Hello Holotable Heroes,
We wanted to inform folks on the cadence of Assault Battles.
Each month, we reheat a set number of Assault Battles.
As we add a new one, an older AB will be rotated out to keep the total number of Assault Battles consistent each month.
Which Assault Battle is rotated out will vary but will likely be an older one.
For example, Forest Moon will return in the month of December.
Capital Games Team
I want to express the immense disappointment this decision is. Obviously one of the least popular decisions that's been made in awhile, but it's legitimately worse than I think y'all realize.
The main gameplay loop in this game, is to unlock a character, upgrade their abilities, and gear them up to relics, and then do it again with another... And one of the MAIN components of that, is Injector pieces, and zetas. Removing 15% of the assault battle income for these is a small change for now, but in the future this could be catastrophic for new-midgame player progression.
At the extreme, assuming we get 2 new assault battles per year (based on the current rate with DotF and Peridia Patrol), we'll be down to 50% of the prior income, or worst case scenario, if the new ones aren't getting rotated too, possibly 0%.
In my opinion, there needs to be a SERIOUSLY good change made for the playerbase, since this last 2 months has been almost entirely disappointment and bad news.
(Punishing One/Tie Dagger making fleets awful to play, and rotating assault battles... Not much happens in this game tbh) - So 2 wildy unpopular changes, to one semi-nice to have change (GL tickets) is really making multiple people in my guild consider quitting.
-- Personal Testimony now --
If Assault battles turn into something like the raids (We have to push for them, or else we lose rewards every month) then that's a strong indication that there's nothing left for me in the game. I signed up for permanent progress and improvement. My line in the sand is here, I won't be buying any more crystals unless we see some sort of positive change.
(The raids being cycling content is fine, it's a good trade for better rewards than before they rotated)
When DotF was released, I thought it was one of the BEST ideas ever... Incentivize people to work on the new release, and add some rewards into the economy for doing it. Peridia Patrol was also another step in the right direction. But the negative prodding toward the new stuff (by dumpstering the old) is something I have enough respect for myself as a player, to avoid.
Honestly, I was literally one message away from uninstalling the game after this announcement, since it represents a shift into scary territory as a game. The only thing stopping that is the guild I'm in, so if that goes away, I'm gone.
Seriously reconsider this, or come up with a way to NOT crash the midgame economy, while not accelerating the lategame economy like you're worried about.
This was worded amazingly and I believe it represents the thoughts of like 99.99% of the playerbase
I completely agree. Albeit at different degrees of severity, this kind of change impacts players of all stages - early, mid, late. Even veteran players rely heavily on ABs because of Zetas, Kyros, early relic mats, and Signal Data. Right now, it's only one AB, so the loss may not be that significant, but add those rewards up at the end of the year, and especially when more and more ABs start getting rotated, it's a big deal.
I for one don't mind new ABs replacing older ones, as long as the rewards are consistent and match what we are currently getting:
1) Compare the old ABs with DoF/PP, you see that the former has much more static rewards. Aside from the gear and maybe shards in the early tiers, the type and amount of rewards we get is the same each time - CT1 gives out the same amount of Zetas, each type of Kyro and each type of Injector piece every run, CT2 and 3 give out the same amount of early relic mats and signal data each time. Meanwhile, with new ABs, none of the tiers give out Zeta mats or Injector pieces; the first two tiers give you shards, but only for one out of the 2-3 required characters, nobody else; the later tiers give you relic mats and maybe signal data, but you only get one or the other for each type of material (one type of relic mat and one type of signal data); the last tier gives you either Droid Brains or Gyrda Keypads, which is something the older ABs didn't have (along with the R7-8 mats, but I'm focusing on the R9, since it's significantly harder to get), but one or the other means that it's going to take a very long time for us to not only get back the mats we spent to get the required toons to R9 but to also notice an actual RoI. Whether or not you should get the toons to R9, it's especially going to be controversial since, let's face it, how long until they release enough new ABs that even DoF and PP are put on rotation.
2) I also don't mind that much the relic requirements for the new ABs. Aside from the R9 tier, you kind of do need to have teams at relic levels to be able to survive in, let alone beat, CT2 and especially 3 (CT3 Sidious is an absolute monster even for relic teams). Okay, maybe lower at least one of the two tiers before it to R3/R5. But, again, make sure the rewards we get once the rotation starts are at best more than and at worst equal to what we used to get from the old ABs. Kyros, for example, right now only PP gives out Kyros (at a good amount), but, like with the other rewards, it's one or the other. Most of the old ABs, even the CTs, have been around for a few years, and because of that players depend on them as a consistent source of gear and relic mats. It's not exactly that surprising that out of nowhere we suddenly find out that those consistent sources of gear and relic mats are suddenly being replaced by newer battles with RNG-dependent rewards and significantly stricter requirements. It's not even that terrible if each new AB has different rewards, e.g., DoF gives out Signal Data (all types, not just one), PP gives out Kyros (both pieces), the next AB can give out Zetas, but in any case make sure they compensate for this new cadence you've come up with. Update the rewards in the new events if necessary so that, regardless of whether you're new, mid-game or a veteran, you feel like your investment toward the ABs are recognized instead of having to worry about it being invalidated after a few months.
Indeed. Peridea Patrol and Duel of the Fates do not reward zetas. If they added the zetas it would help swallow the pill. And getting to R9 in order to possibly farm the hightst tier for their omicrons?
It'll be expensive as hell and it'll take a months to get...which by the time the Assault Battle might be switched out by another one with fewer rewards.
This is so stupid. Greedy CG. Also this is not a ‘reminder’ since it is the first time that y’all are deciding to withhold an AB
Quickly changed to ‘inform’ lol. Every post is so tone deaf. Still at least we got some clarity. Clearly trying to squeeze players as hard as they can.
Of course, they didn’t communicate this ahead of time. So they took on the tone of a scolding school principal.
So yur removing an AB that 99% of the players can get Signal Data (the most important Relic building block in the game) and Injectors and we get a new AB that only 1% of the player base can get the high level rewards on. Thanks for this timely notification. <sarcasm points directly at yur failure to communicate>
I can't help but feel that yur subjecting us all to a shell game or AB Monty.
Still ignoring the community when it comes to the disastrous fleet changes I see. You've destroyed the fleet meta, broke executrix and are now stealing gear from us as well by removing the older, more easily accessible ABs THAT ARE NOT LOCKED BEHIND STARS OR RELIC LEVELS.
To be objectively fair that isn’t quite true. All the old ABs are star locked. You can only use 7 star characters on anything above the second level. They are not relic locked however
CG_MeatheadWhile you are just the messenger, CG has now changed the meaning of what a new assault battle means. For Duel of Fates and Peridea Patrol, my reaction was that they were positive with a new stream of rewards in return for chasing the newer units faster. My current view on the new Assault Battle structure is rewards being removed from challenges I’ve already completed.
Absolutely nothing is preventing CG from simply having the new Assault Battles be additions rather than a replacement. If you seriously wanted to replace an outdated event, the Omega Battles would have been far more understandable to your player base.
This is terrible! We invest in characters needed for AB's so we can get long term rewards from them and now you're saying they are only temporary? So my newly relic 9 Imp Rem troopers are a temporary AB? That's bull crap!
This is garbage! Basically the ones that are more f2p friendly are going to be phased out for the new ones that require 400 kyros per toon.
You've released 20+ characters this year and you're now throttling players' attainable allotment of advancement materials.
Well, according to CG and their EA overlords - you are expected to spend.
100% agree. The pace at which new characters are coming out is getting a little out of hand. CG is going to need a two versions of the game at some point. I'm at the higher end, so I'm okay with most of the new stuff. But a mid-level player must be completely overwhelmed and ready to shelf this game. There is no reason to change the AB rotation - just leave it alone and if you need to add new ABs - then ADD them. Don't replace the older ones! Many of us love this game but the material economy is becoming a real issue. I realize that bottlenecks create income, but so does growing the game. There needs to be a better balance!
Are we going to get injector pieces in said new assault battles?. Assault battles are one of the primary sources of injector pieces so to take a chunk of the injector income away each month would not be a great move for the new and middle game players.
Or….maybe we get 3 assault battles a week instead of 2. Then everyone is happy. Just a suggestion.
Oh but that won't be profitable for CGreedy, so that is not an option I guess.
Losing the playerbase is extremely unprofitable, and at some point another negative change - and perhaps an innocuous one - will be the change that causes the dam to burst. I'm not saying it's this one, but combined with fleet meta awfulness, cointoss impacts to GAC/TW, a couple awful DC sets etc. etc., which of the negative changes will cause an exodus of players?
