Let's everyone who was mistaken about payouts post this to the developers: In their own words from a forum post the DEVS wrote: "There has been feedback that the payout system is a bit confusing. [THAT PUTS IT MILDLY] To help address that, and without going into precise details [SEE THIS IS WHERE A LITTLE MORE DETAIL MAY HAVE HELPED] about how Mithril rewards are calculated, here is a rough formula: Everyone's contribution = Their Mithril Spent [HERE IS THEIR MISTAKE IN WORD CHOICE] Their Attack Items Spent Defensive Items they cause their opponent to use" Soooo, they said "Their Mithril Spent" they did NOT say "Their Spells Cast." And, so when I "SPENT" 350-400Mith on new items - and get back 350 mith in war, I don't expect them to say IT'S A MISTAKE in payout. NOR, do I expect them to reduce my MITH to ZERO the next day. The solution in a CONTRACT situation, where there is MUTUAL mistake, is to put BOTH parties back to the point before the contract. Take back the MITH payout, BUT return all MITH I spent during the Hour before the war and take back your items. I.E. Put me back to the pre-war MITH level I was at and take back the two new items. That way we each can go forward with a MUCH clearer understanding of MITH payouts, costs of items, Etc. This is the fair result.
If we all ask them and they see that it is fair, why not?? It actually is a principle of contract law.
I agree!!! I would not have frivolously spent the mith I made after war had I know it was gonna be taken back!!! Ira like giving someone a million dollars and after they spend it telling them you want it back!!! Just wrong should have let it be and fixed for next war!!! Would be nice for them to do something to make right.as not my fault and ill informed!!!!!
Plus this is what I found on "a popular" website: In contract law, a mistake is an erroneous belief, at contracting, that certain facts are true. It can be argued as a defence, and if raised successfully can lead to the agreement in question being found void ab initio or voidable, or alternatively an equitable remedy may be provided by the courts. Common law has identified three different types of mistake in contract: the 'unilateral mistake', the 'mutual mistake' and the 'common mistake'. It is important to note the distinction between the 'common mistake' and the 'mutual mistake'. Another way of putting it is: "A representor may make a statement which prima facie is technically true; however this may tell only half the story. If a statement of fact is made but the representor fails to include information which would significantly alter the interpretation of this fact, then a misrepresentation may have occurred." Or "Should a statement be made which is true at the time, but subsequently becomes untrue due to a change in circumstances, the representor is obligated to amend the original statement. In With v O’Flanagan [1936] Ch. 575, the plaintiff entered into a contract to purchase O’Flanagan’s medical practice. During negotiations it was said that the practice produced an income of £2000 per year. Before the contract was signed, the practice took a downward turn and lost a significant amount of value."
I also found this: "Negligent misrepresentation at common law occurs when the defendant carelessly makes a representation while having no reasonable basis to believe it to be true. This type of misrepresentation is relatively new and was introduced to allow damages in situations where neither a collateral contract nor fraud is found. It was first seen in the case of Hedley Byrne v Heller [1964] A.C. 465 where the court found that a statement made negligently that was relied upon can be actionable in tort. Lord Denning in Esso Petroleum Co Ltd v Mardon [1976] Q.B. 801" So my thought is that what ever you call it -- the Developers have been great so far trying to correct any mistakes they have made - I have no reason to believe they won't do that here. BY THE WAY - even with this mistake - THIS NEW WAR SYSTEM ROCKS!!!! And while expensive I LIKE THE ITEMS -
Did you people really think you were going to get New Equip for FREE just because you bought it in the hour before the War? You tried to take advantage of the system and it back-fired on you! nuff said
according to ToU, we dont own the accounts. therefore we dont have a claim, since if they own the accounts, they can do whatever they please with them. they planned this...
I'm not sure of the legal aspect, but from a customer service perspective- the devs need to do something about this. When u go to sleep with over a hundred Smith and wake up to none? Then get reimbursed a small fraction? I thought they wanted to encourage war?
The legal problem with your assertion is this was not a contract. No chance for consideration, mutual assent and a meeting of the minds. The items offered for sale are labeled as permanent items. Therefore a reasonable person would expect to purchase these items, and to spend mith to obtain them. To believe you would win back mithril for a permanent item you purchased is an unreasonable construction of the developers description, especially when taking into account the historical way mith was paid out. It is fully reasonable, and logical to receive back the mith you only spent in spells, as that's the way it has been done. I rule in favor of the Developers. No refunds for mith spent, and you should consider your actions more carefully in the future
I agree with him wen something seems too good to be true ...it usually is. That being said devs did make a pretty major mistake and some compensation should be due.
LOL you obviously never read the law on contracts where we pay them money and they sell us use of a game which they sell as described -they say we can spend MITH in that hour and get it back if we win. JUST like vegas baby. So if the dealer changes the rules AFTER the hand is dealt - YOU SHOOT THE DEALER for checking at cards.
Oops I mean stacking the deck. Every hand of cards is a new contract. Sometimes you say aces are wild - other times not--- BUT you don't change the rules after the bets are placed. You must take your legal research skills from Judge Judy.
My alt had 200 succesful actions, 400mil made and knocked out 4 people and only got back what i spent in mith.
Obviously i didn't want because look at my size lol but the devs made the mistake in their rewards code and
Loooool! It's their game. It's a free game therefore they owe us nothing. If you spend money on pro packs or xtals you do this by free will ( remember when they were deleting inactive accounts and said they wouldn't delete ones with pro packs well that's cause they technically can't since money was spent. ) so in other words, stop complaining, they owe us or anyone nothing.
No, you shouldn't be refunded for items bought. Why should you get it for free when others don't? It was an error the devs made, they fixed it accordingly.