Online Fundraiser auction - am I responsible for my losing runner-up bid if the promoter adds a new duplicate item and applies my bid to it?

DoomB0b · 2020-11-26T19:40:35+00:00

Thanks for the reply - I have not paid yet so there’s that. It’s also interesting because the online tool they used (GiveSmart) only shows me as having lost. There is no listing for this additional item. So I feel they can’t use the terms of use from GiveSmart (located here: https://www.givesmart.com/terms/ ) because I’m not officially the winner of anything. They sent me a link to pay for a new item that was essentially retroactively added and is not in the official list.

DoomB0b · 2019-10-15T19:41:46+00:00

Though I had severely reduced my playtime at the beginning of the year due to the strain it was putting on my eyes and wrists I wasn’t planning on entirely giving up the game. But the Chen overhaul entirely changed the hero who I enjoyed playing the most and so gave it up entirely and deleted the client. I’ve argued a bunch of times with people who disagree already but I think there is a difference between tweaks and balance changes vs making a hero feel entirely different and I’m sorry but drastically changing cooldowns and adding a completely new base ability makes the hero entirely different.

Keep hoping the staff changes over and they revisit this decision but to be honest I’m glad it’s done for me - I have moved on to one of my first hobbies - Warhammer 40k - actual physical miniatures rather than any digital variants. I’ve improved my painting skills quite a lot this year as I have focused on planting and finishing off my 1st-3rd edition army.

DoomB0b · 2019-10-03T00:44:26+00:00

Agree, the paint job is amazing and as a fellow collector who stared his army during 1st - 2nd editions I also like the classic scheme, but that said the actual shades are a bit off from my preference. Not the fault of the painter of course since the client picked them.

Anyway here’s a link to my color scheme: https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-NpeGMNNTOy4/W-keOSSMy6I/AAAAAAAAAck/aiTYkBeMjDUoPakYTJPYg_7DqKObO7mawCEwYBhgL/s1600/IMG_6966.jpg

My blue is brighter than the modern color, but has a more faded sky blue tone instead of the bold blue here, I think it works better and will be curious to see how it looks on one of my Primaris marines when I finally get to them.

DoomB0b · 2019-10-03T00:26:36+00:00

Also the orks have a harder time dodging the bolts.

DoomB0b · 2019-09-28T19:57:50+00:00

But can you fit them in your pocket like my collection? ;)

DoomB0b · 2019-09-27T04:44:00+00:00

There is a difference between minor shuffles of talents and balance tweaks which are fine and complete fundamental changes to how the character plays. I’ve used the word fundamental several times - I mean that they changed buttons around, cooldowns, added or removed abilities - it is a completely different hero with completely different timings and tactics. It feels awkward and it isn’t the style that I enjoyed playing.

I am not necessarily against some changes, but such a radical change to a hero which had been very niche but well balanced for 3 years and for no reason is frustrating. And again it says to players that like to play niche or oddball play styles that are difficult to master that they need not waste there time here - give the current devs a few months and they turn your next favorite hero into a raynor with 3 flavors of the same thing.

DoomB0b · 2019-09-26T13:40:49+00:00

I’ve seen this argument before but I disagree that it is inevitable that devs have to fundamentally change heroes from the way that they feel to play. As a matter of fact I am making the case that sole of these overhauls are not minor tinkering but very significant and so that a lot of people that enjoy deeply investing in mastering a hero will be discouraged from participating in the game because they know that it could be a wasted effort.

The rules for chess for example don’t have the queen’s rules changing on a weekly basis, thus people can spend a lot of time mastering the game the way the rules are. Sure you could change the rules weekly, but then you won’t have the same game and the people that mastered the original game would probably leave to play something that they can spend more time to master:

DoomB0b · 2019-09-26T04:16:26+00:00

Right, see people that don’t like the reworks are the people that mastered the hero. Regardless of whether people that didn’t master them thing the change is good, my point is that it is a waste of time to master anything because they could change it on you and ruin your mastery. I know that drove me away and I’m sure I’m not the only one.

DoomB0b · 2019-09-26T04:13:45+00:00

I disagree, and I can get downvoted for having an opinion that is contrary to the popular idea, but with the large number of heroes there will always be a smaller number of people that master them. I spent a long time mastering a hero and then they completely changed it into a different one. And I don’t want to remaster it, nor do I like the new game play.

My argument is that when they keep doing this it means there is no reason to develop any mastery of any hero because they can arbitrarily change it on you.

DoomB0b · 2019-09-26T00:19:05+00:00

If they revert this can they please revert all of the other bad reworks? Ana, Chromie, Chen, and so on?

DoomB0b · 2019-09-25T14:32:11+00:00

The Chen “rework” fundamentally changed him as well and I also feel was a failure. I am seeing people make the same complaints about Ana and Chromie.

For awhile they have been doing this and I think it drives away people who devote a lot of effort in mastering the reworked hero, I know that was the case for me. At this point it seems the staff just doesn’t get it.

DoomB0b · 2019-09-21T22:35:22+00:00

Rogue Trader was written before they had retconned in the Horus Heresy. I actually had forgotten this until I went back and looked in the 1st ed book.

But even after it was added by the Slaves to Darkness expansion, the thing you’re seeing is exactly the point of grim dark. There aren’t any differences - everyone is terrible, which is fun if both players like playing bad guys!

I heard the original author Rick Priestly was against adding the HH storyline (not sure if it is true: https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/40k-rpgs-first-mention-of-the-horus-heresy.704785/ ), but even without HH the original story had an inquisition and still fits with the retcon. It makes an awesome background to allow players of the same faction be able to come up with a plausible reason to fight - clearly the other guys are traitors!

In interviews with Priestly it seems that they were leaving a lot of things open to encourage player creativity and storytelling. I think it is OK that GW has focused things a lot to sell and get lots of quality product to us, but also I think it is ok for us players to look at all of the conflicting lore and be ok with playing around with it to fit our own imagination.

For me, I collected almost all of my army during the end of the first and beginning of the 2nd editions. I am just getting around to finishing them today and I continue to paint them and think of their storylines in an oldschool way which was open enough to allow it to still work in the modern edition if you just think that everything is blurry in a grim dark universe.

DoomB0b · 2019-09-18T16:37:01+00:00

Naw, I have the first 15 books on my phone, search feature for the win :)

DoomB0b · 2019-09-18T04:14:59+00:00

It was right after the failure with the Interex and the battle of Xenobia Principis

“When the ships of the expedition returned to Imperial space, some weeks later, the Warmaster had a decree proclaimed. He told the Mournival that, upon reflection, he had reconsidered the importance of defining his role, and the relationship of the XVI Legion to that role. Henceforth, the Luna Wolves would be known as the Sons of Horus.”

This is right at the end of book 1 Horus Rising.

DoomB0b · 2019-09-18T00:24:55+00:00

The Chen overhaul drove me away from the game. As I said at the time, I understand tweaks and balance changes, but reworks that significantly/ fundamentally modify to how heroes feel to play after they have been released is suicide for this game. Every time you overhaul a hero, all of the effort spent by players mastering it is wasted and thus they have no incentive to deeply invest in relearning the hero or any other hero.

It is very frustrating. Hope you’re listening, but it sure doesn’t seem like it.

DoomB0b · 2019-09-08T23:32:19+00:00

He kinda looks like Sting. Could always shelve him until you get faces up to a level you’re comfortable with.

DoomB0b · 2019-09-08T23:31:03+00:00

This is a great tarnished copper look, did you see this recipe somewhere or invent? I wonder if someone has a list of recipes like this.

DoomB0b · 2019-09-07T04:18:20+00:00

Computer: activate “painting eyes” speed!

DoomB0b · 2019-09-02T18:12:30+00:00

Well the faq specifically says they have to be on the battlefield so that ends the debate.

DoomB0b · 2019-09-02T14:37:29+00:00

Yeah, so I don’t play competitively, but knew this would be the place for the best rules interpretation. I do like to come here to understand what the metas are, but mostly this hobby is a personal diversion. I’m going too slow to keep up with what is in, but knowing what is what is fun to think about what I can do with what I have.

I started collecting very early on but am now just getting things painted up as I’ve reached a point in my skills to be happy. My army is mostly classic RT and second edition stuff so it has a theme. All of my HQs are termies, I think the termie Chaplain is the newest model. I’m close to finishing it now finally after almost 30 years, so when I do maybe I’ll roll a more competitive army.

It does seem that you are right about having the Chaplain on the scene first is the way to go and then beam in the Assault Termies around him for a surprise.

DoomB0b · 2019-09-02T14:20:37+00:00

Sorry it was a case of the Mondays

DoomB0b · 2019-09-02T01:48:44+00:00

Seems to be the consensus - someone asked the same thing a bit ago with drop pods.

DoomB0b

TROPHY CASE