Lol. So we are supposed to start leveling a few toons and then they are going to completely shift the meta under our feet 2 weeks later. Then we can level up the toons we left behind.
This is the most transparent money grab yet. I think it's even worse than GG.
Sweet. Though, I wouldn't level up characters just yet. Maybe the reys of the world. You really want to wait till the fortitude changes are included.
Got to agree. I'm adding this is a blatent grab for money. Let's raise the cap so people level, then shift the meta so they either pay to keep up or be left in the dust. I'm P2P so it does not hurt me as much, but these grabs are getting old.
Lol. So we are supposed to start leveling a few toons and then they are going to completely shift the meta under our feet 2 weeks later. Then we can level up the toons we left behind.
This is the most transparent money grab yet. I think it's even worse than GG.
I don't know what the motivation is (it could be a money grab or just Ockham's Razor applies) but I agree that it is a terrible idea.
I supported the idea of having both at the same time even though most people wanted the cap raised after the combat revamp. But raising the cap first is just an incredibly awful idea. Whether it is intended to or not, it will result in a massive waste of resources unless you want to just sit at 70 (and get slaughtered in arena and GW).
This is breathtakingly horrible design.
Lol. So we are supposed to start leveling a few toons and then they are going to completely shift the meta under our feet 2 weeks later. Then we can level up the toons we left behind.
This is the most transparent money grab yet. I think it's even worse than GG.
I don't know what the motivation is (it could be a money grab or just Ockham's Razor applies) but I agree that it is a terrible idea.
I supported the idea of having both at the same time even though most people wanted the cap raised after the combat revamp. But raising the cap first is just an incredibly awful idea. Whether it is intended to or not, it will result in a massive waste of resources unless you want to just sit at 70 (and get slaughtered in arena and GW).
This is breathtakingly horrible design.
They don't care. All they care about it people will pay to level toons, realize once the meta changes that they leveled the wrong ones, and then pay to catch up.
Sweet. Though, I wouldn't level up characters just yet. Maybe the reys of the world. You really want to wait till the fortitude changes are included.
Got to agree. I'm adding this is a blatent grab for money. Let's raise the cap so people level, then shift the meta so they either pay to keep up or be left in the dust. I'm P2P so it does not hurt me as much, but these grabs are getting old.
you're pay to play? I've been away for a while; did they implement a Subscription-Only model into the game, or is it still a Free-to-play game with an Option to spend?
New player here, but played Heroes charge for a year and this game seems pretty similar.
I don't really understand the fuss though. From what I can see you need different teams for different roles (Droid Event, Galactic War, Challenges, Arena).
So what does it really matter if you level up certain chars, then things change and you have to level up others ? Not to mention, won't everyone be in the same boat ?
Sweet. Though, I wouldn't level up characters just yet. Maybe the reys of the world. You really want to wait till the fortitude changes are included.
Got to agree. I'm adding this is a blatent grab for money. Let's raise the cap so people level, then shift the meta so they either pay to keep up or be left in the dust. I'm P2P so it does not hurt me as much, but these grabs are getting old.
you're pay to play? I've been away for a while; did they implement a Subscription-Only model into the game, or is it still a Free-to-play game with an Option to spend?
P2P means you spend on the game, F2P means you don't. Do we really need this foolish debate that was done in December again?
Occam's razor is usually interpreted as, (paraphrasing) all things being equal, the simplest answer is usually the correct one.
but i'm not quite sure that i understand how it applies here
The simplest answer is that they are just doing this because X is ready and Y is not and they never really thought through what the result would be. As opposed to it being some grand conspiracy to make us pay more.
I'm going to drop like a brick in arena either way and I'm sure GW will become grueling again. I haven't been stockpiling anything. I have just been trying to get as many toons maxed out as possible.
Oh well... That is how I want to play the game so I have to live with it. In some ways I guess it could help. The more toons I have close to 7* 70 and geared up, the less work I will have to do when the changes arrive and the better chance I have of finding a combo that works.
Something tells me that this is even more of a sign that the nerf to chars like QGJ and GS is going to be significant. These are the type of toons that everyone is going to throw resources at first. EA/CG knows this.
Something tells me that this is even more of a sign that the nerf to chars like QGJ and GS is going to be significant. These are the type of toons that everyone is going to throw resources at first. EA/CG knows this.
Sadly i said thats what would happen and still think so. I really think the hidden goal here is to obsolite all the fast toons so that all the "never used ones" become instant arena gods. After a while, ppl will be sic of slow toons ruling the roost, they will cry again, and the devs will nerf them too lol
Occam's razor is usually interpreted as, (paraphrasing) all things being equal, the simplest answer is usually the correct one.
but i'm not quite sure that i understand how it applies here
The simplest answer is that they are just doing this because X is ready and Y is not and they never really thought through what the result would be. As opposed to it being some grand conspiracy to make us pay more.
That's why I mentioned Hanlon's Razor, much more apt an aphorism.
Occam's razor is usually interpreted as, (paraphrasing) all things being equal, the simplest answer is usually the correct one.
but i'm not quite sure that i understand how it applies here
The simplest answer is that they are just doing this because X is ready and Y is not and they never really thought through what the result would be. As opposed to it being some grand conspiracy to make us pay more.
Nope. The best thing is releasing the changes then later add the levels. The simplest for developers is just delaying both. This complicates things. Particularly since they've probably been testing these changes in tandem. Now when 80 breaks things people will be upset. Then when the changes break things people will be upset again a couple weeks later.
They're doing this because they have to get something out when the movie comes out on disk.
Half is ready.
They're doing this because that is where the money is at.
Occam's razor is usually interpreted as, (paraphrasing) all things being equal, the simplest answer is usually the correct one.
but i'm not quite sure that i understand how it applies here
The simplest answer is that they are just doing this because X is ready and Y is not and they never really thought through what the result would be. As opposed to it being some grand conspiracy to make us pay more.
Nope. The best thing is releasing the changes then later add the levels. The simplest for developers is just delaying both. This complicates things. Particularly since they've probably been testing these changes in tandem. Now when 80 breaks things people will be upset. Then when the changes break things people will be upset again a couple weeks later.
They're doing this because they have to get something out when the movie comes out on disk.
Half is ready.
They're doing this because that is where the money is at.
Yep. Despite being told this isn't about money, it most definitely is. We aren't dumb ea
Well played CG, well played. Good business decision.
I just wished they would have released both level cap increase and combat tuning together in April as a big monthly update. I think I need to sit back and hold on to my resources for this one.. Boring!
Replies
This is the most transparent money grab yet. I think it's even worse than GG.
Got to agree. I'm adding this is a blatent grab for money. Let's raise the cap so people level, then shift the meta so they either pay to keep up or be left in the dust. I'm P2P so it does not hurt me as much, but these grabs are getting old.
I don't know what the motivation is (it could be a money grab or just Ockham's Razor applies) but I agree that it is a terrible idea.
I supported the idea of having both at the same time even though most people wanted the cap raised after the combat revamp. But raising the cap first is just an incredibly awful idea. Whether it is intended to or not, it will result in a massive waste of resources unless you want to just sit at 70 (and get slaughtered in arena and GW).
This is breathtakingly horrible design.
You know what this is devs? DEVIOUS.
you're pay to play? I've been away for a while; did they implement a Subscription-Only model into the game, or is it still a Free-to-play game with an Option to spend?
New player here, but played Heroes charge for a year and this game seems pretty similar.
I don't really understand the fuss though. From what I can see you need different teams for different roles (Droid Event, Galactic War, Challenges, Arena).
So what does it really matter if you level up certain chars, then things change and you have to level up others ? Not to mention, won't everyone be in the same boat ?
This is why you plan for the worst ALWAYS.
my thoughts exactly.
Occam's razor is usually interpreted as, (paraphrasing) all things being equal, the simplest answer is usually the correct one.
but i'm not quite sure that i understand how it applies here
I believe will be my new team for next meta.
One word: hoard
P2P means you spend on the game, F2P means you don't. Do we really need this foolish debate that was done in December again?
Amen,lol.
Prime example of when i HATE being rite smh
Yeah I hear you man. I had a feeling they'd pull something foolish, but this is really pretty bad.
The simplest answer is that they are just doing this because X is ready and Y is not and they never really thought through what the result would be. As opposed to it being some grand conspiracy to make us pay more.
Oh well... That is how I want to play the game so I have to live with it. In some ways I guess it could help. The more toons I have close to 7* 70 and geared up, the less work I will have to do when the changes arrive and the better chance I have of finding a combo that works.
Something tells me that this is even more of a sign that the nerf to chars like QGJ and GS is going to be significant. These are the type of toons that everyone is going to throw resources at first. EA/CG knows this.
Sadly i said thats what would happen and still think so. I really think the hidden goal here is to obsolite all the fast toons so that all the "never used ones" become instant arena gods. After a while, ppl will be sic of slow toons ruling the roost, they will cry again, and the devs will nerf them too lol
That's why I mentioned Hanlon's Razor, much more apt an aphorism.
Nope. The best thing is releasing the changes then later add the levels. The simplest for developers is just delaying both. This complicates things. Particularly since they've probably been testing these changes in tandem. Now when 80 breaks things people will be upset. Then when the changes break things people will be upset again a couple weeks later.
They're doing this because they have to get something out when the movie comes out on disk.
Half is ready.
They're doing this because that is where the money is at.
Yep. Despite being told this isn't about money, it most definitely is. We aren't dumb ea
Definitely.
I just wished they would have released both level cap increase and combat tuning together in April as a big monthly update. I think I need to sit back and hold on to my resources for this one.. Boring!