Strangling casual players
Hey there, So this is my first post ever here on the forums, and I am most likely going to set myself up for a "skill issue"-comment, if any comment at all. Although, I gotta say that several of t...
Forum Discussion
@RadioShaqs I think you're missing my point, with the lack of opportunity to complete objectives and it being a stressfest etc.
But at least we can agree in regards to 15 rivals wins being too much (that's if you win every game), compared to the 7 wins last year! 😞
@thelaeby That’s what I am saying less is more casual friendly. You can always play past the 12 for objectives.
When people saying they want 40 games of every mode for casuals doesn’t make sense to me who got time to play 160 games a week. Surely not casuals.
All the modes should be 12.
When people saying they want 40 games of every mode for casuals doesn’t make sense to me who got time to play 160 games a week. Surely not casuals.
All the modes should be 12.
Most people are not saying "they want 40 games in every mode". What people are saying, especially the casual players, is that they want more Squad Battles and less Rivals wins for rewards. For example, EA could've said 20 Squad Battles per week and 10 Rivals wins. But it went more extreme, with 12 Squad Battles, 15 Rivals wins. I'm not considering weekend league because EA has said that Champs is only for the best players, which will not include most casual players. Casual players, by nature, won't be trading all day long and doing every SBC available. EA just seems to have gone out of its way to alienate the majority of its customers, which is a very odd business strategy!
@Leelongy73 wrote:Most people are not saying "they want 40 games in every mode". What people are saying, especially the casual players, is that they want more Squad Battles and less Rivals wins for rewards. For example, EA could've said 20 Squad Battles per week and 10 Rivals wins. But it went more extreme, with 12 Squad Battles, 15 Rivals wins. I'm not considering weekend league because EA has said that Champs is only for the best players, which will not include most casual players. Casual players, by nature, won't be trading all day long and doing every SBC available. EA just seems to have gone out of its way to alienate the majority of its customers, which is a very odd business strategy!
I agree. Im a causual player who loves the idea of building a football team with icons and current players and that is the draw of it for me but i dont want the stress or hassle of playing online as it really raises my anxiety levels and i just like to chill and play 5 or 6 squad battles a night and do a few SBC's and i dont care that i dont get a team as good as those who do rivals and champions as my team is for me and nobody else but i also know that if i want a better team its there if i want it. I think that 12 matches is a big loss to the casual player. For me UT was the best way to dive in and play casual matches without having to manage a team or do training as a player and just enjoy playing football. If it stays like this i think this will be my last version.- @Leelongy73 The problem is people who say casual were playing 40 games on beginner. It’s not about time it’s about being able to play more games than someone else.
If you play 12 or 40 at the same level and so does everyone else it doesn’t matter how many games it could be 800 you would get the same spot.
What’ is happening now is more casuals are play all 12 games so someone who played 40 on beginner is dropping lower. That’s fine if you want it to be who plays more but that’s not casual.
Right now rivals is only 1 more win than the 14 in squad battles and most won’t be playing champs so it’s not that many more games.
More games won’t help casuals.Conduct a survey of casual players, or just read through the posts on here and on social media - I'll wager my mortgage that the majority want to play more Squad Battles and less Rivals. For EA to ignore that...well, as a business strategy, it's condemning itself.
Featured Places
