Originally
posted by
Turtle Crawler:
Originally
posted by
mdevol:
Originally
posted by
Turtle Crawler:
The rest is opinion, you don't get takebacks with contracts because you didn't do your due diligence
Asking the developers if they plan to drop a game breaking mechanic, the day after countries are able to be made is due diligence for pacting? or not including that provision in the pact? That is pretty extreme, even for you.
LaF has everything we care about in the standard pact, but we also have no intention of breaking them so no clauses exist to do so. If SOL wants to be able to break their pacts whenever they like, they should probably add that term so they aren't liable for any damages.
The whole point of this thread is about the Devs dropping massive game breaking mechanics which acted as sanctions. And then when that wasnt enough to appease the whining LaF, they dropped more. Thee reason for bringing up pacts at all was because LaF was acting in bad faith in the pacting. The accusation is that they knew the changes were coming, as they were in discussions about it behind the scene with the devs.
I dont particularly have a dog in this fight because I am not tagged SoL this set or last, so the pacts dont impact me, but working on (and signing) multi set pacts to calm tensions and stop the grudges, while also crying to the devs to implement massive changes to protect yourselves from any attacks to calm tensions in the background is really bad faith.
and QZ using the rationale of "we needed to calm to server down" as a reason for it being rushed, despite it being dropped after traditional FR had already run its course and multi set pacts were signed stopping that tension, yikes. it just felt really suspect from a player standpoint.