On the 3rd phase of current TB our guild faced Tie Silenser and FO SF Tie Fighter present in ship squadrons. We have none of these ships at 4*. Should we pay money to complete platoons which we were able to complete a while ago? Those ships can be bought only in packs! I think this mast be fixed and these ships shouldn't be present in squadrons!
I know you only deliver the response, but can you at least kick someone in the shin for us @CG_Kozispoon? It's a pretty crappy response that it's wai. Anyway we shall deal as always, thanks for checking.
I know you only deliver the response, but can you at least kick someone in the shin for us @CG_Kozispoon? It's a pretty **** response that it's wai. Anyway we shall deal as always, thanks for checking.
Essentially, they are saying that to have any chance to succeed we will need to buy the units they are offering, but don't worry, to make up for it they will be letting us know in advance which very expensive units we will need to be buying in order to be successful.....
As a whale myself, I appreciate that in certain ways there is an advantage received from buying things in the game, but this is probably the worst thing I've seen from EA, and that's saying something.
I haven't spent a dime in over 3 months, and I don't see any reason why that will change going forward.
^^ this.
I’m sure it won’t get fixed in time to complete this TB. It’s already a boring time consuming slog for rewards that aren’t congruent with the time and effort. Now we can add pointless to the list.
Platoon Squad compositions are working as intended, however that does meant that we don’t have plans for improvement.
I am not a native English speaker, so I may be wrong, but that doesn’t sound well.
“that doesn’t meant that”?
If so, please edit. If not, please explain. It gave me quite a bit of head scratching...
English is hard and dumb sometimes, sorry. The first “that” is all that is necessary. The second “that” is unnecessary. It’s technically incorrect grammar, but generally accepted use in America.
Does CG really believe "Buy this or suffer" is an acceptable route to monetization?
It would be a new precedent for CG. You were capable of doing this, but now we released something new and you had better buy it or you won't be capable of doing it anymore - oh, and by the way, we're going to make you do this again. And again. And again.
You are crossing a line here CG that cannot be uncrossed
Entice the players to spend, do not demand that they spend.
I know you only deliver the response, but can you at least kick someone in the shin for us @CG_Kozispoon? It's a pretty **** response that it's wai. Anyway we shall deal as always, thanks for checking.
With this^. @CG_Kozispoon It's awfully lame. At the very least there should be a grace period, a cadence to this sort of thing, maybe?
We've been telling you guys the endless monotony of same 6 waves again and again is trying... but now it's like my guys need to do even more work to go in and face the same hoards. We got one less star last TB from a lack of participation... and I can't blame them If whomever over there wants to do this, so be it, but, again, a grace period. A cadence. Give people at least until they show up in Chromium packs. Something. I don't think that's an unreasonable request.
I know you only deliver the response, but can you at least kick someone in the shin for us @CG_Kozispoon? It's a pretty **** response that it's wai. Anyway we shall deal as always, thanks for checking.
With this^. @CG_Kozispoon It's awfully lame. At the very least there should be a grace period, a cadence to this sort of thing, maybe?
We've been telling you guys the endless monotony of same 6 waves again and again is trying... but now it's like my guys need to do even more work to go in and face the same hoards. We got one less star last TB from a lack of participation... and I can't blame them If whomever over there wants to do this, so be it, but, again, a grace period. A cadence. Give people at least until they show up in Chromium packs. Something. I don't think that's an unreasonable request.
Correct. If this was:
We released <new ship>, and in 3 months <new ship> becomes farmable, and 3 months after that <new ship> will begin appearing in platoons, because your guild ought to have several floating around by then.
It’s underhanded and really rubs me the wrong way. And it’s sad to think they didn’t even tell the community manager about it. At least we all suffer together.
So after the ewoks became farmable and they released vet han and chewy, i breathed a sigh of release that they have not been added to platoons, i really thought the feedback had been listened to. Until today when i see a tie silencer in our ship platoons, this is really unfair on guilds, its not fair to lock a whole gamemode behind chars that can only be bought in packs.
Please stop adding characters to platoons until they have become farmable ingame!
So after the ewoks became farmable and they released vet han and chewy, i breathed a sigh of release that they have not been added to platoons, i really thought the feedback had been listened to. Until today when i see a tie silencer in our ship platoons, this is really unfair on guilds, its not fair to lock a whole gamemode behind chars that can only be bought in packs.
Please stop adding characters to platoons until they have become farmable ingame!
It's always gonna have new toons and ships added to platoons. It's not unfair to your guilds. It's the advantage for p2p players. This will not change.
Replies
Dream on. Aerosmith, "AEROSMITH" 1973
I am not a native English speaker, so I may be wrong, but that doesn’t sound well.
“that doesn’t meant that”?
If so, please edit. If not, please explain. It gave me quite a bit of head scratching...
Here here
^^ this.
I’m sure it won’t get fixed in time to complete this TB. It’s already a boring time consuming slog for rewards that aren’t congruent with the time and effort. Now we can add pointless to the list.
Still on my pay diet too....
That’s because you’re incorrect. Dark Side ships have been in TB since the jump because of the low number of ships total.
English is hard and dumb sometimes, sorry. The first “that” is all that is necessary. The second “that” is unnecessary. It’s technically incorrect grammar, but generally accepted use in America.
It would be a new precedent for CG. You were capable of doing this, but now we released something new and you had better buy it or you won't be capable of doing it anymore - oh, and by the way, we're going to make you do this again. And again. And again.
You are crossing a line here CG that cannot be uncrossed
Entice the players to spend, do not demand that they spend.
We've been telling you guys the endless monotony of same 6 waves again and again is trying... but now it's like my guys need to do even more work to go in and face the same hoards. We got one less star last TB from a lack of participation... and I can't blame them If whomever over there wants to do this, so be it, but, again, a grace period. A cadence. Give people at least until they show up in Chromium packs. Something. I don't think that's an unreasonable request.
Correct. If this was:
We released <new ship>, and in 3 months <new ship> becomes farmable, and 3 months after that <new ship> will begin appearing in platoons, because your guild ought to have several floating around by then.
I would be entirely cool with that.
Please stop adding characters to platoons until they have become farmable ingame!
https://forums.galaxy-of-heroes.starwars.ea.com/discussion/143905/platoon-squad-and-deployments-update#latest
Sorry OP
I am really interested in EA/CG's opinion of how their relationship is with the community(us).
Judging by their approach with TB and these new ship reqs in platoon....they really don't care about the community(us)