Move event start times

War starts at 11AM EST, events start at 4AM EST.  I can only assume that wars starting at 11AM made the most sense for a majority of the player base and was moved to this timeframe to accommodate the largest numbers.  

Events should moved to a later start time as well.  Not necessarily as late as war (bugs and adjustments may need to be made), but sometime so more players can participate properly.  For future events, it allows gold to be more evenly farmed among the most number of players.  And since proper testing isn’t being completed (or seemingly so), it allows a larger number of players access to bugs that are hugely advantageous to only those who are there at the start of the event.

Last BS event - insta melting for pearls.
This event - Gold spent converted back to gems.  

A lot of players are reporting 3158 gems and higher for their upgrades.  I had a full chamber and on shield for the upgrade with 6 legendary chests with more gold, can’t login and get nothing.  Starting to get really fed up with type of activity.

stop feeding ppl with gems, ur ruin the game for all non maxed players.

Events start at about 11am local time and wars start at 5pm local time.
So after having a long breakfast, the employees kick off the events :wink:

After that they prepare to have a lunch break, but lately they need this
time to eliminate the bugs. Kicking off events during their lunch time is
no option :wink:

For an even later start they would probably have to delay their end of
work in case of bugs, which is of course also not an option :grinning:

They don’t want to have double the stress, because they already stay
in the office on friday evenings after 5pm (in case of bugs).

Personally i’m fine with event starting times, it could even be a little bit
earlier :stuck_out_tongue:

Another option is to make sure you don’t release buggy software.

If I was one of the guys who was up a ton of pearls and a bunch of gems, I would not be on here complaining. But, since others get to capitalize on Flare’s mistakes, I feel justified in expressing my anger for the inequity that is created.

I wonder if cashing in on bugs and being up 50K pearls and 3K gems would give anyone else an edge in the game? Probably not more than using VPN for TapJoy which many were banned for.

If you want to make it right, whatever the average pearl payout was during the BS bug - give to every player. Whatever was the average amount of gems that were returned this event, give to every player.

Inequity in any fashion creates distrust and resentment.

 

Your suggestion is not fair for everybody. To get equality for all, you have to adjust it a little bit:

The players who got 50k pearls, invested a lot of gems to buy uber chests for melting items.
I’d estimate they bought at least 10 uber chests for every 10k pearls. Which are about 5k gems.

Same with the players who got gems today: they invested about 10m gold per about 1500 gems.

Real equality for all players (including those who benefited!) would be to give all players the right
to buy up to let’s say 5 times 10k pearls for 5k gems. Those who already benefited, could only
buy the missing part up to 50k pearls. Same for gems: let’s say up to 4 times buying 750 gems
for 5 million gold.

The exact numbers would have to be evaluated by Flare. That would be fair for all. Even though
i’d like to have 50k pearls for free :wink:

I agree with some points, but the value of intsa melting pearls can’t be properly quantified.  And what you’re suggesting is way more expensive than the sunk cost of having 70+ items that you can already melt, but are waiting for the right time to do so, which is the case with some players who benefited.  Even if you didn’t have 70 in inventory, you may have many chests waiting to be opened and free gold chests to assist with the cost of melting.  I probably wouldn’t pay 5k gems for 10k pearls.  Others have boasted of spending around 2k gems for 60k pearls, so there’s a huge disparity with the deals.  The pearls were certainly annoying and I think the bug should be made available for all players who haven’t already benefited for the same duration as the people who benefited from it, as that would be a fair way to deal with it.  Whatever the rest of the community does during that time and how much it costs them is their business, but give them 90 minutes to benefit from the same bug.

The gesture of gems for gold is nice for those who benefited, but the big issue is the advantage it provides to only a select few who there for the start of the event and weren’t apple users.  I think they should be compensated for losing gold and some time, but almost no one in this game buys gold for gems.  And to give back the value of the gold spent in upgrades in gems is a little crazy.  All the while, the people who paid for gold shields are not being compensated at all.  The fair thing to do would be to credit all players on shields at the time of the event (who haven’t already been compensated) for the value in their in chamber and any free legendaries as those are worth on average 1m gold.  I’m also okay with your idea on this Mogor, but not okay with opening it to all.  The point is there has already been an advantage to those geographically situated to be online at the start of the event and these gestures would be available to help level the playing field.

FG knows who benefited from both of these events, it was easy enough for them to tell who had upgraded max towers or obstacles, should be easy enough to provide events to those who haven’t already benefited from mistakes. 

 

Well, i think we can agree, that equality is not an easy thing to achieve in this cases :wink:

A possibly better way to deal with the level bug: They manually checked all the upgrades
and provided gems (manually?) to the affected players. So they could have just saved the list
of upgrades per player and right at the beginning of the next go live of the new levels inserted
these upgrades into the system again (manually or per programmed function).
-> Situation restored with no disadvantage for anybody.

Yes, agreed. Many different ways for fair and equitable resolution.