False Advertising Kills Goodwill
Take the account of any 80th level player.
Choose the 5 best toons or even the 5 toons that, with synergy, make the best squad. There is no way that more than 1% of those accounts' best squads can defeat Tier1 of the Prelude to Territory Wars event.
The description doesn't say that it's physically possible for someone with an 80th level account.
The description says that the event is "recommended" for players 80th level and up. Can the developers really be so daft as to think that the average 80th level account is able to defeat T1/PtTW? If they do actually understand their game and how players and their rosters progress, then wouldn't you have to conclude that this is intentional dishonesty?
Which is worse, really, the possibility that the devs don't know anything about how players actually progress, or the possibility that CG/EA is nakedly lying to its fanbase?
I've said it before and I'll say it again: truth in advertising is a minimum standard. If the average 80th level account can't beat an event, the event can't possibly be honestly "recommended" for 80th level players. It's that simple.
Choose the 5 best toons or even the 5 toons that, with synergy, make the best squad. There is no way that more than 1% of those accounts' best squads can defeat Tier1 of the Prelude to Territory Wars event.
The description doesn't say that it's physically possible for someone with an 80th level account.
The description says that the event is "recommended" for players 80th level and up. Can the developers really be so daft as to think that the average 80th level account is able to defeat T1/PtTW? If they do actually understand their game and how players and their rosters progress, then wouldn't you have to conclude that this is intentional dishonesty?
Which is worse, really, the possibility that the devs don't know anything about how players actually progress, or the possibility that CG/EA is nakedly lying to its fanbase?
I've said it before and I'll say it again: truth in advertising is a minimum standard. If the average 80th level account can't beat an event, the event can't possibly be honestly "recommended" for 80th level players. It's that simple.
0
Replies
Raid Han takes out Wedge with Shoots First, CLS uses his special on Baze, inflicting buff immunity. Then the enemy CLS performs Call To Action I take damage from the CLS attack, but their CLS has lost the extra tenacity. So then my Han Solo goes and uses his stunning special.
Now I'm facing Biggs with no Wedge, a Chirrut with a buff-immune Baze who's at 50% health, and a stunned CLS.
I can kill T2 no problem, but I use two of the best toons in the game with 3 zetas between them to win.
So I'm not complaining for me or my ability to beat the event. I'm commenting on their advertising. I think I'm hopeful that this is an honest mistake where they simply don't have any idea of what average roster strength is at level 80, but honestly if it was an honest mistake, that still says something very, very un-good.
It was a Sith team under a Zaul lead. That's not even possible at that level. I found it hilarious but did think, I'm glad I'm not new to this game because that's just flat out unfair.
Devs, you should not be putting newer players up against teams with zeta abilities. That's just mean.
The questions are, "Did EA/CG accurately represent the difficulty level of (especially) tier 1 when they said that it was "recommended" for level 80 players? If not, why not?"
The difficulty is not represented accurately for Tier 1. It's harder to make the case directly for Tier 2, because it's recommended for "Level 85" but there's a vast difference between being level 85 for the last year, and actively improving your roster the entire time, and just achieving level 85 yesterday. It might be that the average level 85 player is also a longtime player because so many of the people who jumped on the game when it first came out stuck with it.
But whether they started early or late, it's pretty easy to say that the player-level 80 accounts are not ready for this event.