Legendary Difficulty Philosophy

"JohnnySteelAlpha;c-1656368" wrote:
I believe it was difficult as a tradeoff for not having any panic farm involved. You could beat it with all F2P characters there were 2+ years old and with retries, could be done with an average gearing of 11 or less (i've seen some geat it with 1 g8/9 character and just Boba G12). Every other legendary or journey toon you had some element of a panic farm (phoenix for Thrawn or vets for RJT) or really hard character to farm at that time (single hard node toon, raid exclusive character, etc.). That's what I see as unique this time anyway that could justify the increase in difficulty. In prior events, the difficulty hurdle was becoming eligible for the event; this event everyone is eligible cause of the lack of rarity of the toons. If they later combine a panic farm with this high of gear requirements, than we all grab the pitchforks and torches :)

Yoda, Emperor and R2D2 were legendary events and didn't require panic farm.just saying..

To me it makes sense going forward, if they want to keep legendary events the way they are. They are running out of factions to require for future legendaries, so it would make sense that new events would encourage us to improve those old characters.

It wouldn't make sense for us to be able to get new end game characters using the same g8/g9 jedi team we used to get Yoda for example. Now they can reuse factions without it becoming an anti-climactic event.

I hope they read this valid instance of confusion and understand that there are only two possible ways for the player base to reconcile this:

A) Despite the emphasis they've put on communication, they increased an established event type's difficulty by about 33% (just roughly using g9 viability before compared to g12 now) and never communicated the drastic increase in relative difficulty.

B) They did communicate this, but did so indirectly via the event itself. If the event was the communication, the message was, "We can change things whenever we want and will go to maximum winnable difficulty as desired."

Either way is disappointing.

"Burritto;c-1656585" wrote:
I hope they read this valid instance of confusion and understand that there are only two possible ways for the player base to reconcile this:

A) Despite the emphasis they've put on communication, they increased an established event type's difficulty by about 33% (just roughly using g9 viability before compared to g12 now) and never communicated the drastic increase in relative difficulty.

B) They did communicate this, but did so indirectly via the event itself. If the event was the communication, the message was, "We can change things whenever we want and will go to maximum winnable difficulty as desired."

Either way is disappointing.

They did say it was going to be very difficult when they announced the event. And that equated to g10 or g11 and some g12 like many predicted.

"JerryHello;c-1656425" wrote:

Yoda, Emperor and R2D2 were legendary events and didn't require panic farm.just saying..

You sure? Its just about decision, ppl decide to farm something or not.

BB8 requires 5 FO toons, they are in the game when EP7 released, why ppl still panic farming for him? Because they decide not to focus on this faction.

Some dark side player find themselves panic farming rebels because they want emperor palptine, or just like me dont bother with jedi so I have my GMY third time when he appears (and now hes still in blue gear).

How much revenue per year does the f2p population generate?

"DarkHelmet1138;c-1656604" wrote:

"Burritto;c-1656585" wrote:
I hope they read this valid instance of confusion and understand that there are only two possible ways for the player base to reconcile this:

A- Despite the emphasis they've put on communication, they increased an established event type's difficulty by about 33% (just roughly using g9 viability before compared to g12 now) and never communicated the drastic increase in relative difficulty.

B- They did communicate this, but did so indirectly via the event itself. If the event was the communication, the message was, "We can change things whenever we want and will go to maximum winnable difficulty as desired."

Either way is disappointing.

They did say it was going to be very difficult when they announced the event. And that equated to g10 or g11 and some g12 like many predicted.

They also use that language for many other events, none of which have needed maxed toons. It also said nothing about the difficulty in relation to past events.

"capifico22;c-1656704" wrote:
How much revenue per year does the f2p population generate?

Obviously not enough :D :D :D :D :D

"Burritto;c-1656722" wrote:

"DarkHelmet1138;c-1656604" wrote:

"Burritto;c-1656585" wrote:
I hope they read this valid instance of confusion and understand that there are only two possible ways for the player base to reconcile this:

A- Despite the emphasis they've put on communication, they increased an established event type's difficulty by about 33% (just roughly using g9 viability before compared to g12 now) and never communicated the drastic increase in relative difficulty.

B- They did communicate this, but did so indirectly via the event itself. If the event was the communication, the message was, "We can change things whenever we want and will go to maximum winnable difficulty as desired."

Either way is disappointing.

They did say it was going to be very difficult when they announced the event. And that equated to g10 or g11 and some g12 like many predicted.

They also use that language for many other events, none of which have needed maxed toons. It also said nothing about the difficulty in relation to past events.

And g12 wasn't needed for this either. I beat it without full g12. In fact 2 were still g9. So maxed toons weren't req. It probably helps but isn't req.