Update on the Finn/Threepio Raid Interaction: Resulting Finn Modifications [MEGA]

Replies

  • I didn’t Zeta my Finn because I thought he’d get nerfed. So I missed out on possibly getting Traya easily, like other guilds have.

    I didn’t get JK Revan the first go around because I wasn’t close, and I figured: “How powerful could he really be?” So I missed out on hundreds of rewards and crystals that I could’ve gotten in Arena and elsewhere.

    No matter who usurps JKR as undisputed king/queen of the meta, there will always be only one meta: the FOMO meta.
  • mvmss
    213 posts Member
    Gorem wrote: »
    Eventually you get to a point where so many people have taken advantage of a near-infinite loop that it doesn’t even make any real sense to fix it anymore. How many people have already used this bug to get 7* Trayas and G12+ in the three months that we’ve known there has been a problem?

    I mean, my guild hasn’t been able to do it. We’re still on the outside of HSTR looking in, though we’ve almost got it... once we have enough squads to get through P3. Honestly, a lot has already been done to make sure that guilds that were just a little bit better than ours are now a LOT better.

    If I’d known it was going to take so long for the fix, I’d have zetaed my Finn. Might have Traya by now. Guess that’s my fault?

    SMH

    This is my concern, like, they said they would fix this C3 thing with Finn Before the end of last year. It is now March.

    3 potential farming months for guilds gone past. The guilds who had it ready before a "Fix" was announced to happen were able to do it, Finn still remained an excellent Zeta to have outside of HSTR. His lead is awesome, one of the best zeta leads in the entire game. Then later we get word that Finn's lead will be getting the fix to close the loop (And just Finn's, not even CLS's). So now we find out that Finn's lead, one of the best leads to zeta in the game, will be forever worse then it ever was? But then that still doesn't come into effect for weeks and still hasn't.

    So, even if you'd zeta'd Finn at the start of this, 3months of HSTR would be way worth it.

    This whole situation could have been avoided quite easily. Just from the start they could have said "HSTR is over a year old now, one phase being solo'd is fine" and be done with it. But that is why I have always thought that this change was happening because Finn could beat Revan. There are a lot less Finn lead arena teams now then there would have been, beating Revan, if they had never announced this change. Because seriously. CLS can solo p3.


    Look, it really only takes 1 ZFinn paired with 1 3p0, Chewie, Han and Leia, to solo P3. You need one player, out of 50, in your guild, to have those characters and you clear p3, as long as this person knows what he's doing.

    I have just unlocked Traya - I believe I'm the 3rd person on my guild to unlock her -, so, to give you a perspective, in terms of timing, we beat it for the very first time when 3p0 came out, without the loop.

    Sinxe 3p0 came back for the 2nd time, we are using the loop to spread the Sith Smiter achievement around, among those who have all the required characters. We don't need the loop to beat it at all, at this point, but, yes, it does make life a lot easier.

    My point is, if you nobody in your guild has ZFinn at this point, while having all the other characters to solo P3, and your wall on HRST is P3, well... you should have had that zeta long ago. Not because of the HSTR, but all other areas of the game. The current synnergy between 3p0 and Finn is off the charts.

    For us, the real hurdle was P1, because a lot of people in our guild didn't want to farm the "useless" vets. It ended up costing us a lot of time. P3 was a wall for a while, but people eventually worked their Chexmix teams. Chexmix is HORRIBLE to run. I hate the absurd amount of retreats I have to go through to get a 2.5m run. Some people run Deathstorm and they say it's also a nightmare to set up properly.

    P3 is a big headache, plain and simple.
  • I didn’t Zeta my Finn because I thought he’d get nerfed. So I missed out on possibly getting Traya easily, like other guilds have.

    I didn’t get JK Revan the first go around because I wasn’t close, and I figured: “How powerful could he really be?” So I missed out on hundreds of rewards and crystals that I could’ve gotten in Arena and elsewhere.

    No matter who usurps JKR as undisputed king/queen of the meta, there will always be only one meta: the FOMO meta.

    Fomo is real!

    Finn was my 2nd zeta. Even if they do change it and refund it , that zeta will remain. I didn’t get JKR because I chose not to. Way too expensive and the requiremts were malarkey.

    I think cg wisened up though because it appears I’m closer to whatever is coming next. That carrot is closer which means no fomo is within a grasp and based on previous fomo I feel like Darth Revan will make more money.
  • I believe the zeta should be refunded, if change is to be made. I was tired of the finn rebels meta anyway.....
  • So, who's idea was it to HAVE THE SECOND RELEASE OF C3PO BEFORE fixing any unintended interaction C3PO has with others? That combined with letting Finn and C3PO solo p3 for 3 months has created a huge push by players to unlock C3PO, many have dedicated their last 3 months to farming ewoks to get C3PO to make this team.

    If the plan is to change zFinn becuase of the interaction zFinn has with C3PO - the second release of C3PO should have been delayed until after the NERF. This would have avoided any "bait and switch" type that are sure to follow from the effected players.

    Actions like this can be the straw that breaks a lot of camels backs, and even if they are not immediately visible these actions obviously have long term effects on the player base.

    Giving my feedback, from a player perspective. Who ever made this decision at CG should consider the players perspective. Maybe they did, if so great. I wanted to bring this up in case they didn't see the negative implications of delaying a nerf until after the second release. Now we are downstream so it is something to consider.
  • mvmss
    213 posts Member
    I think 3p0 doesn't need the Finn mechanic to be worth investing in Ewoks for his unlock. He is a very powerful character on his own, with synnergies through the roof with 5 (!!!!) different factions. Finn is just one lead of one such possibilities.

    Heck, Ewoks alone are worth the investment. Murder bears are for real!

    I don't see it like some of you do, on this regard. I actually prefer CG to take the time to do a proper rework on the mechanics than rush something and risk amplifying the problem even further.
  • Dk_rek
    3299 posts Member
    I got to solo haat today with zfinn... while its nice 2-4 auto at least i canfall back on yolo
  • Slaveen
    472 posts Member
    When is this change going to happen?
  • mvmss
    213 posts Member
    Slaveen wrote: »
    When is this change going to happen?

    When it does. CG said they were still working on it. No need to rush :#
  • Slaveen wrote: »
    When is this change going to happen?

    I hoop never, especially for HAAT, this raid whas about time to be able to solo it. So time comsuming otherwise and most of the times I only join and don't play it.

  • Really hope that the developers aren't turning Finn into a PVP dumpster fire! Especially with Finn nerfed, the only reliable Revan/Geos/Clones counters will literally be themselves! Which isn't how RPG's are supposed to work! Most basic RPG's dont state "The weakness for this character is the same character".

    Once again, really hope the developers are doing right by us!
  • Slaveen wrote: »
    When is this change going to happen?

    Well it was announced on December 17, 2018, and today is March 11, 2019. Based off the fact its been 83ish days and nothing has happened, I wouldn’t try to plan on anything. There is no way to know when the changes will go live and if the changes will be the same ones they previously mentioned. They could be making additional changes for all we know. Given the abhorrent way CG has handled this, it’s impossible to plan ahead.
  • mvmss
    213 posts Member
    Well, ZFinn was a big part on my GA win today. I got a full health/prot win vs an arena Revan squad. I won by 5 points
  • mvmss wrote: »
    Well, ZFinn was a big part on my GA win today. I got a full health/prot win vs an arena Revan squad. I won by 5 points

    Same for me, I only won my GA due to zFinn because Revan owners love putting him in the front assuming you have nothing to counter him because we all know there is basically nothing that reliably counters Revan but zFinn or Revan with fantastic mods. It's the exact same scenario for TW.
  • Has this nerf came into play yet?
  • Don't touch Finn. If you're unhappy with people soloing P3 of the raid, change P3.

    Make traya unaffected by any debuff when toppled. Not she resists them, not she's immune, just that when a debuff is attempted to apply it's as if it didn't happen. This stops Finn and CLS loops, leaves chexmix as a viable team, and doesn't kill off Finn resistance that we have all come to know and love.
  • StarSon
    4306 posts Member
    Don't touch Finn. If you're unhappy with people soloing P3 of the raid, change P3.

    If P3 was the only issue, I'd imagine that they would just change it. But the infinite loop in other areas (namely arena) means they can't just leave Finn, or they would always have to build in something to counter it.
  • KM1
    145 posts Member
    StarSon wrote: »
    Don't touch Finn. If you're unhappy with people soloing P3 of the raid, change P3.

    If P3 was the only issue, I'd imagine that they would just change it. But the infinite loop in other areas (namely arena) means they can't just leave Finn, or they would always have to build in something to counter it.

    If this was really the case, you would see a ton of Finn teams in the arena. As a great man once said, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". How many Finn teams do you see in your Arena? If you say "people just use them to climb", is no one climbing now?! Amazing!!
  • StarSon wrote: »
    Don't touch Finn. If you're unhappy with people soloing P3 of the raid, change P3.

    If P3 was the only issue, I'd imagine that they would just change it. But the infinite loop in other areas (namely arena) means they can't just leave Finn, or they would always have to build in something to counter it.

    P3 IS the only issue. CG has said as much.
  • StarSon
    4306 posts Member
    KM1 wrote: »
    StarSon wrote: »
    Don't touch Finn. If you're unhappy with people soloing P3 of the raid, change P3.

    If P3 was the only issue, I'd imagine that they would just change it. But the infinite loop in other areas (namely arena) means they can't just leave Finn, or they would always have to build in something to counter it.

    If this was really the case, you would see a ton of Finn teams in the arena. As a great man once said, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". How many Finn teams do you see in your Arena? If you say "people just use them to climb", is no one climbing now?! Amazing!!

    I have already had this debate a few pages ago, and will not repeat all of it. But JKR *has* a counter already in Savior, which is why zFinn isn't meta right now, even though it can still win on defense against JKR because sometimes the JKR offense team just won't get a turn. If you don't think that's a problem, I can't help you.
    StarSon wrote: »
    Don't touch Finn. If you're unhappy with people soloing P3 of the raid, change P3.

    If P3 was the only issue, I'd imagine that they would just change it. But the infinite loop in other areas (namely arena) means they can't just leave Finn, or they would always have to build in something to counter it.

    P3 IS the only issue. CG has said as much.

    Quote, please.
  • Kyno wrote: »
    mvmss wrote: »
    mvmss wrote: »
    Well, it seems that, contrary to what some were defending here, after ONE brief, but informative and suffient reply from CG, there seems to be a much more civilized behavior on everyone's end, doesn't it?

    It takes 2 to tango outside of the choir room. If you often give the other cheek around (aka, being civil and polite even when you are being ignored or disrespected), you are risking getting a second haymaker to your face. Sad real life truth is one has to be rude, from time to time, to get things going.

    Anyways, I am still using Finn on arena, not because I don't have Revan or can't win with him. Simply because of how Finn makes Revan go down fast and batrles don't time out. Ever. Finn is great.

    If CG has determined that Finn must change for the game to keep evolving, I stongly suggest adopting the policy of refunding at least the top end materials to the players - and that goes for every future rework.

    Is a policy like that is implemented, it will show a greater respect for the player base (consumers), who will have the choice of reinvesting the omegas and zetas however they see fit. If refunding gets too complicated to implement (I am an ape, when it comes to coding), than a compensation would also be respectful.

    Obviously, it will not make everyone happy, whichever path is chosen, but sometimes it comes down to minimizing damage.

    Not sure what you're saying, That it's OK to act immature if it gets what you want. Doesn't change my point that you're still responsible for your own behavior and not CG. Repeating your ideas over and over doesn't move responsibility to CG dev team. I think CG team was benevolent here not because of the forums rashness, but despite the forums rashness.

    I apologize if I didn't make myself clear. I'm not a native English speaker, as you might have noticed.

    I said all it took was a simple and clear answer that CG is still looking into finding a solution, that the opinions expressed here are, at the very least, being read and the fallout ended. Or haven't you noticed?

    By the way, when you go to McDonalds and they give you your order is not because they are "benevolent". It's just their job. They get paid for it, you know.

    And when you go to McDonald's and speak the way some have spoken here to the teller, or just in general to the staff, people dont generally say "it's ok, he has been waiting for his food for a while". They would think it was rude, and maybe they wouldnt step in, but they wouldnt condone it.

    My point has been, if we as a collective kept that (or worked towards that)attitude here, maybe we could raise things up a little bit on our end.

    Ok, now let’s work that McDonald’s example into something that more closely resembles this scenario, because it’s definitely not the same as just waiting for your food.

    Imagine you ordered and paid for a cheeseburger. Now imagine instead of getting said cheeseburger, you were handed a salad, and the staff member says “We’re giving you this salad because we think you need this healthier option”. You, rightfully so, are a little miffed and ask for your correct order or at least a refund. The staff member then turns around to face the kitchen and proceeds to ignore you. Are they even listening? Maybe, but they’re not acknowledging, so you can’t be sure. They definitely don’t appear to be doing anything to rectify or defuse the situation. You’re just left there at the counter staring at a salad you didn’t want or order.

    If I saw all this going on as an impartial observer, I would not fault that customer one bit for getting a little heated or upset over the situation, especially if the staff member continued to keep their back turned and appear to ignore the customer.

    I mean who the heck wants a salad when they were looking forward to that cheeseburger?

    ETA: Now, if I saw the staff member engaging and trying to have a constructive dialogue with the customer to resolve the situation and the customer was still screaming their head off, that’d be a different situation to me. Then they’d be a ****. You seem to think that’s what’s happening here, whereas I see the former scenario.

    For this to more closely resemble this scenario you would need an assistant manager standing there telling you that you shouldn't be mad, that's it's your fault your mad, and that they never said either one of those things.
  • SmurfLAX28
    288 posts Member
    edited March 2019
    StarSon wrote: »
    KM1 wrote: »
    StarSon wrote: »
    Don't touch Finn. If you're unhappy with people soloing P3 of the raid, change P3.

    If P3 was the only issue, I'd imagine that they would just change it. But the infinite loop in other areas (namely arena) means they can't just leave Finn, or they would always have to build in something to counter it.

    If this was really the case, you would see a ton of Finn teams in the arena. As a great man once said, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". How many Finn teams do you see in your Arena? If you say "people just use them to climb", is no one climbing now?! Amazing!!

    I have already had this debate a few pages ago, and will not repeat all of it. But JKR *has* a counter already in Savior, which is why zFinn isn't meta right now, even though it can still win on defense against JKR because sometimes the JKR offense team just won't get a turn. If you don't think that's a problem, I can't help you.
    StarSon wrote: »
    Don't touch Finn. If you're unhappy with people soloing P3 of the raid, change P3.

    If P3 was the only issue, I'd imagine that they would just change it. But the infinite loop in other areas (namely arena) means they can't just leave Finn, or they would always have to build in something to counter it.

    P3 IS the only issue. CG has said as much.

    Quote, please.

    "Cool video and cool strategy. Wanted to chime in real quick and say that we have no intention of changing this interaction or strategy only for the AA..."

    They knew that the interaction was completely doable for an "infinite loop" and even said that it completely destroying the HAAT isn't worthy of doing anything for it... You're trying to tell me that they knew a loop (based on tenacity) was possible and yet it never crossed there mind that it may possibly work in arena too?
    ....
    https://www.reddit.com/r/SWGalaxyOfHeroes/comments/a6d2el/this_is_the_droid_youre_looking_for/?utm_source=reddit-android
  • Kyno wrote: »
    mvmss wrote: »
    mvmss wrote: »
    Well, it seems that, contrary to what some were defending here, after ONE brief, but informative and suffient reply from CG, there seems to be a much more civilized behavior on everyone's end, doesn't it?

    It takes 2 to tango outside of the choir room. If you often give the other cheek around (aka, being civil and polite even when you are being ignored or disrespected), you are risking getting a second haymaker to your face. Sad real life truth is one has to be rude, from time to time, to get things going.

    Anyways, I am still using Finn on arena, not because I don't have Revan or can't win with him. Simply because of how Finn makes Revan go down fast and batrles don't time out. Ever. Finn is great.

    If CG has determined that Finn must change for the game to keep evolving, I stongly suggest adopting the policy of refunding at least the top end materials to the players - and that goes for every future rework.

    Is a policy like that is implemented, it will show a greater respect for the player base (consumers), who will have the choice of reinvesting the omegas and zetas however they see fit. If refunding gets too complicated to implement (I am an ape, when it comes to coding), than a compensation would also be respectful.

    Obviously, it will not make everyone happy, whichever path is chosen, but sometimes it comes down to minimizing damage.

    Not sure what you're saying, That it's OK to act immature if it gets what you want. Doesn't change my point that you're still responsible for your own behavior and not CG. Repeating your ideas over and over doesn't move responsibility to CG dev team. I think CG team was benevolent here not because of the forums rashness, but despite the forums rashness.

    I apologize if I didn't make myself clear. I'm not a native English speaker, as you might have noticed.

    I said all it took was a simple and clear answer that CG is still looking into finding a solution, that the opinions expressed here are, at the very least, being read and the fallout ended. Or haven't you noticed?

    By the way, when you go to McDonalds and they give you your order is not because they are "benevolent". It's just their job. They get paid for it, you know.

    And when you go to McDonald's and speak the way some have spoken here to the teller, or just in general to the staff, people dont generally say "it's ok, he has been waiting for his food for a while". They would think it was rude, and maybe they wouldnt step in, but they wouldnt condone it.

    My point has been, if we as a collective kept that (or worked towards that)attitude here, maybe we could raise things up a little bit on our end.

    Ok, now let’s work that McDonald’s example into something that more closely resembles this scenario, because it’s definitely not the same as just waiting for your food.

    Imagine you ordered and paid for a cheeseburger. Now imagine instead of getting said cheeseburger, you were handed a salad, and the staff member says “We’re giving you this salad because we think you need this healthier option”. You, rightfully so, are a little miffed and ask for your correct order or at least a refund. The staff member then turns around to face the kitchen and proceeds to ignore you. Are they even listening? Maybe, but they’re not acknowledging, so you can’t be sure. They definitely don’t appear to be doing anything to rectify or defuse the situation. You’re just left there at the counter staring at a salad you didn’t want or order.

    If I saw all this going on as an impartial observer, I would not fault that customer one bit for getting a little heated or upset over the situation, especially if the staff member continued to keep their back turned and appear to ignore the customer.

    I mean who the heck wants a salad when they were looking forward to that cheeseburger?

    ETA: Now, if I saw the staff member engaging and trying to have a constructive dialogue with the customer to resolve the situation and the customer was still screaming their head off, that’d be a different situation to me. Then they’d be a ****. You seem to think that’s what’s happening here, whereas I see the former scenario.

    For this to more closely resemble this scenario you would need an assistant manager standing there telling you that you shouldn't be mad, that's it's your fault your mad, and that they never said either one of those things.

    Nah, our example is more like they give you a cheeseburger, you take a bite out of it, then they come up to you take away your cheeseburger and give you a salad, saying we made our burgers better, here you go!
  • Madlax
    119 posts Member
    Kyno wrote: »
    mvmss wrote: »
    mvmss wrote: »
    Well, it seems that, contrary to what some were defending here, after ONE brief, but informative and suffient reply from CG, there seems to be a much more civilized behavior on everyone's end, doesn't it?

    It takes 2 to tango outside of the choir room. If you often give the other cheek around (aka, being civil and polite even when you are being ignored or disrespected), you are risking getting a second haymaker to your face. Sad real life truth is one has to be rude, from time to time, to get things going.

    Anyways, I am still using Finn on arena, not because I don't have Revan or can't win with him. Simply because of how Finn makes Revan go down fast and batrles don't time out. Ever. Finn is great.

    If CG has determined that Finn must change for the game to keep evolving, I stongly suggest adopting the policy of refunding at least the top end materials to the players - and that goes for every future rework.

    Is a policy like that is implemented, it will show a greater respect for the player base (consumers), who will have the choice of reinvesting the omegas and zetas however they see fit. If refunding gets too complicated to implement (I am an ape, when it comes to coding), than a compensation would also be respectful.

    Obviously, it will not make everyone happy, whichever path is chosen, but sometimes it comes down to minimizing damage.

    Not sure what you're saying, That it's OK to act immature if it gets what you want. Doesn't change my point that you're still responsible for your own behavior and not CG. Repeating your ideas over and over doesn't move responsibility to CG dev team. I think CG team was benevolent here not because of the forums rashness, but despite the forums rashness.

    I apologize if I didn't make myself clear. I'm not a native English speaker, as you might have noticed.

    I said all it took was a simple and clear answer that CG is still looking into finding a solution, that the opinions expressed here are, at the very least, being read and the fallout ended. Or haven't you noticed?

    By the way, when you go to McDonalds and they give you your order is not because they are "benevolent". It's just their job. They get paid for it, you know.

    And when you go to McDonald's and speak the way some have spoken here to the teller, or just in general to the staff, people dont generally say "it's ok, he has been waiting for his food for a while". They would think it was rude, and maybe they wouldnt step in, but they wouldnt condone it.

    My point has been, if we as a collective kept that (or worked towards that)attitude here, maybe we could raise things up a little bit on our end.

    Ok, now let’s work that McDonald’s example into something that more closely resembles this scenario, because it’s definitely not the same as just waiting for your food.

    Imagine you ordered and paid for a cheeseburger. Now imagine instead of getting said cheeseburger, you were handed a salad, and the staff member says “We’re giving you this salad because we think you need this healthier option”. You, rightfully so, are a little miffed and ask for your correct order or at least a refund. The staff member then turns around to face the kitchen and proceeds to ignore you. Are they even listening? Maybe, but they’re not acknowledging, so you can’t be sure. They definitely don’t appear to be doing anything to rectify or defuse the situation. You’re just left there at the counter staring at a salad you didn’t want or order.

    If I saw all this going on as an impartial observer, I would not fault that customer one bit for getting a little heated or upset over the situation, especially if the staff member continued to keep their back turned and appear to ignore the customer.

    I mean who the heck wants a salad when they were looking forward to that cheeseburger?

    ETA: Now, if I saw the staff member engaging and trying to have a constructive dialogue with the customer to resolve the situation and the customer was still screaming their head off, that’d be a different situation to me. Then they’d be a ****. You seem to think that’s what’s happening here, whereas I see the former scenario.

    For this to more closely resemble this scenario you would need an assistant manager standing there telling you that you shouldn't be mad, that's it's your fault your mad, and that they never said either one of those things.

    Wrong.. for this scenario to work you would have signed a contract upon entering the MCDoof, saying they could serve you whatever they like...
    Cause thats exactly what you signed when you aggreed to the user aggreements and created an account here, heck, its the same in every single online game.
    So stop with those useles real life examples which just dont fit.
  • Madlax wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    mvmss wrote: »
    mvmss wrote: »
    Well, it seems that, contrary to what some were defending here, after ONE brief, but informative and suffient reply from CG, there seems to be a much more civilized behavior on everyone's end, doesn't it?

    It takes 2 to tango outside of the choir room. If you often give the other cheek around (aka, being civil and polite even when you are being ignored or disrespected), you are risking getting a second haymaker to your face. Sad real life truth is one has to be rude, from time to time, to get things going.

    Anyways, I am still using Finn on arena, not because I don't have Revan or can't win with him. Simply because of how Finn makes Revan go down fast and batrles don't time out. Ever. Finn is great.

    If CG has determined that Finn must change for the game to keep evolving, I stongly suggest adopting the policy of refunding at least the top end materials to the players - and that goes for every future rework.

    Is a policy like that is implemented, it will show a greater respect for the player base (consumers), who will have the choice of reinvesting the omegas and zetas however they see fit. If refunding gets too complicated to implement (I am an ape, when it comes to coding), than a compensation would also be respectful.

    Obviously, it will not make everyone happy, whichever path is chosen, but sometimes it comes down to minimizing damage.

    Not sure what you're saying, That it's OK to act immature if it gets what you want. Doesn't change my point that you're still responsible for your own behavior and not CG. Repeating your ideas over and over doesn't move responsibility to CG dev team. I think CG team was benevolent here not because of the forums rashness, but despite the forums rashness.

    I apologize if I didn't make myself clear. I'm not a native English speaker, as you might have noticed.

    I said all it took was a simple and clear answer that CG is still looking into finding a solution, that the opinions expressed here are, at the very least, being read and the fallout ended. Or haven't you noticed?

    By the way, when you go to McDonalds and they give you your order is not because they are "benevolent". It's just their job. They get paid for it, you know.

    And when you go to McDonald's and speak the way some have spoken here to the teller, or just in general to the staff, people dont generally say "it's ok, he has been waiting for his food for a while". They would think it was rude, and maybe they wouldnt step in, but they wouldnt condone it.

    My point has been, if we as a collective kept that (or worked towards that)attitude here, maybe we could raise things up a little bit on our end.

    Ok, now let’s work that McDonald’s example into something that more closely resembles this scenario, because it’s definitely not the same as just waiting for your food.

    Imagine you ordered and paid for a cheeseburger. Now imagine instead of getting said cheeseburger, you were handed a salad, and the staff member says “We’re giving you this salad because we think you need this healthier option”. You, rightfully so, are a little miffed and ask for your correct order or at least a refund. The staff member then turns around to face the kitchen and proceeds to ignore you. Are they even listening? Maybe, but they’re not acknowledging, so you can’t be sure. They definitely don’t appear to be doing anything to rectify or defuse the situation. You’re just left there at the counter staring at a salad you didn’t want or order.

    If I saw all this going on as an impartial observer, I would not fault that customer one bit for getting a little heated or upset over the situation, especially if the staff member continued to keep their back turned and appear to ignore the customer.

    I mean who the heck wants a salad when they were looking forward to that cheeseburger?

    ETA: Now, if I saw the staff member engaging and trying to have a constructive dialogue with the customer to resolve the situation and the customer was still screaming their head off, that’d be a different situation to me. Then they’d be a ****. You seem to think that’s what’s happening here, whereas I see the former scenario.

    For this to more closely resemble this scenario you would need an assistant manager standing there telling you that you shouldn't be mad, that's it's your fault your mad, and that they never said either one of those things.

    Wrong.. for this scenario to work you would have signed a contract upon entering the MCDoof, saying they could serve you whatever they like...
    Cause thats exactly what you signed when you aggreed to the user aggreements and created an account here, heck, its the same in every single online game.
    So stop with those useles real life examples which just dont fit.

    Strictly speaking the 'contract' would of been a lengthy block of text on the wall, with something in there that says "upon entering here you agree we can serve you whatever we like" - and you wouldn't need to sign it for McDs to consider it binding.

    Why is that relevant? Some jurisdictions (parts of Canada is one I believe for example) don't consider a contract fully binding on a consumer if the consumer has no opportunity to negotiate the terms.
  • mvmss
    213 posts Member
    Madlax wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    mvmss wrote: »
    mvmss wrote: »
    Well, it seems that, contrary to what some were defending here, after ONE brief, but informative and suffient reply from CG, there seems to be a much more civilized behavior on everyone's end, doesn't it?

    It takes 2 to tango outside of the choir room. If you often give the other cheek around (aka, being civil and polite even when you are being ignored or disrespected), you are risking getting a second haymaker to your face. Sad real life truth is one has to be rude, from time to time, to get things going.

    Anyways, I am still using Finn on arena, not because I don't have Revan or can't win with him. Simply because of how Finn makes Revan go down fast and batrles don't time out. Ever. Finn is great.

    If CG has determined that Finn must change for the game to keep evolving, I stongly suggest adopting the policy of refunding at least the top end materials to the players - and that goes for every future rework.

    Is a policy like that is implemented, it will show a greater respect for the player base (consumers), who will have the choice of reinvesting the omegas and zetas however they see fit. If refunding gets too complicated to implement (I am an ape, when it comes to coding), than a compensation would also be respectful.

    Obviously, it will not make everyone happy, whichever path is chosen, but sometimes it comes down to minimizing damage.

    Not sure what you're saying, That it's OK to act immature if it gets what you want. Doesn't change my point that you're still responsible for your own behavior and not CG. Repeating your ideas over and over doesn't move responsibility to CG dev team. I think CG team was benevolent here not because of the forums rashness, but despite the forums rashness.

    I apologize if I didn't make myself clear. I'm not a native English speaker, as you might have noticed.

    I said all it took was a simple and clear answer that CG is still looking into finding a solution, that the opinions expressed here are, at the very least, being read and the fallout ended. Or haven't you noticed?

    By the way, when you go to McDonalds and they give you your order is not because they are "benevolent". It's just their job. They get paid for it, you know.

    And when you go to McDonald's and speak the way some have spoken here to the teller, or just in general to the staff, people dont generally say "it's ok, he has been waiting for his food for a while". They would think it was rude, and maybe they wouldnt step in, but they wouldnt condone it.

    My point has been, if we as a collective kept that (or worked towards that)attitude here, maybe we could raise things up a little bit on our end.

    Ok, now let’s work that McDonald’s example into something that more closely resembles this scenario, because it’s definitely not the same as just waiting for your food.

    Imagine you ordered and paid for a cheeseburger. Now imagine instead of getting said cheeseburger, you were handed a salad, and the staff member says “We’re giving you this salad because we think you need this healthier option”. You, rightfully so, are a little miffed and ask for your correct order or at least a refund. The staff member then turns around to face the kitchen and proceeds to ignore you. Are they even listening? Maybe, but they’re not acknowledging, so you can’t be sure. They definitely don’t appear to be doing anything to rectify or defuse the situation. You’re just left there at the counter staring at a salad you didn’t want or order.

    If I saw all this going on as an impartial observer, I would not fault that customer one bit for getting a little heated or upset over the situation, especially if the staff member continued to keep their back turned and appear to ignore the customer.

    I mean who the heck wants a salad when they were looking forward to that cheeseburger?

    ETA: Now, if I saw the staff member engaging and trying to have a constructive dialogue with the customer to resolve the situation and the customer was still screaming their head off, that’d be a different situation to me. Then they’d be a ****. You seem to think that’s what’s happening here, whereas I see the former scenario.

    For this to more closely resemble this scenario you would need an assistant manager standing there telling you that you shouldn't be mad, that's it's your fault your mad, and that they never said either one of those things.

    Wrong.. for this scenario to work you would have signed a contract upon entering the MCDoof, saying they could serve you whatever they like...
    Cause thats exactly what you signed when you aggreed to the user aggreements and created an account here, heck, its the same in every single online game.
    So stop with those useles real life examples which just dont fit.

    Strictly speaking the 'contract' would of been a lengthy block of text on the wall, with something in there that says "upon entering here you agree we can serve you whatever we like" - and you wouldn't need to sign it for McDs to consider it binding.

    Why is that relevant? Some jurisdictions (parts of Canada is one I believe for example) don't consider a contract fully binding on a consumer if the consumer has no opportunity to negotiate the terms.

    This is what we call "leonine clauses", which could be an exploit present in standard form contracts, where one party has no saying on the clauses - he either accepts it or he doesn't.

    There is an understanding that abusive practices should not go unpunished, even when perfectly within the terms of a standard form contract. It is a way to "bring balance to the force", if you will.
This discussion has been closed.