RNG Fairness

[Fawkes]

It's compounding unfairness at this point. Some people won with the broken code, and it's not their fault SE boned everything up.

[Ethers]

Well they're not going to do that and I don't think they should given how many complications with relocation and the people who would have gotten their house this time around (unfair or otherwise) could arise. Given how poorly this was implemented, I don't think they have the capability to solve this issue or housing in general.

[Vryn]

The fairest solution would be to allow the transfers and the people who got the house with the current system with one submission. To those houses that had more than 1 + submission, they should be made to do it again, but I see no reason why FCS or private housing that had one submission should be forced to do it again when they should have won the property. All you would be doing is punishing those who should have rightfully won and compound their chances of failure even further as time progresses because it would be impossible to determine who won the plot on other slots.

[Seera1024]

The fairest solution would be to allow the transfers and the people who got the house with the current system with one submission. To those houses that had more than 1 + submission, they should be made to do it again, but I see no reason why FCS or private housing that had one submission should be forced to do it again when they should have won the property. All you would be doing is punishing those who should have rightfully won and compound their chances of failure even further as time progresses because it would be impossible to determine who won the plot on other slots.

The problem with that is what if the one who won it this time was a relocating house that accepted the winning bid and their house transferred.

Is the system set up to know which plot a house transferred from?

If it's not, then you'd have a huge disaster if that FC or individual then lost the new auction. They went from having a house to not having a house. And I think that would be a worse situation to be in.

Fairest way to handle it without having to deal with any possible additional technical glitches is to just run the ones who errored out and gave 0 or "no participants" as the result.

[Vryn]

The problem with that is what if the one who won it this time was a relocating house that accepted the winning bid and their house transferred.

Is the system set up to know which plot a house transferred from?

If it's not, then you'd have a huge disaster if that FC or individual then lost the new auction. They went from having a house to not having a house. And I think that would be a worse situation to be in.

Fairest way to handle it without having to deal with any possible additional technical glitches is to just run the ones who errored out and gave 0 or "no participants" as the result.

I agree with this, point well stated.

[MiaShino]

In any software development when working with strings of numbers you begin at Zero not One.

What am assuming occurred here is placard listing you as participant Zero would look most strange so Square set you to participant One. However the intern forgot to start at one or write function to ignore zero or heck to list you on placard as participant one while being participant zero in code.

This created ghost zero participant because rounding table begins at zero yet every other participant was set to one. The fix should be simple but they will not admit to making so childish a mistake. I think that they should. Just like setting too many audio channel emitters this is babies first coding or something? Begins at zero ends at nine is one of first things you learn.. seriously..

Roll back the bid and give my friends their houses then you sit there and identify who is worth keeping at the company, and who the heck to let go. How are investors okay with this level of incompetence? It is not complex. It is not difficult. None of Square code is that complex no matter how many times they repeat this. It is simply dice rolling function I could code drunk with eyes closed half asleep and still pick up on better zero issue.

[Nihility]

theoretically since every ward is and was on lockdown for the lottery to start they could just roll back the entirety of all housing districts

I said it elsewhere but every choice they have to repair this is a bad one

rolling back all the housing wards, which should 100% be possible for any game company, upsets the lucky few but with the 0 in place even the winning lottery tickets are somewhat tainted
having all the zero's reroll will screw over anyone that did exactly what was expected of them since checking the board deletes your ticket and refunds your money so they're no longer in the lottery
just restarting the lottery like nothing happened means now you have basically the same amount of people and many fewer houses so that's kind of super messed up to everyone that got booted out of the first round


feels like to me they need to reset and use the opportunity to rethink this whole thing
like clearly they overestimated FC housing needs to a colossal degree and underestimated private housing needs by like 1000% too
Every housing district being 75% FC from now on is just kind of ridiculous a though too

[Evergrey]

theoretically since every ward is and was on lockdown for the lottery to start they could just roll back the entirety of all housing districts

I said it elsewhere but every choice they have to repair this is a bad one

rolling back all the housing wards, which should 100% be possible for any game company, upsets the lucky few but with the 0 in place even the winning lottery tickets are somewhat tainted
having all the zero's reroll will screw over anyone that did exactly what was expected of them since checking the board deletes your ticket and refunds your money so they're no longer in the lottery
just restarting the lottery like nothing happened means now you have basically the same amount of people and many fewer houses so that's kind of super messed up to everyone that got booted out of the first round


feels like to me they need to reset and use the opportunity to rethink this whole thing
like clearly they overestimated FC housing needs to a colossal degree and underestimated private housing needs by like 1000% too
Every housing district being 75% FC from now on is just kind of ridiculous a though too

This is the lesser of two evils in my opinion as well.
Sure, it robs the winners of the plot.
But right now the ones who lost might've been robbed of a win as well due to the 0.
Resetting it would give everyone the same chance as before.
But this time perhaps open up more wards for Personal Housing as well.

[S0lara]

rolling back all the housing wards, which should 100% be possible for any game company, upsets the lucky few but with the 0 in place even the winning lottery tickets are somewhat tainted
having all the zero's reroll will screw over anyone that did exactly what was expected of them since checking the board deletes your ticket and refunds your money so they're no longer in the lottery
just restarting the lottery like nothing happened means now you have basically the same amount of people and many fewer houses so that's kind of super messed up to everyone that got booted out of the first round


feels like to me they need to reset and use the opportunity to rethink this whole thing
like clearly they overestimated FC housing needs to a colossal degree and underestimated private housing needs by like 1000% too
Every housing district being 75% FC from now on is just kind of ridiculous a though too

I agree wholeheartedly with you all. If people won, and no zero (0) affected them, then no, they should not lose their house; however, what if rollback is the only option?

Just like Nihility said, if a zero was in place and counted as a number in the list, then yes it was tainted. There is really no easy way around this for the devs, but that is why I proposed a reroll or rollback excluding the zero was the "most fair" option.

[Breezelyn]

Yeah, no. People who won the lottery on unaffected plots should NOT be rolled back. I'm sorry it sucks for everyone involved, but rolling back people who have already RELOCATED TO ANOTHER PLOT? You're just asking for a much bigger poop storm.

Some who have upgraded from a small to medium, or a medium to a large, or a small to a large:
- How would they be able to go back if their furnishings/storeroom are way over the 400 limit?
- Where would the extra furnishings go?
- How would the player able to get back to their original plot, if the system can't pinpoint where these players were originally?
- Would these players get extra compensation, because of the system being "bugged"?
- Why should players, who entered like everyone else, waited like everyone else, had the same field as everyone else, have to give up something they won? I want a good reason for this.

None of us knew the system was bugged. Everyone who entered the lottery was on the same playing field. People who got their new plots should not be punished, because SE screwed up with something in the coding. The team messed up, yes I get it. However, these players should not be forced to reroll again, due to a lot of other factors that could make the situation much, much worse. If they can find which lottery number won for each bugged plot, it would be better imo.