{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
3/31/2025 1:25:26 PM
3
No.
Flawless is flawless, as it always should have been.
You don't need flawless to go to the lighthouse. You don't need flawless to get adepts.
I'm glad it's gone. Never made a single bit of sense to call something flawless, but allow you to lose, much less TWICE. Ew.
English
-
First off idc about the nuance of what it means to be flawless. By your standard there shouldn’t be loss protection in comp then? Things happen that are completely out of the controls of the player such someone afking, DC, leaving the match, griefing and bad rng. Since things are common in trials yes there should be a mercy. I don’t have a problem going flawless in this system the old system or the D1 system. I love playing trials and the way it’s going right now isn’t good if bringing back 1 mercy will be a start in helping the population stay healthy then why not?
-
Loss protection in comp is not remotely comparable to a mercy lmao. So that entire bit is just pointless. What do you need the mercy for? Why do you need to go flawless if it's not necessary to visit the lighthouse OR get adepts. And what proof do we have bringing back a mercy would improve anything? There's absolutely zero need for it now.
-
Why did you mention comp, they specifically mentioned trials. The end goal is going flawless, it makes sense to actually need to win all your games to achieve it. I don't think the changes they made are bad, nor do i think mercy was a bad choice. It's just weird to call it a flawless passage when you haven't played flawlessly.
