Best Of

Re: Announce Post #3061: Ascension Postmortem

Admin: The game wasn't fair so we're calling it a draw so no one loses due to our own errors.

Some players: This is not fair, we want TWO winners on our team that's the thing to do to make us happy since we played to make some guy lose, not to win. Also consider raising someone who didn't compete to win. Maybe a few without seals even.

Other players: Wtf?

Sapphira

4

Re: Announce Post #3061: Ascension Postmortem

Orael said:

So your point is that we should make Glom/Celest/Halli happy by giving them two TA's and Mag/Gaudi/Seren are supposed to be happy with one TA?

I think the central confusion is with your language here. You only gave one side TA, the other side (feels) they earned their TA. Give vs earn. Gave one side TA, so give the other side TA as well. The earned-TA notwithstanding. Etc.

I think people who are arguing that is a special prize are way off base. Ixion will forever be marked as the TA*, and he cant even remove that mark going forward. Always felt bad about Dei and the crap she got for hers, gonna feel bad about Ixion too. Riiiiiip.

Synl

3

Re: QUOTES 8: THE QUOTING

Oracular Elexia Myeras-Silvermoon says, "Alas, I am too stunned! Ethilwen, you are far too ready for me!"

Coraline

5

Re: Announce Post #3061: Ascension Postmortem

"We keep seeing terms being thrown out like 'moving forward in full awareness that it's hurting one competitive group.' I've already said this multiple times, -any- decision we made was hurting one competitive group." Instead of leaving it as it was with the losing competitive group hurting they decided to hurt the winning group? How does that make sense in the slightest? Rancoura's and Xenthos's comments are logical.

"As far as fair decision - I think both sides are getting a fair deal. Glom/Celest/Halli got the TA they fought for in Parhelion, Mag/Gaudi/Seren get the TA they fought for in Ixion." This argument is flawed, it should be 'As far as fair decision - I think both sides are getting a fair deal. Glom/Celest/Halli got the TA they won through the games rules of Ascension in Parhelion, Mag/Gaudi/Seren get the TA they fought for, albeit lost, in Ixion."

Jason

2

Re: Announce Post #3061: Ascension Postmortem

Ixion and his team did not win. They came close, but they did not win. Lag was present on both sides. You are now handing what is arguably the greatest prize and honour that can be won in this game to someone who did not win the event for which it is given. This would have been just as unfair if circumstances were reversed and Choros had gotten within minutes of winning but Ixion managed to get the staff and hold on to it until the end, only to have Choros be handed the prize as well, but we will never know if that would have happened at this point.

It escapes me why the skewed fairness of this is so difficult to understand. Why is the administrative team okay with setting this kind of precedent? Why is it so difficult to acknowledge how this looks?

Rancoura

3

Re: Announce Post #3061: Ascension Postmortem

I'm super confused by what you're trying to play here.

Glom/Celest/Halli get Parhelion - the TA they fought for.
Mag/Gaudi/Seren get Ixion - the TA they fought for

They both have one TA, the TA they fought for. They are both on equal footing. Raising Ixion doesn't cancel out Parhelion. If we were to raise another ascendant for Glom/Celest/Halli - it wouldn't cancel out Ixion - it would be in addition to Parhelion.

Raising another TA doesn't cancel out either of them - it only adds to the situation. So then you would have two TA's and they would have one TA. There isn't any cancelling out here, there isn't any kind of weird logic you're trying to apply here - your side would simply have two to their one, which yes, I think that would hurt them more.

Just to be clear - I think you having two TA's Hurts Mag/Gaudi/Seren more than them getting one TA hurts Glom/Celest/Halli.

I'm not understanding your logic when you are trying to tell me that two is equal to one.

Orael

9

Re: Announce Post #3061: Ascension Postmortem

The math is:

Glomdoring/Celest/Hallifax got the TA they won with.

Mag/Gaudi/Seren get +1 TA that would not exist in the game at all. A bonus, extra, additional one. Giving each side an extra bonus one is, itself, equivalence. The way I'm approaching it is that Choros won either way. This decision was not about whether or not to take it away from Choros: it was about whether or not to increase the TAs in the game by awarding it to those other than the actual winner of the event.

I think I'll ask one last question here:
You asked us to trust you. You asked us to believe that you're looking out for all of us. You have also stated that you knew how we would react to the decision. Is there ANY room in your mind, whatsoever, for attempting to address that? Because from our standpoint, the full math is:

1) The lag was a mess, but it affected everyone equally.

2) One side won, one side lost.

3) A decision was made to make the losing side also be the winning side (again, at this point, we understand that this decision isn't changing).

4) Nothing was done for the winning side at all to account for point 3, except for stating "trust us" and "we knew you'd be upset but we thought it was the right thing to do."

Are we just barking up the wrong tree here? Is this really the end, the final decision, there's nothing else that you are willing to do whatsoever? Because I think we've all been very open with stating how we feel. We've laid everything we have out for you. It's not speculation any more- you know exactly how it's come across to us because we've all told you.

If the answer is really "Nah, this is it," then... well, I guess it'd be good to know. We can all give up trying to let you know how we feel / what we think.

Xenthos

4

Re: Announce Post #3061: Ascension Postmortem

Orael said:

So your point is that we should make Glom/Celest/Halli happy by giving them two TA's and Mag/Gaudi/Seren are supposed to be happy with one TA? You are asking if giving your side two TA's is hurting them any more than giving them one TA?

I think the answer is yes, it hurts them more - you're getting two TA's and they're only getting one. It puts us back to square one.

So you are explicitly stating that raising one TA cancels out the raising of another TA, and in that respect it's a zero sum game.

By that logic then, raising Ixion cancels out raising Choros.

Yet, at the same time you're telling us that raising Ixion does not cancel out the raising of Choros?

Only one of these can be true at a time- if raising someone alongside Ixion cancels out raising Ixion, then raising Ixion on his own cancels out raising Choros.

Xenthos

1

Re: Announce Post #3061: Ascension Postmortem

Orael said:

As far as fair decision - I think both sides are getting a fair deal. Glom/Celest/Halli got the TA they fought for in Parhelion, Mag/Gaudi/Seren get the TA they fought for in Ixion.

I think it's pretty clear that this is not really felt as a fair deal. Glom/Celest/Halli got the TA they won with. If you had decided to do nothing at all, we would still have won. Mag/Gaudi/Seren are getting a bonus TA because you feel it was the right thing to do. And if we're doing extra / bonus TAs... why not make another? Then it's not a "super special extra win." You can have a uniting event to bring the playerbase together. Raise two, one from each side, for which everyone will be able to attend and - despite possible disgruntlement about the other side's nominee - support their own.

This also undermines the whole "Pity Ascendant/False Ascendant" narrative because it would need to be applied equally to both. You're already stating that you're doing things differently... so why not take it a step further and do something that actually feels like it addresses and tries to salve the wounds and hurts deliver delivered to both parties?

Let me ask you: Does raising another one hurt Mag/Gaudy/Seren any more than raising Ixion hurts Glom/Celest/Halli?

You want to try to try to move Ascension to a different path that isn't so hyper-competitive. I think you have a chance to start now. I started out my posts asking why there wasn't a decision to try to bring us on board and work together to come up with something all parties could swallow and at least feel something good about- it took me a lot of posts to work through what I was feeling, but I think that crystallizes it. You're not going to undo your call. For better or worse, it is what we've got to work with. But it doesn't have to end there.

Xenthos

1

Re: Announce Post #3061: Ascension Postmortem

I'm done.

No more speeches anymore. No attempts to change anyone's mind anymore. I can't push this hard again knowing the resolution will just be contested by the other side (even if that's our side) because they're unhappy with the results. The process has been undermined to the point that I know I will never again care about the results enough to try.

I wish you the best.

Jaspet

3