As Requested by a Dev: A Thread about Devs' Actions/Inactions

Ah… Hmm… I see your point.

1 Like

Just gonna leave this here before it gets edited.

Lies? Ignorance? Oopsie?: whichever you decide to believe, it’s worth remembering how much a statement by an IP2 staff can be reliably trusted.

The bug report was also immediately labeled “Not a Bug”.
:roll_eyes: :person_facepalming: :vulcan_salute:


Small addenda, also for safekeeping.
:blush: :vulcan_salute:


@AMT Thank God I am not a moderator of GoW. This very thread would make me become the incredible Hulk out of anger…

1 Like

ProTip / Solution: Don’t drop the ball that often.


Just gonna keep this eloquent description of the state of affairs at IP2 here before it gets deleted for being “feedback in a bug report” or some other commonly used excuse to remove things they don’t like to hear (lately things being “insults” is quite in fashion).

With the following noteworthy tangential exchange:

If we are to believe the above statement by a mod, it begs the question: what are they doing about it? Is the underlying message “mods can’t effect change on things that are universally seen as crappy design”? or maybe “mods aren’t trying hard enough to effect change on things that are universally seen as crappy design”?

IP2 is allegedly a small team, it’s hard to fathom that mods would be ignored if they really stood up for the things that they “100% agree” with player feedback.

While considering the above, we must always remember how fast mods were heard (or how much effort they put in making sure they were head?) when they ran to the devs to tell them about the New Dungeon non-economy-breaking RNG.
:thinking: :person_facepalming: :vulcan_salute:


It seems mods are still finding time in their busy schedule (and despite their small team size) to go on long tirades about certain specific topics…

…while other topics that are arguably more important to the playerbase (and could be answered in a single sentence) continue to be deliberately ignored:

They like to call themselves “CX team”: the above is yet another snippet of the X given to the C by said team.
:roll_eyes: :person_facepalming: :vulcan_salute:


One post I can answer without any assistance from the team.

The other I have to poke someone else and wait for an answer :slight_smile:


“I have asked the Devs X days ago, and am still waiting for a reply. Sorry guys, will keep pushing for an answer, no idea what’s taking so long but will get to the bottom of this.”

…or the radio silence way
:blush: :vulcan_salute:


Guild wars, Dooms, and Invasion next week? I thought the community has been pretty clear that this is too much in one week.

How about some lightening of the load devs?


We also get a Legends Reborn and a Kingdom Pass


First reports started coming in :point_up_2:

Slightly more than 24 hours later, a Dev showed up to let us know they’re on it (as usual, no mods to be seen outside of office hours, but that is the level of dedication we have come to expect from mods)

As of this post, no mods have logged in since before the ban bug was reported

While Nimhain jumped in with changes to try and prevent more auto-bans, and to manually start unbanning customers, they decided not to disable the auto-ban feature for some reason.

…as such, we are still getting reports of players getting auto-banned as the long weekend continues, including Tacet:

Among it all, it remains baffling that there’s an auto-ban at all, since we were reassured by a mod that bans need to be approved by at least two IP2 staff, ‘to avoid any issues’:

Yet another chance to remember how much IP2 can be trusted, and their degree of dedication.

Thanks Nimhain for showing up and trying to help the players affected by this.
:pray: :vulcan_salute:


the same rake - in the same forehead.

After all, this here is disappointment for the crowds of players could have been banal to avoid, if someone had checked in a test mode how to behave that watchdog with janitor’s syndrome, about which the developers do not say, but it is available.


:point_up_2:Safekeeping in case of edits

Particular attention to, once again, the truthfulness of statements in every iteration:

Whereas a key piece of information that players were asking for continued to be withheld:

Just for the record… Again.
:blush: :vulcan_salute:


Popping in to say that, regardless of any personal disagreements with the post, it was well-worded, informative, and more transparent than prior posts. It’s important we point out the good, too, even if only to encourage future positive steps.


It’s important to remember that we were told, in a well-worded, informative, and transparent way, that bans were examined one by one by two human beings.

Instead they put together this thing and unleashed it unsupervised at Christmas, of course at the same time with a new mechanism of acquiring gold and maps. What could go wrong? And who cared?


At the time they stated bans were always reviewed by humans, that was true. The error lies in the lapse in communication between that statement and Krinklemess, when players were not told about the new banning system slowly being rolled out.

They should have told players sooner, absolutely. Kafka’s post admits as much and apologizes for it, which is the right thing to do whether we as players believe them or not.

Not saying anything is fully resolved or that this is concrete evidence that all our concerns will be fixed, just saying I appreciate a detailed explanation and apology for what should have been communicated earlier :slightly_smiling_face:


Where it is mentioned that auto bans were rolled out during the Christmas event? Why would you not assume that this was always (or for a longer time) the case?

Maybe I missed part of the announcement but I don’t think they are as pure as you imagine they are.


Indeed they admitted this has been ongoing for a while:

If not for Krinklemess, we may still be living under the impression that bans were reviewed by two staff before being implemented for who knows how long, seeing how IP2 has a history of silence unless needed, and inaction/slow action unless it affects customer purchases.

Ref. “at least they are communicating about it transparently and apologetically”
This is pretty much the usual conclusion of every cycle when things like this blow up in their face (bigger incident = bigger apology/‘transparency’ post), and then the new cycle begins where things are ignored/swept under the rug/usual QA.

So yes, surely we want to encourage more transparency et al, but it’s also important to acknowledge the history of these iterations, so especially new customers don’t spend based on misplaced expectations.
:blush: :vulcan_salute:


100% true. We have seen this cycle countless times. Still good to encourage steps in the right direction, but let’s not get our hopes up about massive improvements :sweat_smile:

I will say I think things have been a little better lately than we’ve seen at other points in this game’s history, but it’s far from perfect, and I’m sad to expect communication breakdowns and a pile of bugs from IP2.