Wesley Pringle said:
I guess when it comes to gaming you must cater to the popularity of the Masses over complaints of the very few.
And how who are you to decide only a "a few" had the issue raised in this thread and that the "masses" loved it. Or is that just something you get to arbitrarily decide for everyone. Which issues are "real" and which it's fine to flame and belittle the poster for.
The evidence of this thread is far from clear.
The op clearly had an issue.
2 people who are clearly liked the event and benefited from it want to deny there is any sort of problem (mainly as far as I can see through some paranoia that pointing out a weakness has to mean the end of the event, rather than the start of a discussion about how to improve it).
And one person has been honest enough to say they loved, because it suited their circumstance but that they can see the op has a point.
Not an amazing sample size granted but the only hard evidence we have right now.
So do you want to start a discussion about how to improve it and fix the issue raised or just continue in denial, look to paint anyone disagreeing with your as a "trouble maker", "throwing shade", "a complainer", "in a minority" (although you have no real proof of that) etc etc. Just being personal basically and avoiding any discussion of the actual issue (an all to familiar trend tbh).
So to move things on, here is an easy suggestion:
- don't run the event as a surprise (because that way you will always disappoint some people by catching them at a time they don't have champs to train)
- announce it several weeks ahead, with a guaranteed champ event and double chance event between the announcement and the running of the event (giving people plenty of time to generate some champs)
Then you are pretty much guaranteed to get just happy customers.
