![]() I had thought about this myself and it didn't seem right. The original poster is absolutely correct. Amazing ships.Īnd once the dust settled and a few people got rewarded one or more of these amazing ships for dishing out potentially hundreds of dollars in random loot crates, Wargaming decided to penalize those players by nerfing the ship they burned their credit cards on. So people threw money at those Santa crates for that chance. they advertised the ship as tier 5 when they sold it in the premium shop, and then they advertise it as tier 5 only a couple of months ago as a small chance to get a rare and powerful ship. But those who wanted it but could not have it were sold on the idea that buying *RNG* based loot crates could net you a chance to get a *tier 5* Giulio Cesare. Some of us did buy it for money when it first came out. You paid for a chance to play a ship that isnt owned by you on WG's servers.Įxcept that he very much has a point. You didnt pay a certain price for any certain good with those boxes. Like that whole part, isnt even true at all with lockboxes. See the problem? The people being actively lured into purchasing these crates, by advertisements such as the one above, have agreed to pay a certain price for a certain good I demand a refund for my falsely advertised purchase, and he instead offers me the price of the peas. He assures me, that the peas are extremely top grade. Angrily, I ask the cashier why I wasn't provided with the caviar. Should of went with the, "I bought this directly with cash".įollowing purchase, I open the can to discover it is, in fact, filled with peas. You also are shooting yourself in the foot by using the lockbox argument.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |