Update: Extension of Seasonal Discounts

So apparently people had 30 minutes of discount branches that extended into the fort event, that they were then able to make use of. Isn’t this massively unfair to people who weren’t able to be on at the start of the event given that there has been no precedence for such a discount extension in the past, and as no notice was given?

Can we get some sort of response as to why we were led to believe that an extension of the seasonal discount was not doable when it evidently happened anyway?

(I can’t quote the not doable bit. But it’s the solution in my below linked post.)


No because it wasnt an extension, it was a glitch and we already had a topic about this

1 Like

Normally glitches get fixed. This one wasn’t.

Plus, that topic was closed and it seems remiss to just leave it be when this could have impacted many people’s season plans.

The point is that PG said it would not be possible for the discount to extend for a 3rd event. Evidently, they managed to do it by accident. Nobody knew except for people who were online in the first 30 mins and they got to take advantage of this while others didn’t. It’s pretty outrageous.


I’ve always assumed this to mean “not possible because the financial department won’t let us”, not that the tech isn’t there.


It’s because “not possible” actually meant “we
don’t want to” and everyone knows this.
Of course they could change the end date for the discount.

1 Like

It’s kind of tiring to get jerked around like this all the time. At some point, it doesn’t really matter anymore why exactly something can’t be done, just that PG isn’t doing it.


That’s also what I took from it but whether it can’t, or won’t happen, it did. People got to capitalize. Others did not and that’s horse shit.

:flushed: Do not believe this :roll_eyes: Think need to rectify this, as really is not fair…

I mean, what do you want PG to do about it now? An extension at this point would just be screwing over everyone who already opened their stuff in pvp to finish the discounts when they would have rather opened in fort, making it even more unfair.


Lots of people have profited from various bugs over time, generally not a reason to make those bugs more widely available…

Some people lucked out, good for them.

Yeah, understand would be tough to figure how to make it right with those that were left out of taking advantage of the slight extension others had, that would be on PG to sort out am thinking.

Am usually missing out on them too :roll_eyes::joy: Last one was the glitch with Assault :smiling_imp:

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:What game have you been playing where glitches get fixed? How many years did we have the cloak glitch? It did get fixed though as it was removed after 30 minutes. Yes the topic was closed for a reason, because it was a glitch that they didnt intend to happen. If people got to use it then lucky for them. No different than the old runic/sigil chest glitch with the bonus chests, if you got to use it then lucky for you.

Actually what they said was that it wasnt doable, as in they have the ability to do it but they’re not going to do it.

My question is how would they fix this? Most people are already done with Fort, they’ve already spent their sigils if they had unfinished discount lines so unless the solution is to refund some sigils to people, I absolutely dont think it would be fair to turn the discount back on.

My mistake. I was under the impression that I was playing a game where devs would seek to fix glitches so as to improve their players’ gameplay experience, as all successful games do. If they’re not, isn’t it up to us to remind them to do so on the players’ discussion forums?

No, the discounts were coded to end 30 minutes past the start of the fort event. This is pretty unforgivable.

The difference is that everyone got a chance to use that glitch. If your argument is that PG should stick to how they’ve always done things, I suppose they should stick to how they’ve always been doing things for everything else in the game. Point is, basing expectations for reactions to mistakes on unsatisfactory reactions to previous mistakes seems like a pretty self-crippling move to choose to make.

Actually I don’t think anyone in the thread disagreed with you, if you read a little further.

Wipe progress on lines claimed after fort started and refund the sigils, or charge a sigil deficit on those who made use of the 30 minutes to claim discounted lines.

Since you feel like arguing semantics, this literally means that they did not have the ability to do it. Root word: do. Suffix: able. Able means ability. If they do not have the ability to do something, that means that they do not have the ability to do something. I can see how that might be confusing.

This is in direct conflict with your explanation so gg.

My post about this in another thread got removed! It’s a conspiracy! PG is trying to silence the whistleblowers. rabble rabble

On a serious note, not everyone reads the forum or watches the streams. The discount was advertised as “until 3/18.” I know plenty of NEW players that thought this meant it was available on the 3/18. Yes, we tell our team members that it’s available for only 2 weeks. But not all teams are good with communications. And players shouldn’t need to tell others “Oh PG really meant instead of .”

What kind of optics does this present to new players? Not a good one. I reviewed the in-game “News” communications, and it was not mentioned at all it was limited to 2 weeks. Which it should be.

It’s bad “optics.” If I continually did this in my communications for the product I work on, I would be out of a job. But PG frequently does this and doesn’t seem to care.

by reading his post I don’t get the impression he meant it wasn’t “doable” due to coding or technical restraints. It was probably simply not approved or not enough time to be considered by the financial department.

I would be happy if all this talking about extention stops really. It was 2 weeks as announced, end of the story.

1 Like

It wasn’t. Two weeks and half an hour. Are you reading the post? :rofl: