The ghost was added to the platoons on the 4th line of planets specifically so that the guild could not complete 50/50 CM? @CG_SBCrumb , @CG_Tusken_Meathead
Thats not a question. If you want to complete the operation, gear your ghost up.
I don't think that's what the OP is saying. On Lothal, one Ghost ship is required in Operation 4. Ghost is also a required ship in the combat mission on Kessel. Guilds cannot get 50/50 on the Kessel combat mission because one Ghost ship is requried elsewhere in the same phase of planets.
OP is right to mention that. Ghost is needed in the operations on Lothal. And in the same zone it is obligatory to use Ghost for the ship battle on Kessel. So a guild member has to scrifice his Ghost and can't do the battle.
Then the guild leader has to make a decision. Where does it say that it will never happen that a toon or a ship not can be required in a mission and aswell in an operation?
Then the guild leader has to make a decision. Where does it say that it will never happen that a toon or a ship not can be required in a mission and aswell in an operation?
That’s been the standard for TB’s to not have mission specific toons in platoons.
I am just asking for an official TB rule which excludes that a toon or a ship can't be needed for an operation and a mission aswell. Obviously nobody can give me an answer. Isn't this room here to discuss? I didn't say I couldn't be wrong.
And sorry that I don't have a trustworthy name like you, DonPuto.
No, you are just wrong. If somecone could give this answer it would help the OP and all the other players. But obviously you don't understand this.
It was a simple question from me and the answer would give clarity so that the operation has to be corrected or that everything is compliant.
I don't know that there was ever a rule, but when DS Geo TB first came out we faced this issue and CG specifically said it was not their intention to have a unit required for for both missions and platoons in the same phase. They are now calling "platoons" "ops missions" but it's the same thing. Whether it's a rule or not is debatable. We do know that CG has said that this is not an intentional element of design.
Yes and what is if it is intended that one of the guild has to sacrifice his ghost for the operation and can't do the mission? Why is there not a single guild who already could reach max stars if it is so intended that everything can be done to 100%?
I am just asking for an official TB rule which excludes that a toon or a ship can't be needed for an operation and a mission aswell. Obviously nobody can give me an answer. Isn't this room here to discuss? I didn't say I couldn't be wrong.
And sorry that I don't have a trustworthy name like you, DonPuto.
We will continue the practice of excluding factions/characters from Platoons where those factions/characters are required somewhere else in the same vertical slice.
I mean sure they changed the name from platoons to operations it is still the same. 6 years ago they said they wouldn't do it, yet they did it multiple times in RoTE
We are unlikely to see any changes in the near future. But I really hope that by the next TB the developers will remove the mandatory characters for CM from the platoons. Or mandatory characters will be removed from CM.
We are unlikely to see any changes in the near future. But I really hope that by the next TB the developers will remove the mandatory characters for CM from the platoons. Or mandatory characters will be removed from CM.
They would have to know that they did it, which is clearly not the case as evidenced by them making a big show of removing some Inquisitor and then being asked why they didn't also remove the other one and going "oh."
They would have to know that they did it, which is clearly not the case as evidenced by them making a big show of removing some Inquisitor and then being asked why they didn't also remove the other one and going "oh."
Most likely their testers passed SM using 4 inquisitors, and then it turned out that exactly 5 were needed.
Just accept it, there is nothing to fix and nothing to complain about it.
Even toons with tb omicrons are required for operations (intended!). So you can't use that effect in missions too. And when a toon is required for a mission and an operation then it's fine. You don't have to complain about everything.
In december 2022 (not that old stuff from 2017) CG_SBCrumb wrote:
"Guilds that are at the level needed to compete in Rise of the Empire are well prepared to fill these Operations with some careful forethought and planning."
That says everything. Careful forethought and planning. So get over it. Preloading is already a solution.
Someone provided you a direct quote proving this was not CG's intent. Maybe their intentions have changed, but they haven't told us. So, it's very reasonable to assume this is an oversight and call it to CG's attention.
Obviously nobody cares, you see there is no reaction. This was a quote from 2017 about vertical slice. There is not a single word in the version of 2022 from CG_SBCrrumb. Only that you have to fill the operations with careful forethought and planning.
Obviously nobody cares, you see there is no reaction. This was a quote from 2017 about vertical slice. There is not a single word in the version of 2022 from CG_SBCrrumb. Only that you have to fill the operations with careful forethought and planning.
At least one person cares. I admit that I don't care because combat points are such a small piece of total TP in this TB.
It doesn't matter when the quote came from, imo. Until they say something that contradicts it, or until they have a consistent action history to indicate otherwise, it should be assumed to be their intent. And we shouldn't be surprised by people wanting clarification.
You are free to feel otherwise, of course, and say that statements have a shelf life and their most recent action is enough evidence to you that CG has changed their intended practice. But you can't expect that to satisfy everyone.
https://forums.galaxy-of-heroes.starwars.ea.com/discussion/260407/new-territory-battle-rise-of-the-empire-details#latest
This one is the last and current one. There is not a single word that they have the intention that a toon/ ship can not be required for both.
And what I mean is that everytime someone opens a thread to show a bug, a mistake or something else IMPORTANT what has to be checked there is a reaction within a few hours or sometimes the next day. But here it is not the case.
https://forums.galaxy-of-heroes.starwars.ea.com/discussion/260407/new-territory-battle-rise-of-the-empire-details#latest
This one is the last and current one. There is not a single word that they have the intention that a toon/ ship can not be required for both.
And what I mean is that everytime someone opens a thread to show a bug, a mistake or something else IMPORTANT what has to be checked there is a reaction within a few hours or sometimes the next day. But here it is not the case.
What a weird take. Sure, CG could have changed their mind, but they never said so, and based on them trying to get things back in line (like when they swapped out that Inquisitor from a planet they were required on) we can safely assume their intent is still not to have required characters in platoons.
Also, CG never reacts "within a few hours," and very rarely "the next day." Just because they don't acknowledge someone's concern doesn't mean they won't act on it later. The only thing you're right about is the fact that CG doesn't care if their game is wrong or not.
Nobody told Mace Windu that he would be thrown trough the window but it happened.
That was a specific thread about ROTE TB. The other thread from 2017 has nothing to do with specific ROTE. And since when it is the normal practice that you chose an old text to "prove" something when there is alreay a current one.
You are free to feel otherwise, of course, and say that statements have a shelf life and their most recent action is enough evidence to you that CG has changed their intended practice. But you can't expect that to satisfy everyone.
Replies
That’s been the standard for TB’s to not have mission specific toons in platoons.
And sorry that I don't have a trustworthy name like you, DonPuto.
It was a simple question from me and the answer would give clarity so that the operation has to be corrected or that everything is compliant.
https://forums.galaxy-of-heroes.starwars.ea.com/discussion/143905/platoon-squad-and-deployments-update
I mean sure they changed the name from platoons to operations it is still the same. 6 years ago they said they wouldn't do it, yet they did it multiple times in RoTE
They would have to know that they did it, which is clearly not the case as evidenced by them making a big show of removing some Inquisitor and then being asked why they didn't also remove the other one and going "oh."
This is the way
Most likely their testers passed SM using 4 inquisitors, and then it turned out that exactly 5 were needed.
Vertical slice was when tb phase went right to left or left to right (all but RotE)
Anyway, in this case, the player who places the ghost in the platoons will be added to the exclusion list, since he did not take part in the CM
Even toons with tb omicrons are required for operations (intended!). So you can't use that effect in missions too. And when a toon is required for a mission and an operation then it's fine. You don't have to complain about everything.
In december 2022 (not that old stuff from 2017) CG_SBCrumb wrote:
"Guilds that are at the level needed to compete in Rise of the Empire are well prepared to fill these Operations with some careful forethought and planning."
That says everything. Careful forethought and planning. So get over it. Preloading is already a solution.
At least one person cares. I admit that I don't care because combat points are such a small piece of total TP in this TB.
It doesn't matter when the quote came from, imo. Until they say something that contradicts it, or until they have a consistent action history to indicate otherwise, it should be assumed to be their intent. And we shouldn't be surprised by people wanting clarification.
You are free to feel otherwise, of course, and say that statements have a shelf life and their most recent action is enough evidence to you that CG has changed their intended practice. But you can't expect that to satisfy everyone.
This one is the last and current one. There is not a single word that they have the intention that a toon/ ship can not be required for both.
And what I mean is that everytime someone opens a thread to show a bug, a mistake or something else IMPORTANT what has to be checked there is a reaction within a few hours or sometimes the next day. But here it is not the case.
What a weird take. Sure, CG could have changed their mind, but they never said so, and based on them trying to get things back in line (like when they swapped out that Inquisitor from a planet they were required on) we can safely assume their intent is still not to have required characters in platoons.
Also, CG never reacts "within a few hours," and very rarely "the next day." Just because they don't acknowledge someone's concern doesn't mean they won't act on it later. The only thing you're right about is the fact that CG doesn't care if their game is wrong or not.
That was a specific thread about ROTE TB. The other thread from 2017 has nothing to do with specific ROTE. And since when it is the normal practice that you chose an old text to "prove" something when there is alreay a current one.