Fairly straightforward, this one:
|Campaign: Buy a Premium Set!||14 April 2020||09 June 2020||-|
|Campaign: Buy a Premium Set! (7/15)||15 July 2020||18 August 2020||92 days|
|Campaign: Buy a Premium Set!||16 September 2020||21 October 2020||63 days|
Someone who had a little premium and bought 90 days in the first campaign would have been ready to buy into the second when it arrived. That made sense.
But this third campaign arriving so soon after the second means they'll have accrued some premium over time. If every campaign is 60 days apart, then after half a year they'll have spent on a month of premium that's completely surplus. Moreover anyone who already had close to the cap of premium duration will be sitting on an increasing number of unusable premium tickets.
It's somewhat minor in the grand scheme - someone could simply skip one campaign when they have too much premium, provided the emote is tradable and affordable in player shops - but I still think it's worth suggesting.
It may also be a premature request if this was an exception or a mistake and the intention is to space them 90 days apart normally.
Alternative but more complex suggestion that would satisfy the above and also alleviate a lot of Twitter complaints presently happening: Adjust Buy Premium campaigns so instead of requiring a purchase during the campaign period, players are awarded the respective bonuses if the amount of premium time they have remaining exceeds 30/90 days at any point during the campaign period.