Conquest hard mode

"FerociousPanda;c-2238844" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2238793" wrote:

"FerociousPanda;c-2238789" wrote:

"HumbleMumble;c-2238785" wrote:
I would guess the feats that say “Win and do X” require that you win for it to count, feats saying “Do Y for Z number of times” do not require a win to count. Otherwise it’s unnecessary to have some feats adding the “Win” criteria to their description if it’s really a requirement for all feats.

Yea that's what I was thinking too, but I just wanted to make sure in case my memory was just incorrect. If this is the case then this situation isn't as simple as Kyno is suggesting, and it's just factually incorrect for him to say that they need to fix this bug to bring the way feats work in Conquest in line with how they work everywhere else. Because feats currently work two different ways depending on which game mode they're in, so there is no singular consistent line that they have to follow. So it certainly is a valid concern to raise and give feedback on, unless the GAC feats are actually bugged too.

I specifically asked about this feat, and was told this is a bug, so it is a fact that this is being called a bug and will be changed.

I will ask for more clarification on the details. I have never seen or realized a feat was contributed to by a losing match.

I didn't say that it's incorrect to say that it's a bug, I said it's incorrect to say that they have to fix this bug in order to bring the Conquest feats in line with GAC and GC feats. You make it seem like they have no choice but to fix it to make it "in accordance with ever other use of this type of element in the game" and because it's the way "feats work in any circumstance, GAC, GCs, and now GCon" (your own words). But this just isn't true if feats are working differently in GAC and GC. Because how can they bring Conquest feats in line with GAC and GC feats if the way those two work are polar opposites? So clearly that's not the reason they're going to fix the bug, unless again, it turns out that GAC feats aren't working as they intended, and they do want everything to be consistent.

Also, just because it's a bug doesn't mean they definitely have to fix it. The Jawas and the thermal detonator interaction was a bug, but they decided to just make it a feature. I don't think it's out of the question that we can raise feedback about this and ask that they reconsider.

In any case, I'll happily wait for more clarification on the matter.

Ok, I see.

About not fixing bugs, there are 2 ways things can go...

Liking a bug doesnt give Doja a leg to stand on if there are other places where something is used and they are making them all line up. (He is the one who would be representing the player side of this argument)

Isolated things can have an argument that "they are not a bug". (This will be evaluated individually and could or could not change)

In this case the situation started as liking a bug, which is never going to be a reason to not change a bug, if it is to bring it in line with other uses of that element. If feats have 2 variants, then yes which ever case this falls in should align with how it is used elsewhere.

I believe since this fell into the bug bin, that when this question is posed to them they will make a determination if other feats in other game modes are bugged. As I said I will ask for clarification.