

 

Scarponi's interpretation of my point was 100% accurate. Sorry, I was sleepy.

 

By and large, that's been my experience with the Daily Disappointment Deal.
I don't see a problem with leaving a PC running overnight, but I'll accept that it could be a problem for s0me.
For those asleep during reset, unless you have a problem with leaving your PC on, you have as good a chance as anyone else for a double-shot with your breakfast. Probably better than those at work during reset, if they don't play at work and use a shared PC at home.
Except in fringe cases, I believe most players will have the same opportunity.
If you're worried about others getting the same legendary items you've been using, stay worried.

 

I think a couple of people are getting upset about nothing - if this method allowed people to buy a handful of legendaries every day, then I would definitely be pushing for a fix. As things stand, you have a chance to buy just one extra on the rare day that the rarities shop has anything amazing. Most of the time I'm not logged in around the reset so can't take advantage, but I'm not complaining.

 

You misunderstood -> You said " And while it may be naturally harder to take advantage of for some players over others, this is due to an aspect outside the game (their sleep schedule)" and I was implying you cannot
say its harder because of sleep schedule (which is aspect outside of the game) - as, you know, most people sleep at night .. its harder because reset is programmed at some players sleeping time.

Its like you have 1000 players. And you give 500pizza each month to all of them, except 500 of them get pizza on their account, and other 500 must go to Switzerland to sign some papers firs, but hey its ok as its harder for some because of distance from Switzerland (which is factor outside of the game) so its ok.

We can play with words, but there is really no argue there.

Sorry I meant tripple dipping .. we all double dip.. loot fairy reset is sliding so it is fair (imho) ..

You know how many months it took me to get desired numbers of some legendaries? Do you know how many months you have to play to get 4 Searing Pains? 3 Hawkwind's Moccassins, 3x Vibrant Pain ..
I'm playing more than a YEAR .. and I only have 2 Searing Pains ..

There will be few must have items in ETTCS .. maybe some that you'll need 3 or more.. etc . .bla . .isnt that an obvious shortcut ..

 

I've been playing for more than a year and only have 1. Still not complaining though. Although there are quite a few legendaries I'd like a few copies of, much of this game is about building with what you have. Anyway, anything that would help people give up their Bejeweled Shortsword addiction can't be too bad...

 

Yes I'm aware most people sleep at night, though I'm not sure why you're bringing a "majority argument" to bear as if we go that route it doesn't support your point - the majority of players don't sleep when the DD resets. But that aside we can go back and forth arguing whether players sleep during the reset, or if the reset is programmed during players sleep schedule but such semantics will go no where. We both agree that the reset and some players sleeping coincide however you want to express it. The point is the devs have control of one factor, not both.

I disagree that your analogy fits because as you have it laid out there are different requirements for different players. An actual apt analogy would be one where everyone who wants 500 pizza has to go to Switzerland to pick it up - it's just for those in Switzerland this is easy while for those in Japan it's entirely impractical. Hopefully you can see that this 2nd analogy is actually a more accurate correlation.

Now maybe you think that free pizza given out only in Switzerland is still unfair. In some sense you might be right. But let's look at a more realistic possibility. Let's say a certain video game store chain approaches BM and says we'll promote your game if you help us get people in the store. So BM and the store decide that the store will offer a giveaway of free pizza codes to anyone who stops by a physical store - good publicity for both. But here's the kicker, the video game store is only in Switzerland. Well now you have precisely that situation. Is it "unfair?" Maybe. But really no more than the fact that my job allows me to enter leagues at almost any time of day so I have a ton of chests saved up to open for the expansion while someone who works a job that doesn't allow that has many fewer. I have time flexibility but don't live in Switzerland. Another player may live in Switzerland, but may not have time flexibility.

Ultimately I don't care if the DD double dip possibility exists, but I agree with Flaxative that it's similar to say, a situation where a person is only able to get online Monday-Friday and therefore misses the DD 2 days a week every week because their real life doesn't allow otherwise. Should we shut down the CH server on the weekends for the sake of those people?

Let's get down to brass tacks. Is this an intended feature that BM has intentionally implemented knowingly giving certain time zones a rare shopping advantage? No, plain and simple.

Is it something that some players will take advantage of? Yes, but let's be realistic, the percentage compared to the overall player base is going to be extremely small.

Will they reprogram the game to remove it? Maybe, depending on how easy that is to do while retaining the "same for everyone" functionality of the DD. But again if we're being realistic I wouldn't expect it before the expansion or really any time soon.

 

Then I have a counter-argument.

Ah, but there is a crucial difference. The amount of time a player has to devote to the game (or other such factors) are not in any shape or form in Blue Manchu's hands. The reset time is under their exclusive control. If they wanted to, they could even the playing field in this respect.

Also, I'd like to clarify that when I originally brought up the 'unfairness' of the effect the static reset time has on using the technique under discussion, I didn't mean to actually complain personally about it being unduly unfair (nor am I suggesting something be actually done about it), I just wanted to point out a property of the phenomenon that could be construed as disadvantaging some of the global audience, as a part of the ongoing discussion. This, as so many other things, is of course close to impossible to discern from my original posted comments. Textual, especially fast-paced, communication tends to have that property, unfortunately.

 

Aren't they? Couldn't BM only have the game server available for 1 hour a day so that those players who can't play more than that aren't "disadvantaged?" (It could even be a rotating hour. )

 

Yeah, right. All it is is that if Blue Manchu wanted, they could, for example, put the daily reset on a 25-hour clock. I'm not saying that it's necessary, sensible or practical to do so, just that it's under their control unlike the amount of hours any player sleeps or the timing thereof.

There's also a precedent for it. They did exactly that for the Loot Fairy, for the same reason. It's not an outlandish, impossible scenario like the one in your post above. I emphasize again I'm not asking for it to be done. This is just a pretty far gone tangent to the main thread subject.

 

No argument here.

I'm not sure why the LF was put on a 25 hour clock (I suspect it was originally just to make it more "random"), but when it was on a 24 hour clock no one could double dip so there was no advantage/disadvantage, so the reason it was switched was not for "fairness" sake.

The ease or practicality of implementing a change affects the discussion of whether it should be done, but not whether the situation under discussion is fair or not. I continue to hold that they are both in the same camp in regards to "fairness," but I do not deny that the scenario is outlandish.

 

By the way, about Loot Fairy triple-dipping, I think Lord Feleran established somewhere in the depths of the Loot Fairy thread that you can triple-dip at any date, not just on the days when the reset and Looty movement times coincide. At least that's my recollection of it, please disabuse me of the notion if it's just a fever dream. I haven't been using the trick myself so I'm not practised on its finer points.

 

You can, though you have to stay logged into the game from the time of reset until the fairy moves and is found, so depending on the day this can require an extended period of time.

 

Yeah, you're right. I was confusing its history with later arguments of mine that it should be kept on the 25-hour clock for fairness' sake and not restored to a 24-hour clock. Mea culpa.

Hmm, I still feel the "fairness" is affected by the practicality of a solution. Something which is in the 'act of God' category like the way the planet rotates is equally fair or unfair to all but something the developer can relatively easily change cannot in my view as easily be grouped with such issues. When you have the means to do something about a problem, it's a more obligating thing than something you can in actual practise do nothing about. I can still see your point, I think, but I just can't personally brush the practical side aside for the sake of keeping a pure philosophy about it (sorry if I'm misrepresenting your position in some way).

 

Thanks! That sounds very familiar now that you said it.

 

Man, eyes like a hawk! Thanks, fixed.

Nope, it appears you're seeing it as I intend it. I think in the large scheme of things my point is that there will always be disparities in what parts of the game people can, or choose, to take advantage of, and that's okay (a quasi parallel post if it helps enlighten where I'm coming from). That said you have a good point that the capacity of means to address a problem should weigh on whether it should be addressed. (Of course in this case part of the capacity factor is unfortunately that BM is a one man team with a never ending list of things that could be worked on to make the game better for all.)

 

Yes devs do have control on reset time and they dont have control on when players sleep, but having control on one factor can actually solve that "issue" ..

Its was not quite an analogy, its more (there is a term logic for that, but I dont know to translate it) proving point by going to limits. You two said that "well all players have option to do that, so its fair".
I just wanted to say, that me doing that is similar as me going to Swiss signing pizza papers -> it isnt going to happen. Its not an option. If it were at 2PM it would very much be an option.

I'm not saying anything needs to be done with that, I'm just saying that statement "all players have option to do that, so its fair" is wrong.

Oh man .. what's this .. developers cannot know who can play on weekend and who not, who can play every league and who not. Nobody expects that from them. But they can assume most players cannot really play at 5AM.
That's why you put some effort and make events more fair, like -> lets have a League match every 5h instead of lets have League matches only at 4AM in UTC-5.
You're a developer yourself, I didnt took you for one who would make a game with Shops open from 3h-7h in one timezone, arguing that you cannot know who can play when, so its ok.

I know I wouldn't make such design choice (only if it would ask too many resources to even things, but then I would know it's unfair to some players)

I know its not intended. I'm not asking that this must be removed.. As I already stated before -> I'm just saying it is possible unfair advantage to one (probably bigger) part of players.