This needs to stop.....

This really has to stop....its absurd that a marquee toon becomes a platoon req in the middle of a TB, let alone the fact its a pay to play toon, preventing entire guilds from ever maxing platoons.

c19o8e6hzvpw.png

Replies

  • All a cash grab
  • All a cash grab

    yeah...just so darn frustrating...like do they have a moral compass there seriously?
  • This isn't a "moral" decision. It's a business decision.

    Some players spend money on the game. Their financial investment (usually) gets them a competitive advantage. In the case of Platoons, it means that guilds that have members who spend money will have a competitive advantage over guilds that are completely f2p.

    If nobody spends money on the game, it will quickly shut down, so players who spend money are funding the f2p players.

    I also find it frustrating because my guild only has a couple of guys who spend (and only on certain characters), but have recognized that it is the business model for the game, and is unlikely to change.
  • Cash grab or not, If it helps the game stay afloat then so be it.
  • jkray622 wrote: »
    This isn't a "moral" decision. It's a business decision.

    Businesses can make money and still be moral/ethical.
  • jkray622 wrote: »
    This isn't a "moral" decision. It's a business decision.

    Businesses can make money and still be moral/ethical.

    Yes, but THIS DECISION - to provide spenders with a very small competitive advantage - is neither moral nor immoral. It is moral-neutral.
  • Yup... our guild have 2 of them at it needs to be at minimum 5 stars to put it there...

    3sny1kzplnik.jpg
  • Honestly - in a game like this, I can't think of any gameplay or release-based decision that could be classified as immoral. Any decisions they make in game might make players unhappy, but they can't force you to do anything.

    Even if they announced that Darth Revan will be released, but you must pay $500 cash (no crystals, no f2p method) to get him - that's not "immoral."
  • Mr_Sausage
    1869 posts Member
    edited February 2019
    This is certainly nothing new and has been going on since the inception of TB. Just get the stars you normally get and move on.
  • ENERGYSS wrote: »
    Yup... our guild have 2 of them at it needs to be at minimum 5 stars to put it there...

    3sny1kzplnik.jpg

    I count six stars, not five.
  • jkray622 wrote: »
    Honestly - in a game like this, I can't think of any gameplay or release-based decision that could be classified as immoral. Any decisions they make in game might make players unhappy, but they can't force you to do anything.

    Even if they announced that Darth Revan will be released, but you must pay $500 cash (no crystals, no f2p method) to get him - that's not "immoral."

    Even completely changing a kit 2 years later and not refunding the zeta?
  • jkray622 wrote: »
    Honestly - in a game like this, I can't think of any gameplay or release-based decision that could be classified as immoral. Any decisions they make in game might make players unhappy, but they can't force you to do anything.

    Even if they announced that Darth Revan will be released, but you must pay $500 cash (no crystals, no f2p method) to get him - that's not "immoral."

    Even completely changing a kit 2 years later and not refunding the zeta?

    Nothing "immoral" about that.

    I think this warrants a zeta refund like they did with Daka after the Nightsister revamp, but it's a game. No one is hurt, injured, or financially impacted as a result of this change. Everyone who zeta'd Finn already received a lot of value out of having his zeta over the past 2 years - so you could consider that worth the cost of the 20 zetas.

    Additionally - they are indicating that zeta Finn can still defeat all the same squads it could defeat, and the rework can now register ~20% of HSith phase 3. Daka's zeta basically had no significant use after the Zombie rework, so I think there was a much bigger argument for refunding it.

    So is it a good decision? I think the better "Customer Service"-oriented decision would be to refund the zeta and let players decide. But just because I think it's not the best decision doesn't make it "immoral."
  • Lately, CG has done quite a number of morally/ethically questionable things. Having marquee characters in TB is NOT a big deal - nor is it anything they haven't clearly stated they would do.

    Putting some "pay to own" characters in platoons (which, if your guild is strong enough, don't matter anyway) when they have said all along they would do it is much different than, say, nerfing characters people have poured resources into (NS, zFinn, etc.) and far different from releasing intentionally misleading videos about character/team performance in an effort to deceive the player base into pouring resources into them...for example.

    If you want to hammer CG/EA for being morally barren, have at it - but there are SOOOO many better examples to take issue with than this one.
    In game name: Lucas Gregory - - - -"Whale blah grump poooop." - Ouchie

    In game guild: TNR Uprising
    I beat the REAL T7 Yoda (not the nerfed one) and did so before mods were there to help
    *This space left intentionally blank*
  • Liath
    4942 posts Member
    Dunedain wrote: »
    This really has to stop....its absurd that a marquee toon becomes a platoon req in the middle of a TB, let alone the fact its a pay to play toon, preventing entire guilds from ever maxing platoons.

    c19o8e6hzvpw.png

    What do you mean by “in the middle of TB”? B1 marquee happened before the TB started, and like all other marquees, he is in the platoons right away. He wasn’t in p1-3 because those platoons are curated.
  • jkray622 wrote: »
    Honestly - in a game like this, I can't think of any gameplay or release-based decision that could be classified as immoral. Any decisions they make in game might make players unhappy, but they can't force you to do anything.

    Even if they announced that Darth Revan will be released, but you must pay $500 cash (no crystals, no f2p method) to get him - that's not "immoral."

    Even completely changing a kit 2 years later and not refunding the zeta?

    You mean changing the kit for better than it was BEFORE C3P0 brought in a glitch to it?
  • jkray622 wrote: »
    This isn't a "moral" decision. It's a business decision.

    Some players spend money on the game. Their financial investment (usually) gets them a competitive advantage. In the case of Platoons, it means that guilds that have members who spend money will have a competitive advantage over guilds that are completely f2p.

    If nobody spends money on the game, it will quickly shut down, so players who spend money are funding the f2p players.

    I also find it frustrating because my guild only has a couple of guys who spend (and only on certain characters), but have recognized that it is the business model for the game, and is unlikely to change.

    Its amusing you pretend to know how they allocate the revenue generated from the game....cuz if they changed their business model to a yearly subscription, like so many other games out there, the game would shut down...give me a break
  • jkray622 wrote: »
    This isn't a "moral" decision. It's a business decision.
    The 2 should not be conflated or separated. Many business decisions have a moral component and many moral decisions affect business.
    This is a game though. If them doing things like this raises your blood pressure then perhaps it isn't fulfilling the things in your life you want. Time to look elsewhere?
  • TVF
    18848 posts Member
    Why necro this?
    TVF's guild is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
Sign In or Register to comment.