Another Pilotless Ship (are you kidding me?)

Prev1
ANH
13 posts Member
Dear CG:

I love SWGOH.

Ships is one of the best things in the game.

Pilotless ships reduce players' ROI on existing piloted ships, and also the average value of fleets in the game.

Would you please share with those of us who have invested in high-relic pilots, why you continue to trivialize our hard work and focus by releasing ships that can be farmed by anyone with such little effort?

At least help us understand the thinking, so those of us who did "real" work on our fleets (read: we invested in the pilots) can breathe a sigh of understanding that it's a rational approach, and that our efforts weren't wasted.

Alternatively, would you please knock it off?

Best Regards,
ANH

Replies

  • UdalCuain
    3388 posts Member
    I'm viewing this in the opposite way. It's one less ship that needs massive investment in the pilot in order to be competitive (assuming it performs as well as Hyena and the GR Y-Wing). Happy Times.
  • Iy4oy4s
    1413 posts Member
    UdalCuain wrote: »
    I'm viewing this in the opposite way. It's one less ship that needs massive investment in the pilot in order to be competitive (assuming it performs as well as Hyena and the GR Y-Wing). Happy Times.

    I’m glad we are getting something. My only gripe is the reason why. Are we getting more OT content or is this a one off? We need the road ahead to answer these questions.
  • Gifafi
    4011 posts Member
    ANH wrote: »
    Dear CG:

    I love SWGOH.

    Ships is one of the best things in the game.

    Pilotless ships reduce players' ROI on existing piloted ships, and also the average value of fleets in the game.

    Would you please share with those of us who have invested in high-relic pilots, why you continue to trivialize our hard work and focus by releasing ships that can be farmed by anyone with such little effort?


    At least help us understand the thinking, so those of us who did "real" work on our fleets (read: we invested in the pilots) can breathe a sigh of understanding that it's a rational approach, and that our efforts weren't wasted.

    Alternatively, would you please knock it off?

    Best Regards,
    ANH

    what does even mean? you are upset that a new ship replaces HT in that lineup so it can be used eleswhere, and that somehow devalues past effort, or something? so confused

    rtt: sweet, another pilotless ship!
    Maybe End Game isn't for you
  • ANH
    13 posts Member
    Gifafi wrote: »

    what does even mean? you are upset that a new ship replaces HT in that lineup so it can be used eleswhere, and that somehow devalues past effort, or something? so confused

    rtt: sweet, another pilotless ship!

    Yours is a false interpretation about what I said.

    I didn't say I was upset that a new ship replaces HT. If you disagree, re-read what I wrote. I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion, since I didn't mention HT in my post, nor did I even allude to it. Unless you think that my point about relic'd pilots was a specific allusion to HT. For the record, my point about pilot relics was not at all in reference to HT.

    So let me set that record straight. I'm happy this ship adds more ability for people to a) use their rebels again and b) replace HT. Hope that's black and white enough for you.

    What is devalued (as I already pointed out, and as people familiar with economics and returns on investment will easily recognize) is the effort we already spent on high-geared pilots. CG seems to be going down a path of releasing ONLY pilotless ships moving forward. Which does, in point of fact, reduce the amount of time and resources players must spend to make their fleets useful - on average.

    For those of us who have already done this with existing fleets and pilots, CG releasing pilotless ships reduces the average value (i.e., time and resources invested) to make fleets valuable and usable in arenas and elsewhere.

    Thanks for giving me a chance to clarify that I was not, in fact, talking at all about HT.
  • Gifafi
    4011 posts Member
    ANH wrote: »
    Gifafi wrote: »

    what does even mean? you are upset that a new ship replaces HT in that lineup so it can be used eleswhere, and that somehow devalues past effort, or something? so confused

    rtt: sweet, another pilotless ship!

    Yours is a false interpretation about what I said.

    I didn't say I was upset that a new ship replaces HT. If you disagree, re-read what I wrote. I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion, since I didn't mention HT in my post, nor did I even allude to it. Unless you think that my point about relic'd pilots was a specific allusion to HT. For the record, my point about pilot relics was not at all in reference to HT.

    So let me set that record straight. I'm happy this ship adds more ability for people to a) use their rebels again and b) replace HT. Hope that's black and white enough for you.

    What is devalued (as I already pointed out, and as people familiar with economics and returns on investment will easily recognize) is the effort we already spent on high-geared pilots. CG seems to be going down a path of releasing ONLY pilotless ships moving forward. Which does, in point of fact, reduce the amount of time and resources players must spend to make their fleets useful - on average.

    For those of us who have already done this with existing fleets and pilots, CG releasing pilotless ships reduces the average value (i.e., time and resources invested) to make fleets valuable and usable in arenas and elsewhere.

    Thanks for giving me a chance to clarify that I was not, in fact, talking at all about HT.

    I brought up HT bc this ship replaces HT. You are happy about that. got it. What I don't get is how releasing ships without pilots devalues past investment in pilots and their ships. new ships don't affect your investment and it doesn't matter that they are pilotless. for ex., if you and player x both get this new ship and max it, you will have it plus your previously invested ships, so you will both still be where you started in terms of you being ahead. it's a non-issue imo. they have a tank for rebs, but you have a tank for rebs plus can use your better-than-their HT elsewhere.
    Maybe End Game isn't for you
  • Yeah I’m sure there are some pilots in game that are pretty useless (I’m looking at you Resistance X Wing Pilot), but this doesn’t devalue other pilots in the game. This is just making it easier for everyone to access the ship without having to worry about gearing a generic no-name pilot. The droid ships are an exception, given they are their own pilot
  • TVF
    22334 posts Member
    Iy4oy4s wrote: »
    UdalCuain wrote: »
    I'm viewing this in the opposite way. It's one less ship that needs massive investment in the pilot in order to be competitive (assuming it performs as well as Hyena and the GR Y-Wing). Happy Times.

    I’m glad we are getting something. My only gripe is the reason why. Are we getting more OT content or is this a one off? We need the road ahead to answer these questions.

    Or patience.
    TVF's guild is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • Kyno
    23440 posts Moderator
    Pilot less ships are good, they simply cannot flood us with ships that would require gearing up pilots too.

    They want to give us more ships and expand that area of the game but cannot do that if it all requires gearing pilots too, it will make the overall process too slow.

    but dont you worry, i'm sure we will get more ships too that will require pilots, but it seems like they want to add a tank (or two) to the game to help round out other factions so they will have options other than HT.
  • R_Val_17
    110 posts Member
    Less credits, less relic, less zeta investment. Not seeing a negative on this one being pilotless.
  • YaeVizsla
    3395 posts Member
    ANH wrote: »
    Yours is a false interpretation about what I said.

    I didn't say I was upset that a new ship replaces HT. If you disagree, re-read what I wrote. I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion, since I didn't mention HT in my post, nor did I even allude to it. Unless you think that my point about relic'd pilots was a specific allusion to HT. For the record, my point about pilot relics was not at all in reference to HT.

    So let me set that record straight. I'm happy this ship adds more ability for people to a) use their rebels again and b) replace HT. Hope that's black and white enough for you.

    What is devalued (as I already pointed out, and as people familiar with economics and returns on investment will easily recognize) is the effort we already spent on high-geared pilots. CG seems to be going down a path of releasing ONLY pilotless ships moving forward. Which does, in point of fact, reduce the amount of time and resources players must spend to make their fleets useful - on average.

    For those of us who have already done this with existing fleets and pilots, CG releasing pilotless ships reduces the average value (i.e., time and resources invested) to make fleets valuable and usable in arenas and elsewhere.

    Thanks for giving me a chance to clarify that I was not, in fact, talking at all about HT.
    New content continuously devalues old content.

    My troopers used to be arena viable under Thrawn. Now, they barely see use, plucking off weak teams in GAC. They've been devalued by basically every team since CLS was released.

    New content devalues old content. That's the nature of the beast. The fact that the Rebel Y-Wing is pilotless is immaterial to that point.

    And no, CG is not going down a path of only releasing pilotless ships. It's just the new shiny tech that they're sprinkling in right now. Right now, the overall investment to get a fleet going can be massive. Rebels especially; Rebel pilots is the literal worst gear of the game. Pilotless ships help bring that in line.
    Still not a he.
  • ZAP
    2538 posts Member
    YaeVizsla wrote: »
    ANH wrote: »
    Yours is a false interpretation about what I said.

    I didn't say I was upset that a new ship replaces HT. If you disagree, re-read what I wrote. I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion, since I didn't mention HT in my post, nor did I even allude to it. Unless you think that my point about relic'd pilots was a specific allusion to HT. For the record, my point about pilot relics was not at all in reference to HT.

    So let me set that record straight. I'm happy this ship adds more ability for people to a) use their rebels again and b) replace HT. Hope that's black and white enough for you.

    What is devalued (as I already pointed out, and as people familiar with economics and returns on investment will easily recognize) is the effort we already spent on high-geared pilots. CG seems to be going down a path of releasing ONLY pilotless ships moving forward. Which does, in point of fact, reduce the amount of time and resources players must spend to make their fleets useful - on average.

    For those of us who have already done this with existing fleets and pilots, CG releasing pilotless ships reduces the average value (i.e., time and resources invested) to make fleets valuable and usable in arenas and elsewhere.

    Thanks for giving me a chance to clarify that I was not, in fact, talking at all about HT.
    New content continuously devalues old content.

    My troopers used to be arena viable under Thrawn. Now, they barely see use, plucking off weak teams in GAC. They've been devalued by basically every team since CLS was released.

    New content devalues old content. That's the nature of the beast. The fact that the Rebel Y-Wing is pilotless is immaterial to that point.

    And no, CG is not going down a path of only releasing pilotless ships. It's just the new shiny tech that they're sprinkling in right now. Right now, the overall investment to get a fleet going can be massive. Rebels especially; Rebel pilots is the literal worst gear of the game. Pilotless ships help bring that in line.

    I haven’t invested in some of my rebel pilots for a decent rebels fleet. If I get this y-wing, will that replace one of the rebel ships I’d rather not invest in and if so which one/s?

    Serious question.

  • YaeVizsla
    3395 posts Member
    ZAP wrote: »
    I haven’t invested in some of my rebel pilots for a decent rebels fleet. If I get this y-wing, will that replace one of the rebel ships I’d rather not invest in and if so which one/s?

    Serious question.
    If you're doing a full Rebels lineup? Probably Wedge. Which is admittedly the smallest savings, but every bit helps.
    Still not a he.
  • Rath_Tarr
    3044 posts Member
    ZAP wrote: »
    YaeVizsla wrote: »
    ANH wrote: »
    Yours is a false interpretation about what I said.

    I didn't say I was upset that a new ship replaces HT. If you disagree, re-read what I wrote. I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion, since I didn't mention HT in my post, nor did I even allude to it. Unless you think that my point about relic'd pilots was a specific allusion to HT. For the record, my point about pilot relics was not at all in reference to HT.

    So let me set that record straight. I'm happy this ship adds more ability for people to a) use their rebels again and b) replace HT. Hope that's black and white enough for you.

    What is devalued (as I already pointed out, and as people familiar with economics and returns on investment will easily recognize) is the effort we already spent on high-geared pilots. CG seems to be going down a path of releasing ONLY pilotless ships moving forward. Which does, in point of fact, reduce the amount of time and resources players must spend to make their fleets useful - on average.

    For those of us who have already done this with existing fleets and pilots, CG releasing pilotless ships reduces the average value (i.e., time and resources invested) to make fleets valuable and usable in arenas and elsewhere.

    Thanks for giving me a chance to clarify that I was not, in fact, talking at all about HT.
    New content continuously devalues old content.

    My troopers used to be arena viable under Thrawn. Now, they barely see use, plucking off weak teams in GAC. They've been devalued by basically every team since CLS was released.

    New content devalues old content. That's the nature of the beast. The fact that the Rebel Y-Wing is pilotless is immaterial to that point.

    And no, CG is not going down a path of only releasing pilotless ships. It's just the new shiny tech that they're sprinkling in right now. Right now, the overall investment to get a fleet going can be massive. Rebels especially; Rebel pilots is the literal worst gear of the game. Pilotless ships help bring that in line.

    I haven’t invested in some of my rebel pilots for a decent rebels fleet. If I get this y-wing, will that replace one of the rebel ships I’d rather not invest in and if so which one/s?

    Serious question.
    Falcon, Biggs, Y-Wing will be the new Rebel-lite starting lineup, with Cassian's, Phantom and whoever else as reinforcements.
  • ZAP
    2538 posts Member
    YaeVizsla wrote: »
    ZAP wrote: »
    I haven’t invested in some of my rebel pilots for a decent rebels fleet. If I get this y-wing, will that replace one of the rebel ships I’d rather not invest in and if so which one/s?

    Serious question.
    If you're doing a full Rebels lineup? Probably Wedge. Which is admittedly the smallest savings, but every bit helps.

    I was afraid of that lol

    Was hoping maybe one of the 2-3 pilot ships to really get a discount.

    Thanks
  • Gifafi wrote: »
    ANH wrote: »
    Gifafi wrote: »

    what does even mean? you are upset that a new ship replaces HT in that lineup so it can be used eleswhere, and that somehow devalues past effort, or something? so confused

    rtt: sweet, another pilotless ship!

    Yours is a false interpretation about what I said.

    I didn't say I was upset that a new ship replaces HT. If you disagree, re-read what I wrote. I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion, since I didn't mention HT in my post, nor did I even allude to it. Unless you think that my point about relic'd pilots was a specific allusion to HT. For the record, my point about pilot relics was not at all in reference to HT.

    So let me set that record straight. I'm happy this ship adds more ability for people to a) use their rebels again and b) replace HT. Hope that's black and white enough for you.

    What is devalued (as I already pointed out, and as people familiar with economics and returns on investment will easily recognize) is the effort we already spent on high-geared pilots. CG seems to be going down a path of releasing ONLY pilotless ships moving forward. Which does, in point of fact, reduce the amount of time and resources players must spend to make their fleets useful - on average.

    For those of us who have already done this with existing fleets and pilots, CG releasing pilotless ships reduces the average value (i.e., time and resources invested) to make fleets valuable and usable in arenas and elsewhere.

    Thanks for giving me a chance to clarify that I was not, in fact, talking at all about HT.

    I brought up HT bc this ship replaces HT. You are happy about that. got it. What I don't get is how releasing ships without pilots devalues past investment in pilots and their ships. new ships don't affect your investment and it doesn't matter that they are pilotless. for ex., if you and player x both get this new ship and max it, you will have it plus your previously invested ships, so you will both still be where you started in terms of you being ahead. it's a non-issue imo. they have a tank for rebs, but you have a tank for rebs plus can use your better-than-their HT elsewhere.

    My irritation with it is that we already have ships with pilots that suck. Why add a new ship when they can rework Biggs to make him a better tank? Why not rework Wedge? He is a pilot with a ship that no one uses anymore. Given their ships some synergy like the toons do in the game. Yes, a pilotless ship is better than having a new ship and a new pilot, but there are so many outdated toons that can use a revamp.
  • Kyno wrote: »
    Pilot less ships are good, they simply cannot flood us with ships that would require gearing up pilots too.

    They want to give us more ships and expand that area of the game but cannot do that if it all requires gearing pilots too, it will make the overall process too slow.

    but dont you worry, i'm sure we will get more ships too that will require pilots, but it seems like they want to add a tank (or two) to the game to help round out other factions so they will have options other than HT.

    reworking the pilots/ships that we have in the game that people don't use anymore would be nicer than a new ship, even pilotless.
  • YaeVizsla wrote: »
    ANH wrote: »
    Yours is a false interpretation about what I said.

    I didn't say I was upset that a new ship replaces HT. If you disagree, re-read what I wrote. I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion, since I didn't mention HT in my post, nor did I even allude to it. Unless you think that my point about relic'd pilots was a specific allusion to HT. For the record, my point about pilot relics was not at all in reference to HT.

    So let me set that record straight. I'm happy this ship adds more ability for people to a) use their rebels again and b) replace HT. Hope that's black and white enough for you.

    What is devalued (as I already pointed out, and as people familiar with economics and returns on investment will easily recognize) is the effort we already spent on high-geared pilots. CG seems to be going down a path of releasing ONLY pilotless ships moving forward. Which does, in point of fact, reduce the amount of time and resources players must spend to make their fleets useful - on average.

    For those of us who have already done this with existing fleets and pilots, CG releasing pilotless ships reduces the average value (i.e., time and resources invested) to make fleets valuable and usable in arenas and elsewhere.

    Thanks for giving me a chance to clarify that I was not, in fact, talking at all about HT.
    New content continuously devalues old content.

    My troopers used to be arena viable under Thrawn. Now, they barely see use, plucking off weak teams in GAC. They've been devalued by basically every team since CLS was released.

    New content devalues old content. That's the nature of the beast. The fact that the Rebel Y-Wing is pilotless is immaterial to that point.

    And no, CG is not going down a path of only releasing pilotless ships. It's just the new shiny tech that they're sprinkling in right now. Right now, the overall investment to get a fleet going can be massive. Rebels especially; Rebel pilots is the literal worst gear of the game. Pilotless ships help bring that in line.

    You make a good point, but before CG releases new ships, even pilotless, reworking older pilots/ships would be nice. If they reworked Wedge, they will still get money out of people that need run him to r5-r7. Then throw in some synergy with Biggs like they have in standard gameplay.

  • YaeVizsla
    3395 posts Member
    You make a good point, but before CG releases new ships, even pilotless, reworking older pilots/ships would be nice. If they reworked Wedge, they will still get money out of people that need run him to r5-r7. Then throw in some synergy with Biggs like they have in standard gameplay.
    They've already reworked most of the ships in the game in Ships 2.0.

    And I'd rather have a new pilotless ship than have a meta that calls for an R7 Wedge.
    Still not a he.
  • Congratulations to developers! You are making game less logical and break your own rules.

    Ship can't be without pilots. I understand pilotless droid ships. But fighters that must have pilot - and without pilot - it's ridiculous!

    You could add clone pilot, you could open existing rebel pilot. But you decided to go wrong way. What next? Galactic legend's shards in regular battles?
  • Kyno
    23440 posts Moderator
    edited May 21
    Kyno wrote: »
    Pilot less ships are good, they simply cannot flood us with ships that would require gearing up pilots too.

    They want to give us more ships and expand that area of the game but cannot do that if it all requires gearing pilots too, it will make the overall process too slow.

    but dont you worry, i'm sure we will get more ships too that will require pilots, but it seems like they want to add a tank (or two) to the game to help round out other factions so they will have options other than HT.

    reworking the pilots/ships that we have in the game that people don't use anymore would be nicer than a new ship, even pilotless.

    not really, we need more ships, not less better ones.
  • Hey @Kyno since you pretty much know everything that happens on the forum, didn't CG say at some point they were trying out pilotless ships as they realized the community disliked gearing pilots who had pretty much no use outside their ship? Therefore kinda throwing the players a bone when it comes to ships?
  • Kyno
    23440 posts Moderator
    Hey Kyno since you pretty much know everything that happens on the forum, didn't CG say at some point they were trying out pilotless ships as they realized the community disliked gearing pilots who had pretty much no use outside their ship? Therefore kinda throwing the players a bone when it comes to ships?

    I believe that this was expressed in a QA. I think it was actually part of a longer answer to "pilot-less ships keeping up", since they dont have a pilot to gear up to do so.
  • YaeVizsla
    3395 posts Member
    bonArt wrote: »
    Congratulations to developers! You are making game less logical and break your own rules.

    Ship can't be without pilots. I understand pilotless droid ships. But fighters that must have pilot - and without pilot - it's ridiculous!

    You could add clone pilot, you could open existing rebel pilot. But you decided to go wrong way. What next? Galactic legend's shards in regular battles?
    The rules change over time. It's literally CG's job to change them.

    Strictly piloted ships and ships that have meh pilots who aren't particularly useful otherwise were a problem. They changed the rules to address that problem.

    I like pilotless ships because that's one less pilot to gear. Just shard farm, invest a pretty small amount of ship resources, and you're good to go.
    Still not a he.
  • Bulldog1205
    3227 posts Member
    YaeVizsla wrote: »
    bonArt wrote: »
    Congratulations to developers! You are making game less logical and break your own rules.

    Ship can't be without pilots. I understand pilotless droid ships. But fighters that must have pilot - and without pilot - it's ridiculous!

    You could add clone pilot, you could open existing rebel pilot. But you decided to go wrong way. What next? Galactic legend's shards in regular battles?
    The rules change over time. It's literally CG's job to change them.

    Strictly piloted ships and ships that have meh pilots who aren't particularly useful otherwise were a problem. They changed the rules to address that problem.

    I like pilotless ships because that's one less pilot to gear. Just shard farm, invest a pretty small amount of ship resources, and you're good to go.

    I think that’s the point of the thread though. Players can be good at ships with a much lower level of investment. For people who enjoy investing in ships, that’s a slap in the face to a group that is already constantly on the short end of the stick. A lot of you like this, because you don’t want to invest in ships. And I completely get that. But you have to realize there’s another side to that.
  • YaeVizsla wrote: »
    bonArt wrote: »
    Congratulations to developers! You are making game less logical and break your own rules.

    Ship can't be without pilots. I understand pilotless droid ships. But fighters that must have pilot - and without pilot - it's ridiculous!

    You could add clone pilot, you could open existing rebel pilot. But you decided to go wrong way. What next? Galactic legend's shards in regular battles?
    The rules change over time. It's literally CG's job to change them.

    Strictly piloted ships and ships that have meh pilots who aren't particularly useful otherwise were a problem. They changed the rules to address that problem.

    I like pilotless ships because that's one less pilot to gear. Just shard farm, invest a pretty small amount of ship resources, and you're good to go.

    I think that’s the point of the thread though. Players can be good at ships with a much lower level of investment. For people who enjoy investing in ships, that’s a slap in the face to a group that is already constantly on the short end of the stick. A lot of you like this, because you don’t want to invest in ships. And I completely get that. But you have to realize there’s another side to that.

    No, it is not remotely a ‘slap in the face’, people here are ridiculous with the things they call that,
  • YaeVizsla
    3395 posts Member
    I think that’s the point of the thread though. Players can be good at ships with a much lower level of investment. For people who enjoy investing in ships, that’s a slap in the face to a group that is already constantly on the short end of the stick. A lot of you like this, because you don’t want to invest in ships. And I completely get that. But you have to realize there’s another side to that.
    With the Y-Wing in the mix, the pure Rebels lineup looks like this:

    Home One, Millennium Falcon, Biggs, Y-Wing, Ghost, Phantom, Cassian's U-Wing, Bistan's U-Wing.

    That is fifteen pilots to gear, down from sixteen, including some characters who are just awful to gear. (I'm looking at you, SRP.) If that's not enough gearing pilots for you, that's a you problem.

    Gearing fifteen units is still an inordinate amount of investment, and that's coming from someone who's more focused on ships than arena.

    Literally everything CG can possibly add to the game will shift something's significance in a direction. Value up, value down, left, right, whatever. That is not a slap in the face. That is the nature of adding stuff to the game. Any meaningful change in the game will be to some players' advantage and preference, and not to others. That is not a slap in the face. Calling it a slap in the face is ignorant and makes it unduly personal, which is a trend that's a big part of why this playerbase is so toxic.
    Still not a he.
  • Bulldog1205
    3227 posts Member
    It’s nothing to do with personal, because I’m not a ship guy myself, and haven’t been since the Millenium falcon came out. IMO the mode is just trash now with CGs inability/unwillingness to fix all the bugs. But I can see how they continually hurt those players who want to prioritize ships and be elite there. Yes, minimizing investments for ships is a slap in the face to those fans. You don’t get to say it’s not. That’s like me trying to tell a minority that a racist comment isn’t offensive.
  • TVF
    22334 posts Member
    Lol ok.
    TVF's guild is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • Gifafi
    4011 posts Member
    It’s nothing to do with personal, because I’m not a ship guy myself, and haven’t been since the Millenium falcon came out. IMO the mode is just trash now with CGs inability/unwillingness to fix all the bugs. But I can see how they continually hurt those players who want to prioritize ships and be elite there. Yes, minimizing investments for ships is a slap in the face to those fans. You don’t get to say it’s not. That’s like me trying to tell a minority that a racist comment isn’t offensive.

    hqdefault.jpg

    also, lol at a reb tank somehow taking the place of HT and taking over the top of arena in a rebel fleet. good luck
    Maybe End Game isn't for you
  • ZAP
    2538 posts Member
    Gifafi wrote: »
    It’s nothing to do with personal, because I’m not a ship guy myself, and haven’t been since the Millenium falcon came out. IMO the mode is just trash now with CGs inability/unwillingness to fix all the bugs. But I can see how they continually hurt those players who want to prioritize ships and be elite there. Yes, minimizing investments for ships is a slap in the face to those fans. You don’t get to say it’s not. That’s like me trying to tell a minority that a racist comment isn’t offensive.

    hqdefault.jpg

    also, lol at a reb tank somehow taking the place of HT and taking over the top of arena in a rebel fleet. good luck

    Looks like Rebels can now handle at least GR fleets with HT easier now

Sign In or Register to comment.