Community Territory Wars Poll Results [MEGA]

Replies

  • DuneSeaFarmer
    2968 posts Member
    edited January 12
    All this is based on a lack of communication.
    Adding clarity on the plans for upcomming TWs would have definately helped.

    No snark intended, but it is not in EA's makeup to be forth coming. They neither want or require our input, approval, or advice. We can play or go away. Either way they will not change, not one little bit.

    I know not a response to my post, but I'll give a quick response to yours. If what you say is true, there's no need for a forum I guess. But I see we do have a forum. I wonder what that could mean? Do you have any ideas why a forum is maintained?

    Most companies have message forums as a user generated FAQ/Helpdesk. In this case the players answer repetitive questions, freeing up support personnel. They also serve as a knowledgebase for players to learn how to operate the game, solve issues, suggest alternate ideas, etc. They are not for having a direct line to the developers as many think. EA is notorious for not wanting them but they concede their use, and for appearance sake they are a neccessary evil. I speak with some authority having been a volunteer and a paid moderator for commercial sites, and I have worked as a designer and have customized them for commercial companies since they came into vogue in the late 90's.
    Post edited by DuneSeaFarmer on
    Leader: Grey Area 51 - My Squads: https://swgoh.gg/p/716522998/
  • Yes and I dislike thEy change the characters to bE less effective without notice!
    They are trying to make us put the money and energy into other characters no one likes
  • Comet19
    178 posts Member
    edited January 12
    CadoaBane wrote: »
    While I am not overly excited for that TW concept, I'll never understand how so many people (not only here, but as an internet phenomenon in general) willingly put so much energy into unconstructive hating. Hand in hand with it goes the situation that people who refuse to share the hate, will be hated, too. Guess that's just part of human nature... I'm rather part of the "let's give it a try and put judgements afterwards, not before"-type of players. Of course it's a little disappointing that I won't be able to use my freshly zeta'd Jolee in my Jedi team, but it's a one-time-only thing so far, with same conditions for everyone.
    Laughing at a handful on here who think this is not a big deal and to give it a try. Here's the main issues that I have with this horrible idea:

    5. Anyone who is a guild leader or officer now has to spend more time trying to come up with a brand new defense strategy and try and beg/motivate the guild to participate in the dumbest TW ever created.

    Not only participate but move mods as well. I mean, we are talking about 20 toons I believe, most of which people had modded, and some of which have premier mods. Are we suppose to remod and entire roster each TW? And are we suppose to expect a guild to do that?

    I can't think of a way to demotivate people for even more participation than having to remod every TW.
    Actually I didn't plan to comment in such a mega thread at all, but that argument about mods has been brought up a couple of times before and I just don't get it. I mean... if someone has a character like Revan (e.g.) , he/she will most likely use him in Arena and other game modes, and not only geared him for TWs. So why would you remove mods from a viable character, only because you can't use him in one TW? And even if characters are not in the Arena squad, it's not worth the effort of switching mods and burning a bunch of credits. In general, people who overly switch their mods around and count their GP everyday, make the game more complicated than it actually is and put more stress on themselves than necessary. If really as many guilds won't seriously participate in the coming TW as people have stated here to boycott it, my guild would actually have an easy time with such an opponent! B)

    Easy. You could move mods off Revan and onto a usable character just before you lock your stats in TW, and then move them back right afterwards. But like DarthBarron brought up, this costs credits and why would a demotivated player take the time to do this? And for some people, the mods on banned characters may be the only good mods they have.
    Bottom line, this is a terrible idea. I’ve already given numerous reasons why I think this is terrible, but I’m not going to rehash them all over again.
  • Kodiak01a
    30 posts Member
    edited January 12
    yohann269 wrote: »
    It’s funny how so many people say CG devs community managers don’t listen. They dropped the originally planned 28 banned toons to only 20. They also received enough positive feedback in the beta program to think this was a good idea. People move mods for every TW. People also move mods for raids so using that excuse as a reason why this is a bad idea is silly. Removing toons from TW was always in the plans. When they introduced TW they talked about having “platoons” which is the exact same thing removing toons from Off/Def teams. I’m the TW leader for my guild. It took me all of 5 minutes to figure out new teams.

    Really? You're the TW guy for MC?


  • Kodiak01a wrote: »
    yohann269 wrote: »
    It’s funny how so many people say CG devs community managers don’t listen. They dropped the originally planned 28 banned toons to only 20. They also received enough positive feedback in the beta program to think this was a good idea. People move mods for every TW. People also move mods for raids so using that excuse as a reason why this is a bad idea is silly. Removing toons from TW was always in the plans. When they introduced TW they talked about having “platoons” which is the exact same thing removing toons from Off/Def teams. I’m the TW leader for my guild. It took me all of 5 minutes to figure out new teams.

    Really? You're the TW guy for MC?


    Just looked him up. His guild’s GP is 150 mil. I wonder why he’s not so concerned about this change...
    Another proof that this is a change that highly favors end-game and/or P2W players, rather than beginning/mid-game/F2P. Makes the whale outrage over this that more delicious, right?
  • For those of you still spending money on this game; Please stop.
    Finis edition am i
  • Comet19 wrote: »
    Kodiak01a wrote: »
    yohann269 wrote: »
    It’s funny how so many people say CG devs community managers don’t listen. They dropped the originally planned 28 banned toons to only 20. They also received enough positive feedback in the beta program to think this was a good idea. People move mods for every TW. People also move mods for raids so using that excuse as a reason why this is a bad idea is silly. Removing toons from TW was always in the plans. When they introduced TW they talked about having “platoons” which is the exact same thing removing toons from Off/Def teams. I’m the TW leader for my guild. It took me all of 5 minutes to figure out new teams.

    Really? You're the TW guy for MC?


    Just looked him up. His guild’s GP is 150 mil. I wonder why he’s not so concerned about this change...
    Another proof that this is a change that highly favors end-game and/or P2W players, rather than beginning/mid-game/F2P. Makes the whale outrage over this that more delicious, right?

    https://swgoh.gg/p/364655542/

    ??

    Who did you get?

  • What would cg do if we all set defense and no 1 attacked so everyone tied.
  • What would cg do if we all set defense and no 1 attacked so everyone tied.

    The side with the highest GP wins I believe.
    Leader: Grey Area 51 - My Squads: https://swgoh.gg/p/716522998/
  • Comet19
    178 posts Member
    edited January 12
    Kodiak01a wrote: »
    Comet19 wrote: »
    Kodiak01a wrote: »
    yohann269 wrote: »
    It’s funny how so many people say CG devs community managers don’t listen. They dropped the originally planned 28 banned toons to only 20. They also received enough positive feedback in the beta program to think this was a good idea. People move mods for every TW. People also move mods for raids so using that excuse as a reason why this is a bad idea is silly. Removing toons from TW was always in the plans. When they introduced TW they talked about having “platoons” which is the exact same thing removing toons from Off/Def teams. I’m the TW leader for my guild. It took me all of 5 minutes to figure out new teams.

    Really? You're the TW guy for MC?


    Just looked him up. His guild’s GP is 150 mil. I wonder why he’s not so concerned about this change...
    Another proof that this is a change that highly favors end-game and/or P2W players, rather than beginning/mid-game/F2P. Makes the whale outrage over this that more delicious, right?

    https://swgoh.gg/p/364655542/

    ??

    Who did you get?

    Hmmm, this is the guild he started a recruitment thread for but maybe he switched guilds since. Or maybe it’s a guild for an alt account. https://swgoh.gg/g/487/tres-comas/
  • This is the guild I found him in. 200m+ GP.

    https://swgoh.gg/g/18670/mighty-chiorians/
  • I liked it, my guild has only 27 players so I never had an opportunity to play the old territory wars.
  • Comet19
    178 posts Member
    edited January 12
    Vendi1983 wrote: »
    This is the guild I found him in. 200m+ GP.

    https://swgoh.gg/g/18670/mighty-chiorians/

    That’s probably the right guild. Still, my point stands. He’s way past having to strategize on who to put gear and zetas on, unlike most of the community, so this is not going to hurt him. Hence his super-positive response to this. :D
  • All this is based on a lack of communication.
    Adding clarity on the plans for upcomming TWs would have definately helped.

    No snark intended, but it is not in EA's makeup to be forth coming. They neither want or require our input, approval, or advice. We can play or go away. Either way they will not change, not one little bit.

    I know not a response to my post, but I'll give a quick response to yours. If what you say is true, there's no need for a forum I guess. But I see we do have a forum. I wonder what that could mean? Do you have any ideas why a forum is maintained?

    Most companies have message forums as a user generated FAQ/Helpdesk. In this case the players answer repetitive questions, freeing up support personnel. They also serve as a knowledgebase for players to learn how to operate the game, solve issues, suggest alternate ideas, etc. They are not for having a direct line to the developers as many think. EA is notorious for not wanting them but they concede their use, and for appearance sake they are a neccessary evil. I speak with some authority having been a volunteer and a paid moderator for commercial sites, and I have worked as a designer and have customized them for commercial companies since they came into vogue in the late 90's.

    What you say all sounds reasonable, until you really listen to what it is you say and the ethos you claim. I don't care to get into all that. It's not easy trying to be positive here...lol. It actually takes a lot of self restraint.

    Let me respond by only asking a few more questions.

    If the community is not supposed to have a 'direct line to the devs' and forums are a 'necessary evil', (1) why have a beta program and ask forum users to participate, and (2) why use random survey's in game from the community at large? Maybe I'm slow witted, but I can't reconcile your words with what I see.
    what an ugly thing to say... does this mean we're not friends anymore?
  • But my best toons/teams that have been banned have 6e mods. They can’t be moved to other toons I had no Idea, real money or resources to invest in.
  • All this is based on a lack of communication.
    Adding clarity on the plans for upcomming TWs would have definately helped.

    No snark intended, but it is not in EA's makeup to be forth coming. They neither want or require our input, approval, or advice. We can play or go away. Either way they will not change, not one little bit.

    I know not a response to my post, but I'll give a quick response to yours. If what you say is true, there's no need for a forum I guess. But I see we do have a forum. I wonder what that could mean? Do you have any ideas why a forum is maintained?

    Most companies have message forums as a user generated FAQ/Helpdesk. In this case the players answer repetitive questions, freeing up support personnel. They also serve as a knowledgebase for players to learn how to operate the game, solve issues, suggest alternate ideas, etc. They are not for having a direct line to the developers as many think. EA is notorious for not wanting them but they concede their use, and for appearance sake they are a neccessary evil. I speak with some authority having been a volunteer and a paid moderator for commercial sites, and I have worked as a designer and have customized them for commercial companies since they came into vogue in the late 90's.

    What you say all sounds reasonable, until you really listen to what it is you say and the ethos you claim. I don't care to get into all that. It's not easy trying to be positive here...lol. It actually takes a lot of self restraint.

    Let me respond by only asking a few more questions.

    If the community is not supposed to have a 'direct line to the devs' and forums are a 'necessary evil', (1) why have a beta program and ask forum users to participate, and (2) why use random survey's in game from the community at large? Maybe I'm slow witted, but I can't reconcile your words with what I see.
    Wait, there’s a beta program and in-game surveys?
  • Palin wrote: »
    But my best toons/teams that have been banned have 6e mods. They can’t be moved to other toons I had no Idea, real money or resources to invest in.

    ^ This is what I’m talking about. I’m 99% sure this new TW was designed to encourage players to spend real money panic farming toons that aren’t banned, not to make an already fun part of the game more fun.
  • Comet19 wrote: »
    All this is based on a lack of communication.
    Adding clarity on the plans for upcomming TWs would have definately helped.

    No snark intended, but it is not in EA's makeup to be forth coming. They neither want or require our input, approval, or advice. We can play or go away. Either way they will not change, not one little bit.

    I know not a response to my post, but I'll give a quick response to yours. If what you say is true, there's no need for a forum I guess. But I see we do have a forum. I wonder what that could mean? Do you have any ideas why a forum is maintained?

    Most companies have message forums as a user generated FAQ/Helpdesk. In this case the players answer repetitive questions, freeing up support personnel. They also serve as a knowledgebase for players to learn how to operate the game, solve issues, suggest alternate ideas, etc. They are not for having a direct line to the developers as many think. EA is notorious for not wanting them but they concede their use, and for appearance sake they are a neccessary evil. I speak with some authority having been a volunteer and a paid moderator for commercial sites, and I have worked as a designer and have customized them for commercial companies since they came into vogue in the late 90's.

    What you say all sounds reasonable, until you really listen to what it is you say and the ethos you claim. I don't care to get into all that. It's not easy trying to be positive here...lol. It actually takes a lot of self restraint.

    Let me respond by only asking a few more questions.

    If the community is not supposed to have a 'direct line to the devs' and forums are a 'necessary evil', (1) why have a beta program and ask forum users to participate, and (2) why use random survey's in game from the community at large? Maybe I'm slow witted, but I can't reconcile your words with what I see.
    Wait, there’s a beta program and in-game surveys?

    https://forums.galaxy-of-heroes.starwars.ea.com/discussion/164646/dev-blog-community-improvements-3-29-18#latest
    what an ugly thing to say... does this mean we're not friends anymore?
  • Comet19 wrote: »
    All this is based on a lack of communication.
    Adding clarity on the plans for upcomming TWs would have definately helped.

    No snark intended, but it is not in EA's makeup to be forth coming. They neither want or require our input, approval, or advice. We can play or go away. Either way they will not change, not one little bit.

    I know not a response to my post, but I'll give a quick response to yours. If what you say is true, there's no need for a forum I guess. But I see we do have a forum. I wonder what that could mean? Do you have any ideas why a forum is maintained?

    Most companies have message forums as a user generated FAQ/Helpdesk. In this case the players answer repetitive questions, freeing up support personnel. They also serve as a knowledgebase for players to learn how to operate the game, solve issues, suggest alternate ideas, etc. They are not for having a direct line to the developers as many think. EA is notorious for not wanting them but they concede their use, and for appearance sake they are a neccessary evil. I speak with some authority having been a volunteer and a paid moderator for commercial sites, and I have worked as a designer and have customized them for commercial companies since they came into vogue in the late 90's.

    What you say all sounds reasonable, until you really listen to what it is you say and the ethos you claim. I don't care to get into all that. It's not easy trying to be positive here...lol. It actually takes a lot of self restraint.

    Let me respond by only asking a few more questions.

    If the community is not supposed to have a 'direct line to the devs' and forums are a 'necessary evil', (1) why have a beta program and ask forum users to participate, and (2) why use random survey's in game from the community at large? Maybe I'm slow witted, but I can't reconcile your words with what I see.
    Wait, there’s a beta program and in-game surveys?

    https://forums.galaxy-of-heroes.starwars.ea.com/discussion/164646/dev-blog-community-improvements-3-29-18#latest

    Huh. Never got one for as long as I've played. I do remember hearing about them running focus groups but not implementing the ideas recommended in those focus groups.
  • DuneSeaFarmer
    2968 posts Member
    edited January 12
    All this is based on a lack of communication.
    Adding clarity on the plans for upcomming TWs would have definately helped.

    No snark intended, but it is not in EA's makeup to be forth coming. They neither want or require our input, approval, or advice. We can play or go away. Either way they will not change, not one little bit.

    I know not a response to my post, but I'll give a quick response to yours. If what you say is true, there's no need for a forum I guess. But I see we do have a forum. I wonder what that could mean? Do you have any ideas why a forum is maintained?

    Most companies have message forums as a user generated FAQ/Helpdesk. In this case the players answer repetitive questions, freeing up support personnel. They also serve as a knowledgebase for players to learn how to operate the game, solve issues, suggest alternate ideas, etc. They are not for having a direct line to the developers as many think. EA is notorious for not wanting them but they concede their use, and for appearance sake they are a neccessary evil. I speak with some authority having been a volunteer and a paid moderator for commercial sites, and I have worked as a designer and have customized them for commercial companies since they came into vogue in the late 90's.

    What you say all sounds reasonable, until you really listen to what it is you say and the ethos you claim. I don't care to get into all that. It's not easy trying to be positive here...lol. It actually takes a lot of self restraint.

    Let me respond by only asking a few more questions.

    If the community is not supposed to have a 'direct line to the devs' and forums are a 'necessary evil', (1) why have a beta program and ask forum users to participate, and (2) why use random survey's in game from the community at large? Maybe I'm slow witted, but I can't reconcile your words with what I see.

    Most companies forbid their staff from interacting in forums unless their replies are read and approved. But this makes sense, it's easy to be drawn into an argument and act as a person, not an employee. Most recently it happened with a popular MMO resulting in 2 employees being terminated. (Let's not rehash that incident, that horse is long dead). The Devs here are made aware or may even read the posts. A CM is employed to act as a liaison or firewall if you will to interact as required. The days of "Hanging out" with employees are pretty much long gone. Work loads, etc. Coupled with our (the players) taking every single utterance here as gospel, hard fact, carved in stone, will absolutely happen, make it so attitude they fear saying anything, because it will be taken out of context, held against them, etc.

    Beta programs are generally used to act as load testers and to report any glaring functionality errors. They rarely are used to decide on updates being acceptable etc. They aren't the players working as testers giving advice, or voicing upset at proposed changes. When software reaches a "Beta" state it is getting ready for release. I have been a beta tester elsewhere, and each version we tested we were told "OK, go break it". And some would do just that. Seriously I interacted with testers I call scary smart. LOL So much the person we reported to would remark "I am glad you are on our side" as they could find bugs fast, sometimes serious ones.

    Wow, I'm been doing this type of stuff since the late 90's.. ok rocker and shawl please.. (I just turned 60)

    Interesting but we're way off topic, tks for rolling me down memory lane lol
    Leader: Grey Area 51 - My Squads: https://swgoh.gg/p/716522998/
  • Comet19 wrote: »
    Comet19 wrote: »
    All this is based on a lack of communication.
    Adding clarity on the plans for upcomming TWs would have definately helped.

    No snark intended, but it is not in EA's makeup to be forth coming. They neither want or require our input, approval, or advice. We can play or go away. Either way they will not change, not one little bit.

    I know not a response to my post, but I'll give a quick response to yours. If what you say is true, there's no need for a forum I guess. But I see we do have a forum. I wonder what that could mean? Do you have any ideas why a forum is maintained?

    Most companies have message forums as a user generated FAQ/Helpdesk. In this case the players answer repetitive questions, freeing up support personnel. They also serve as a knowledgebase for players to learn how to operate the game, solve issues, suggest alternate ideas, etc. They are not for having a direct line to the developers as many think. EA is notorious for not wanting them but they concede their use, and for appearance sake they are a neccessary evil. I speak with some authority having been a volunteer and a paid moderator for commercial sites, and I have worked as a designer and have customized them for commercial companies since they came into vogue in the late 90's.

    What you say all sounds reasonable, until you really listen to what it is you say and the ethos you claim. I don't care to get into all that. It's not easy trying to be positive here...lol. It actually takes a lot of self restraint.

    Let me respond by only asking a few more questions.

    If the community is not supposed to have a 'direct line to the devs' and forums are a 'necessary evil', (1) why have a beta program and ask forum users to participate, and (2) why use random survey's in game from the community at large? Maybe I'm slow witted, but I can't reconcile your words with what I see.
    Wait, there’s a beta program and in-game surveys?

    https://forums.galaxy-of-heroes.starwars.ea.com/discussion/164646/dev-blog-community-improvements-3-29-18#latest

    Huh. Never got one for as long as I've played. I do remember hearing about them running focus groups but not implementing the ideas recommended in those focus groups.

    Organizations generally are not as nimble as forum members. There is a fair amount of red tape. This is why I say 'stay positive' in your honest feedback, and be sure to provide your feedback. The company as a whole is listening to your feedback on these forums in addition to other places. It would make their jobs much more enjoyable if we can stay positive ourselves. No one can completely insulate themselves from constant negativity. We're all kinda like sponges soaking in the experiences around us. I see you are passionate about this game, and it's great. Now I don't expect people here to be perfect, everyone is entitled even to make mistakes. Hopefully you may see things slightly more the way I do, and if you don't I'll keep on believing even if you will some day, some way...lol.

    MTFBWY

    Yeah, I'd say that my experiences with the game has generally been positive (aside from the frustrating times when service goes down when I'm trying to collect extra energy). I'm just honestly blown away by the fact that this TW is going live when it seems like they didn't think out all the repercussions of what this would mean to the majority of the player base. I've given what I think are well-thought-out reasons for why this should've never been given the green light, but I've already rehashed them a million times at this point.
  • UV_
    14 posts Member
    If you don't like negativity, why are you doing such experiments on us? What did you expect? Especially claiming with such hypocrisy that the players have asked for it?
  • UV_ wrote: »
    If you don't like negativity, why are you doing such experiments on us? What did you expect? Especially claiming with such hypocrisy that the players have asked for it?

    You're not wrong. This probably should've been focus grouped instead of making everyone a guinea pig imo.
  • Comet19 wrote: »
    Vendi1983 wrote: »
    This is the guild I found him in. 200m+ GP.

    https://swgoh.gg/g/18670/mighty-chiorians/

    That’s probably the right guild. Still, my point stands. He’s way past having to strategize on who to put gear and zetas on, unlike most of the community, so this is not going to hurt him. Hence his super-positive response to this. :D

    Actually at his level it's going to be worse because generally the top 5 guilds only play each other...sometimes they branch out into the top 10. But at his level strategy plus toons is everything. That's why I don't believe they came up with a strategy in 5 minutes unless the strategy was just 'the heck with it, we're not going to try'.
  • LoreleiPhoenix
    137 posts Member
    edited January 12
    Discord has malfunctioned/crashed (they are letting people back in slowly)...I wonder if this is related...
    Have you ever played with dominos?
  • ImYourHuckleberry
    1415 posts Member
    edited January 14
    All this is based on a lack of communication.
    Adding clarity on the plans for upcomming TWs would have definately helped.

    No snark intended, but it is not in EA's makeup to be forth coming. They neither want or require our input, approval, or advice. We can play or go away. Either way they will not change, not one little bit.

    I know not a response to my post, but I'll give a quick response to yours. If what you say is true, there's no need for a forum I guess. But I see we do have a forum. I wonder what that could mean? Do you have any ideas why a forum is maintained?

    Most companies have message forums as a user generated FAQ/Helpdesk. In this case the players answer repetitive questions, freeing up support personnel. They also serve as a knowledgebase for players to learn how to operate the game, solve issues, suggest alternate ideas, etc. They are not for having a direct line to the developers as many think. EA is notorious for not wanting them but they concede their use, and for appearance sake they are a neccessary evil. I speak with some authority having been a volunteer and a paid moderator for commercial sites, and I have worked as a designer and have customized them for commercial companies since they came into vogue in the late 90's.

    What you say all sounds reasonable, until you really listen to what it is you say and the ethos you claim. I don't care to get into all that. It's not easy trying to be positive here...lol. It actually takes a lot of self restraint.

    Let me respond by only asking a few more questions.

    If the community is not supposed to have a 'direct line to the devs' and forums are a 'necessary evil', (1) why have a beta program and ask forum users to participate, and (2) why use random survey's in game from the community at large? Maybe I'm slow witted, but I can't reconcile your words with what I see.

    Most companies forbid their staff from interacting in forums unless their replies are read and approved. But this makes sense, it's easy to be drawn into an argument and act as a person, not an employee. Most recently it happened with a popular MMO resulting in 2 employees being terminated. (Let's not rehash that incident, that horse is long dead). The Devs here are made aware or may even read the posts. A CM is employed to act as a liaison or firewall if you will to interact as required. The days of "Hanging out" with employees are pretty much long gone. Work loads, etc. Coupled with our (the players) taking every single utterance here as gospel, hard fact, carved in stone, will absolutely happen, make it so attitude they fear saying anything, because it will be taken out of context, held against them, etc.

    Beta programs are generally used to act as load testers and to report any glaring functionality errors. They rarely are used to decide on updates being acceptable etc. They aren't the players working as testers giving advice, or voicing upset at proposed changes. When software reaches a "Beta" state it is getting ready for release. I have been a beta tester elsewhere, and each version we tested we were told "OK, go break it". And some would do just that. Seriously I interacted with testers I call scary smart. LOL So much the person we reported to would remark "I am glad you are on our side" as they could find bugs fast, sometimes serious ones.

    Wow, I'm been doing this type of stuff since the late 90's.. ok rocker and shawl please.. (I just turned 60)

    Interesting but we're way off topic, tks for rolling me down memory lane lol

    You're definitely speaking from more experience than I. I may have missed characterized the involvement of the company with the forums, and frankly I don't know. But I am certain, because it's reasonable to assume, key members of the company are aware of what is said on the forums. Nevertheless, it would definitely make the CM's job easier by remaining upbeat. I guess that's all I am trying to say.

    Edited for clarity
    Post edited by ImYourHuckleberry on
    what an ugly thing to say... does this mean we're not friends anymore?
  • Comet19 wrote: »
    Comet19 wrote: »
    Comet19 wrote: »
    All this is based on a lack of communication.
    Adding clarity on the plans for upcomming TWs would have definately helped.

    No snark intended, but it is not in EA's makeup to be forth coming. They neither want or require our input, approval, or advice. We can play or go away. Either way they will not change, not one little bit.

    I know not a response to my post, but I'll give a quick response to yours. If what you say is true, there's no need for a forum I guess. But I see we do have a forum. I wonder what that could mean? Do you have any ideas why a forum is maintained?

    Most companies have message forums as a user generated FAQ/Helpdesk. In this case the players answer repetitive questions, freeing up support personnel. They also serve as a knowledgebase for players to learn how to operate the game, solve issues, suggest alternate ideas, etc. They are not for having a direct line to the developers as many think. EA is notorious for not wanting them but they concede their use, and for appearance sake they are a neccessary evil. I speak with some authority having been a volunteer and a paid moderator for commercial sites, and I have worked as a designer and have customized them for commercial companies since they came into vogue in the late 90's.

    What you say all sounds reasonable, until you really listen to what it is you say and the ethos you claim. I don't care to get into all that. It's not easy trying to be positive here...lol. It actually takes a lot of self restraint.

    Let me respond by only asking a few more questions.

    If the community is not supposed to have a 'direct line to the devs' and forums are a 'necessary evil', (1) why have a beta program and ask forum users to participate, and (2) why use random survey's in game from the community at large? Maybe I'm slow witted, but I can't reconcile your words with what I see.
    Wait, there’s a beta program and in-game surveys?

    https://forums.galaxy-of-heroes.starwars.ea.com/discussion/164646/dev-blog-community-improvements-3-29-18#latest

    Huh. Never got one for as long as I've played. I do remember hearing about them running focus groups but not implementing the ideas recommended in those focus groups.

    Organizations generally are not as nimble as forum members. There is a fair amount of red tape. This is why I say 'stay positive' in your honest feedback, and be sure to provide your feedback. The company as a whole is listening to your feedback on these forums in addition to other places. It would make their jobs much more enjoyable if we can stay positive ourselves. No one can completely insulate themselves from constant negativity. We're all kinda like sponges soaking in the experiences around us. I see you are passionate about this game, and it's great. Now I don't expect people here to be perfect, everyone is entitled even to make mistakes. Hopefully you may see things slightly more the way I do, and if you don't I'll keep on believing even if you will some day, some way...lol.

    MTFBWY

    Yeah, I'd say that my experiences with the game has generally been positive (aside from the frustrating times when service goes down when I'm trying to collect extra energy). I'm just honestly blown away by the fact that this TW is going live when it seems like they didn't think out all the repercussions of what this would mean to the majority of the player base. I've given what I think are well-thought-out reasons for why this should've never been given the green light, but I've already rehashed them a million times at this point.

    I'm glad you provide your feedback! Keep on! You do have a voice, and it's heard.
    what an ugly thing to say... does this mean we're not friends anymore?
  • ...
    All this is based on a lack of communication.
    Adding clarity on the plans for upcomming TWs would have definately helped.

    No snark intended, but it is not in EA's makeup to be forth coming. They neither want or require our input, approval, or advice. We can play or go away. Either way they will not change, not one little bit.

    I know not a response to my post, but I'll give a quick response to yours. If what you say is true, there's no need for a forum I guess. But I see we do have a forum. I wonder what that could mean? Do you have any ideas why a forum is maintained?

    Most companies have message forums as a user generated FAQ/Helpdesk. In this case the players answer repetitive questions, freeing up support personnel. They also serve as a knowledgebase for players to learn how to operate the game, solve issues, suggest alternate ideas, etc. They are not for having a direct line to the developers as many think. EA is notorious for not wanting them but they concede their use, and for appearance sake they are a neccessary evil. I speak with some authority having been a volunteer and a paid moderator for commercial sites, and I have worked as a designer and have customized them for commercial companies since they came into vogue in the late 90's.

    What you say all sounds reasonable, until you really listen to what it is you say and the ethos you claim. I don't care to get into all that. It's not easy trying to be positive here...lol. It actually takes a lot of self restraint.

    Let me respond by only asking a few more questions.

    If the community is not supposed to have a 'direct line to the devs' and forums are a 'necessary evil', (1) why have a beta program and ask forum users to participate, and (2) why use random survey's in game from the community at large? Maybe I'm slow witted, but I can't reconcile your words with what I see.

    Most companies forbid their staff from interacting in forums unless their replies are read and approved. But this makes sense, it's easy to be drawn into an argument and act as a person, not an employee. Most recently it happened with a popular MMO resulting in 2 employees being terminated. (Let's not rehash that incident, that horse is long dead). The Devs here are made aware or may even read the posts. A CM is employed to act as a liaison or firewall if you will to interact as required. The days of "Hanging out" with employees are pretty much long gone. Work loads, etc. Coupled with our (the players) taking every single utterance here as gospel, hard fact, carved in stone, will absolutely happen, make it so attitude they fear saying anything, because it will be taken out of context, held against them, etc.

    Beta programs are generally used to act as load testers and to report any glaring functionality errors. They rarely are used to decide on updates being acceptable etc. They aren't the players working as testers giving advice, or voicing upset at proposed changes. When software reaches a "Beta" state it is getting ready for release. I have been a beta tester elsewhere, and each version we tested we were told "OK, go break it". And some would do just that. Seriously I interacted with testers I call scary smart. LOL So much the person we reported to would remark "I am glad you are on our side" as they could find bugs fast, sometimes serious ones.

    Wow, I'm been doing this type of stuff since the late 90's.. ok rocker and shawl please.. (I just turned 60)

    Interesting but we're way off topic, tks for rolling me down memory lane lol

    You're definitely speaking from more experience than I. I may have missed characterized the involvement of the company with the forums, and frankly I don't have 1st hand knowledge. But I am certain, because it's reasonable to assume, key members of the company are aware of what is said on the forums. Nevertheless, it would definitely make the CM's job easier by remaining upbeat. I guess that's all I am trying to say.

    To finish a thought, it's tricky for developers to hear advice from testers. More than likely they use private forums or something similar to interact. Those forums are monitored for progress, results, etc. To that end if devs appear like they really need advice on how changes will be received, or where to go next, those monitoring may feel like they are not up to the task. Slippery slope.

    Thst said, CG how about offering top rewards, win or lose for the innagural voyage of this approach?
    Leader: Grey Area 51 - My Squads: https://swgoh.gg/p/716522998/
  • I'm extremely critical about this ban of characters. I think it's the single worst decision every made by the dev team, but I took a step back for a minute and tried to see that big picture.
    With the massive backlash to these character bans, CG is moving ahead as if there's no outcry whatsoever. To me there appears to be another motive.
    Notice there was a note that they had not yet find an acceptable solution to the zFinn/C3P0 cheese team. In case you aren't aware, that team features the reliable double tap from zHan Solo, which nearly everyone in the endgame has acquired. Ezra and Leia work as well, but the fact that Han goes first helps this team get off the ground in a PvP scenario, and start the expose train early. This interaction could potentially prevent the opposing team from taking a turn.
    Now if you look at "CGs choice" of the unavailable characters, you'll notice it contains Han Solo. Therefore, they chose, deliberately, to remove Han Solo from TW. This effectively breaks the zFinn cheese team because going first is now no longer guaranteed.

    Conspiracy theory:. This whole "community style" TW was staged due to any guild potentially being able to field fifty of these teams. They really only wanted to control the zFinn cheese, even if they weren't ready for an answer in the sith raid, so to prevent further backlash from barring one or two toons, they package it up as a "community TW" until they have prepared a fix.

    Thoughts? Or should I just pick up the pitchfork again?
  • Silent1018 wrote: »
    SoonerJBD wrote: »
    CG silence does not mean CG isn't listening. Perhaps they just aren't ready to comment. But the devs have on numerous occasions on these forums and on other public places expressed their love of the game and of SW in general. This is not just a business for many of them; it's also their passion. SW has brought us all together, introducing people to others from all across the world. It's truly amazing to see! I believe CG is made of up regular people like Sven, and many others who are behind the scenes, and they all really do want to meet the expectations of the community, keep the game fresh and exciting, and innovate in fun ways.

    I understand the responses many have made regarding the TW 'ban' on premium toons. You paid or invested lots of time and energy, for toons and now can't use them. Or the inconvenience of mod switching from banned toons to viable ones. Or the disparate impact to gamers with smaller rosters. I only want to encourage you to be positive and upbeat, but continue to express your opinions, and if possible remain civilized. Don't feel that you are not being heard, because you are. Their are thousands and thousands of views on these threads, and I would bet RL money that a lot of those views are from CG/EA staffers, from top to bottom.

    I’m disinclined to give them the benefit of the doubt anymore. I don’t believe them when they say they play the game too or spend their own money on it. I think it is a lie. Because I simply can’t believe that anyone who plays this game seriously or cares about it beyond simply a paycheck would make this decision. Further, the messaging that says “this is what the community wanted,” is flat insulting. If they paid attention to our feedback or cared in the slightest, they would not say that. They care insofar as it helps them keep their jobs. That’s it.

    So they misunderstood our community. O well, this can happen. Onward and forward. At this point I'm going to wait and let CG team come to terms with the communities response. I understand you're passionate about the game, and that's great. It really is.

    They didn’t misunderstand the community, they blatantly ignored. There is a whole other thread with over 60 pages of negative feedback. They then proceeded to follow through with it, and are now playing coward and not responding.

    Things don't just happen on a dime. If you have unrealistic expectations, yes you'll find a way to be disappointed. I see beyond your jockeying internet reflexsive comments. I see you and a lot of other people who enjoy this game, from players like you, to developers at CG in Sacramento. I choose to see the positive in these responses here. And I respond even though I hold little hope you will choose to see it my way. I respond knowing it's very likely you'll up the ante and place even larger grander ideas dreaming up even darker motives. The little hope I have is still more than enough to keep on. I chose to see you as a passionate person who loves SW like many others here, including those you seem to hold in disdain at CG. We're actually not all that different, all of us. And I think if we all got together and had a conversation over a beer we'd get along just fine.

    I understand things don’t happen on a dime, but they asked for feedback, feedback was given then ignored. And then they had the audacity to say they we asked for the change. That’s not unrealistic expectations.
This discussion has been closed.