[mdavidford]

TERatcliffe26 wrote:Just to

TERatcliffe26 wrote:

Just to your middle bit, having someone extra to dave doing that would cost money, and im sure a yearly salary would be more than just the tenner we pay.

Well that’s the rub, isn’t it? If people are going to pay for something, they’re going to expect a certain level of support for it. If the sums don’t add up to provide that, then there’s a hole in the business plan. In which case, those running the game have various options:
– find some extra investment/income from somewhere – this may not be available
– change the price point to increase the income to the point where it can be funded – it may just not be possible to generate sufficient income
– change the funding model so that people’s expectations are lowered – eg fund it through advertising or ask for donations rather than making a charge
– accept the risk, and when something like this inevitably goes wrong, just wear the criticism and lost subscriptions

Either way though, to say that it’s just one of those things, that it couldn’t have been anticipated, and so people shouldn’t complain, is misleading.

[mdavidford]

Gkam84 wrote:It wasn’t

Gkam84 wrote:

It wasn’t unusable, it was slow

It was so slow as to be unusable, at least for some users.

Gkam84 wrote:

with over 1600 teams in, there were less then 50 teams that I can see who were affected.

As I said, this assumes that anyone who did get a team in was not affected, which is just wrong.

Gkam84 wrote:

It just happens that Dave had something one when the server had an issue, which is not predictable and with Dave being the only one who does the server side of things, we were helpless to do anything to sort it.

Not predictable, but plannable for. It seems the main issue that needs addressing is having only one person who does the server side of things, and apparently with authority to make decisions about how to run the game, and no-one to cover when he’s away.

nemysys wrote:

I’m actually quite disappointed in this outcome… this time I think it has been handled badly… a solution that doesn’t solve the problem a lot of players experienced.

Hard to see what could have been done though, given that there wasn’t anyone who could take a decision to neutralise in the initial short window of opportunity – beyond the apology that’s been given, what would you have like to have seen happen that wouldn’t have been unfair to somebody?

In the grand scheme of things it doesn’t really matter, and there ain’t no fixing it now.

[mdavidford]

Gkam84 wrote:It is countable,

Gkam84 wrote:

It is countable, Less than 2% of teams

What is that number though? The number of players who didn’t get teams registered at all? If so, then it will considerably underestimate the problem. It won’t include people like me who struggled through the problems to get some kind of team in, but weren’t able to finesse it into the team we would have wanted. Or like those above who put a preliminary team in early and then came back to find they couldn’t make changes.

This is reminiscent of last year’s ‘non-neutralised’ snow stage. Like that, it needed a decision taken early, and once it was left too long there really was no fair way to resolve it without penalising somebody. The only fair thing that could be done now would be to neutralise stages 1 and 2 and have unlimited transfers ahead of stage 3, and that would be getting really farcical.

Sure, there’s no way that server problems could have been anticipated, but what could have been anticipated was the start of one of the biggest competitions of the season, and that it would be a good idea to make sure that someone who could sort things out should be around in case some – any – problems occurred. Of people’s money is going to be taken for the game, then there really should be some professionalism in the level of support available.

Personally, I don’t have much right to complain, as I don’t pay for premium, so I haven’t really lost anything except for a bit of time and frustration that was my own choice. However, I might well have upgraded for next season, but after an incident like this that now seems unlikely, and I can certainly understand why those who have paid for the game would feel aggrieved.

[mdavidford]

Scoring should be scrapped
Scoring should be scrapped for this stage, and unlimited transfers allowed for stage 2.

[Author]

Replies