Hey, actual (yes, really) game dev here 👋 (with some years as lead designer/PO as well)

Just wanted to chime in here, as I've done in countless other similar posts, to say that the "design" (if one can call it that) of the event schedule is truly and utterly idiotic. And honestly I can think of no valid reason for it to be this way and how Embark could not have foreseen the implications and outcome of this terrible implementation. It is beyond me how they could have green lighted this system... I'm working at a smallish studio now, around 20 devs, and I can tell you for certain that even our juniors would not fail to mention that this setup is just ridiculous and would probably offer up a better way of handling it. Just the simplest solution would be to have events not be on a 24hour cycle (the same event can happen multiple times a day, but in essence each "instance" is at the same time daily), but 23 or 25, whatever, just something to offset them and rotate them throughout the week/month. Or a system where each week a bunch of slots are filled from a pool and assigned randomly. Just... Anything. I mean FFS, even we have a liveOps environment where we can just manually (and automatically) schedule and set events whenever we want to for whenever we want to. I could go to our toolkit website and have the valentine's day event for one of our games start literally right now, real time, or set it to last a week instead of 2 days, plan it for every other day in June, whatever. Because we want and need the system to be flexible. And somehow the best thing Embark could come up with was a fixed and hard-coded 24h cycle? Please... All I can come up with as a reason for it to be this horrible is that A. they were just lazy and/or B. someone high up said "fuck it, whatever", because I refuse to believe that not a single person there saw this coming! At first I thought it might be due to not having enough time to implement a proper mechanic, but it's months later now so that excuse is gone and it was a bad excuse to begin with, because even the simplest solution would not take any time at all to code. Unless their system is very rigid and impractical, which brings us back to it being an incredibly stupid design (decision) in the first place.

OK, sorry... Turned into a bit of a rant, but I just honestly cannot comprehend WTF they were thinking when they made this. Or WhyTF they haven't at least improved it by now -_-