You haven't fixed it so people who kept themselves behind saving GET2 because they prioritized Separatist content can use that Separatist content on YOUR SEPARATIST GAME MODE.
This is the second month. So at best, three months before we actually get to use Malevolence instead of Imperial capital ships?
You made the content, I didn't. Why did you make it so it just sits in my inventory doing nothing?
The general fact CG seems to release content it doesn't even care about.
"Tiig;c-2057034" wrote: What does it matter? You don’t need it. Run the seppie ships with the executrix, and if they’re any good, it’s an easy win, then run Hounds Tooth with the Chimaera, and wait through the cooldown for the insta kill on each ship. Easy.
how good do the seppies need to be?
All I know is that g12 Geos get slaughtered if you roll Negotiator.
yeah g13 and g12+5 do too lol, which is why I asked him
There's more seppie ships than just geos. HB and VD are both really needed for seps to work well. I'd assume someone with Mal would have them built up. I'd assume someone without them is probably out of luck.
You're forced to start with the bugs. And if you roll Mr. Hello There, they likely won't survive until you can reinforce.
They claimed it was intended to use your entire roster. They gave bonuses to era specific teams and said they would never be required in platoons when they were required in battle.
Ergo Platoons are for everything BUT the era specific teams
https://tenor.com/view/kletter-gif-4614012.gif
Let's see I see clones and resistance and ewoks. None of which were around Hoth. Thank you for proving me non-contradictory! Thank you very much!
I don't know why you keep pointing out to me that they lied. Doesn't change what I said into a lie.
How do you require a non era character and keep the content somewhat authentic? By including them in scenarios where they don't do anything, like platoons.
See, there you go. If you would have just responded intially with "I quoted outdated info by CG and that platoons do in fact utilize factions required in combat missions like the rebels in Hoth Tb" there would have been no argument.
i was never arguing the intent of platoons, just that you are spreading misinformation about their requirements.
"littleMAC77;c-2056664" wrote:
"Woodroward;c-2056651" wrote:
"littleMAC77;c-2056641" wrote:
"Woodroward;c-2056584" wrote:
logic. To deny the post, produce counter logic.
They claimed it was intended to use your entire roster. They gave bonuses to era specific teams and said they would never be required in platoons when they were required in battle.
Ergo Platoons are for everything BUT the era specific teams
https://tenor.com/view/kletter-gif-4614012.gif
Let's see I see clones and resistance and ewoks. None of which were around Hoth. Thank you for proving me non-contradictory! Thank you very much!
I don't know why you keep pointing out to me that they lied. Doesn't change what I said into a lie.
How do you require a non era character and keep the content somewhat authentic? By including them in scenarios where they don't do anything, like platoons.
See, there you go. If you would have just responded intially with "I quoted outdated info by CG and that platoons do in fact utilize factions required in combat missions like the rebels in Hoth Tb" there would have been no argument.
i was never arguing the intent of platoons, just that you are spreading misinformation about their requirements.
I see this is your first interaction with woodmisinformationroward? It's his middle name.
That's right in over 3000 posts I've been wrong a handful of times and always admitted it if it was proven (and a decent number of those times I was the one who proved me wrong, not someone else)...
Well guess what? I've been right a heck of a lot more. Are you sure that ain't your middle name? Cause right now you are 99.87% wrong.
Even in this thread, the guy you were talking to was the one who was spreading misinformation, as the devs did indeed say that.
My posts are, fortunately, much clearer than some other people's and don't take on the misleading semblance of logical fact while containing nothing of the sort.
Though I may seem verbose occasionally, my posts are almost always jam packed with subtle nuances of the english language allowing me to speak far more succinctly than the amount of information I am conveying. I am avoiding wasting time repeating myself or clarifying by doing so to begin with.
This complex succinct brevity often leads people to mistakenly understand my posts as no one likes to actually read whole posts, and you can't understand me if you skim read me.
Due to this this thread is, in the end, just one more example of someone arguing against their own misconceptions of what I said and blaming it on me, rather than an example of me spreading misinformation.
For example, arguing against what they said and saying I'm wrong rather than they are. Illogical misinformation. Confusing statement. Not taking advantage of subtle nuances in the english language such as prefacing a statement with "Blah said". That obviously means the following statement is not my own. It's quite clear.
They claimed it was intended to use your entire roster. They gave bonuses to era specific teams and said they would never be required in platoons when they were required in battle.
Ergo Platoons are for everything BUT the era specific teams
https://tenor.com/view/kletter-gif-4614012.gif
Let's see I see clones and resistance and ewoks. None of which were around Hoth. Thank you for proving me non-contradictory! Thank you very much!
I don't know why you keep pointing out to me that they lied. Doesn't change what I said into a lie.
How do you require a non era character and keep the content somewhat authentic? By including them in scenarios where they don't do anything, like platoons.
See, there you go. If you would have just responded intially with "I quoted outdated info by CG and that platoons do in fact utilize factions required in combat missions like the rebels in Hoth Tb" there would have been no argument.
i was never arguing the intent of platoons, just that you are spreading misinformation about their requirements.
"littleMAC77;c-2056664" wrote:
"Woodroward;c-2056651" wrote:
"littleMAC77;c-2056641" wrote:
"Woodroward;c-2056584" wrote:
logic. To deny the post, produce counter logic.
They claimed it was intended to use your entire roster. They gave bonuses to era specific teams and said they would never be required in platoons when they were required in battle.
Ergo Platoons are for everything BUT the era specific teams
https://tenor.com/view/kletter-gif-4614012.gif
Let's see I see clones and resistance and ewoks. None of which were around Hoth. Thank you for proving me non-contradictory! Thank you very much!
I don't know why you keep pointing out to me that they lied. Doesn't change what I said into a lie.
How do you require a non era character and keep the content somewhat authentic? By including them in scenarios where they don't do anything, like platoons.
See, there you go. If you would have just responded intially with "I quoted outdated info by CG and that platoons do in fact utilize factions required in combat missions like the rebels in Hoth Tb" there would have been no argument.
i was never arguing the intent of platoons, just that you are spreading misinformation about their requirements.
I see this is your first interaction with woodmisinformationroward? It's his middle name.
That's right in over 3000 posts I've been wrong a handful of times and always admitted it if it was proven (and a decent number of those times I was the one who proved me wrong, not someone else)...
Well guess what? I've been right a heck of a lot more. Are you sure that ain't your middle name? Cause right now you are 99.87% wrong.
Even in this thread, the guy you were talking to was the one who was spreading misinformation, as the devs did indeed say that.
My posts are, fortunately, much clearer than some other people's and don't take on the misleading semblance of logical fact while containing nothing of the sort.
Though I may seem verbose occasionally, my posts are almost always jam packed with subtle nuances of the english language allowing me to speak far more succinctly than the amount of information I am conveying. I am avoiding wasting time repeating myself or clarifying by doing so to begin with.
This complex succinct brevity often leads people to mistakenly understand my posts as no one likes to actually read whole posts, and you can't understand me if you skim read me.
Due to this this thread is, in the end, just one more example of someone arguing against their own misconceptions of what I said and blaming it on me, rather than an example of me spreading misinformation.
For example, arguing against what they said and saying I'm wrong rather than they are. Illogical misinformation. Confusing statement. Not taking advantage of subtle nuances in the english language such as prefacing a statement with "Blah said". That obviously means the following statement is not my own. It's quite clear.
People's misconceptions are their own, not mine.
"Nuances of the english language" would have been more effective if you hadn't used the phrase twice. It dimishes some of the impact, and makes it look like you just learned a new word and are trying to use it as often as possible.
Otherwise, 35 minutes in between the edit and the original version well spent.
"CCyrilS;c-2057347" wrote: He communicates so well nobody can understand him....
One thing you'll always notice about any woodromisinformationward post is the complete lack of "likes" underneath them. Dude has 4K posts on this forum and 500 likes. He will argue with a brick wall and the brick wall will win the "like" war by not even posting.
"Tiig;c-2057034" wrote: What does it matter? You don’t need it. Run the seppie ships with the executrix, and if they’re any good, it’s an easy win, then run Hounds Tooth with the Chimaera, and wait through the cooldown for the insta kill on each ship. Easy.
how good do the seppies need to be?
All I know is that g12 Geos get slaughtered if you roll Negotiator.
yeah g13 and g12+5 do too lol, which is why I asked him
There's more seppie ships than just geos. HB and VD are both really needed for seps to work well. I'd assume someone with Mal would have them built up. I'd assume someone without them is probably out of luck.
"Darth_DeVito;c-2057335" wrote:
"Woodroward;c-2057316" wrote:
"Gifafi;c-2057291" wrote:
"Darth_DeVito;c-2057282" wrote:
"Gifafi;c-2057278" wrote:
"Tiig;c-2057034" wrote: What does it matter? You don’t need it. Run the seppie ships with the executrix, and if they’re any good, it’s an easy win, then run Hounds Tooth with the Chimaera, and wait through the cooldown for the insta kill on each ship. Easy.
how good do the seppies need to be?
All I know is that g12 Geos get slaughtered if you roll Negotiator.
yeah g13 and g12+5 do too lol, which is why I asked him
There's more seppie ships than just geos. HB and VD are both really needed for seps to work well. I'd assume someone with Mal would have them built up. I'd assume someone without them is probably out of luck.
You're forced to start with the bugs. And if you roll Mr. Hello There, they likely won't survive until you can reinforce.
this. and also, my question about sep levels still stands
"CCyrilS;c-2057347" wrote: He communicates so well nobody can understand him....
One thing you'll always notice about any woodromisinformationward post is the complete lack of "likes" underneath them. Dude has 4K posts on this forum and 500 likes. He will argue with a brick wall and the brick wall will win the "like" war by not even posting.
They claimed it was intended to use your entire roster. They gave bonuses to era specific teams and said they would never be required in platoons when they were required in battle.
Ergo Platoons are for everything BUT the era specific teams
https://tenor.com/view/kletter-gif-4614012.gif
Let's see I see clones and resistance and ewoks. None of which were around Hoth. Thank you for proving me non-contradictory! Thank you very much!
I don't know why you keep pointing out to me that they lied. Doesn't change what I said into a lie.
How do you require a non era character and keep the content somewhat authentic? By including them in scenarios where they don't do anything, like platoons.
See, there you go. If you would have just responded intially with "I quoted outdated info by CG and that platoons do in fact utilize factions required in combat missions like the rebels in Hoth Tb" there would have been no argument.
i was never arguing the intent of platoons, just that you are spreading misinformation about their requirements.
"littleMAC77;c-2056664" wrote:
"Woodroward;c-2056651" wrote:
"littleMAC77;c-2056641" wrote:
"Woodroward;c-2056584" wrote:
logic. To deny the post, produce counter logic.
They claimed it was intended to use your entire roster. They gave bonuses to era specific teams and said they would never be required in platoons when they were required in battle.
Ergo Platoons are for everything BUT the era specific teams
https://tenor.com/view/kletter-gif-4614012.gif
Let's see I see clones and resistance and ewoks. None of which were around Hoth. Thank you for proving me non-contradictory! Thank you very much!
I don't know why you keep pointing out to me that they lied. Doesn't change what I said into a lie.
How do you require a non era character and keep the content somewhat authentic? By including them in scenarios where they don't do anything, like platoons.
See, there you go. If you would have just responded intially with "I quoted outdated info by CG and that platoons do in fact utilize factions required in combat missions like the rebels in Hoth Tb" there would have been no argument.
i was never arguing the intent of platoons, just that you are spreading misinformation about their requirements.
I see this is your first interaction with woodmisinformationroward? It's his middle name.
That's right in over 3000 posts I've been wrong a handful of times and always admitted it if it was proven (and a decent number of those times I was the one who proved me wrong, not someone else)...
Well guess what? I've been right a heck of a lot more. Are you sure that ain't your middle name? Cause right now you are 99.87% wrong.
Even in this thread, the guy you were talking to was the one who was spreading misinformation, as the devs did indeed say that.
My posts are, fortunately, much clearer than some other people's and don't take on the misleading semblance of logical fact while containing nothing of the sort.
Though I may seem verbose occasionally, my posts are almost always jam packed with subtle nuances of the english language allowing me to speak far more succinctly than the amount of information I am conveying. I am avoiding wasting time repeating myself or clarifying by doing so to begin with.
This complex succinct brevity often leads people to mistakenly understand my posts as no one likes to actually read whole posts, and you can't understand me if you skim read me.
Due to this this thread is, in the end, just one more example of someone arguing against their own misconceptions of what I said and blaming it on me, rather than an example of me spreading misinformation.
For example, arguing against what they said and saying I'm wrong rather than they are. Illogical misinformation. Confusing statement. Not taking advantage of subtle nuances in the english language such as prefacing a statement with "Blah said". That obviously means the following statement is not my own. It's quite clear.
People's misconceptions are their own, not mine.
"Nuances of the english language" would have been more effective if you hadn't used the phrase twice. It dimishes some of the impact, and makes it look like you just learned a new word and are trying to use it as often as possible.
Otherwise, 35 minutes in between the edit and the original version well spent.
One was said about me saying it, and the other was used 3 paragraphs later where a pronoun would have been inappropriate saying they didn't get it. If the impact was diminished, maybe you fall into the second usage.
Editing and original post time difference makes what difference? None sir. Poking fun is only fun if it has a point to poke.
"Lor_San_Teka;c-2057356" wrote:
"CCyrilS;c-2057347" wrote: He communicates so well nobody can understand him....
One thing you'll always notice about any woodromisinformationward post is the complete lack of "likes" underneath them. Dude has 4K posts on this forum and 500 likes. He will argue with a brick wall and the brick wall will win the "like" war by not even posting.
Communication is a two way street. Not asking for clarification is a failure of the person with the counterargument not the original statement.
And I am not here to make friends. I have plenty. I am here to make sense.
If getting likes on the internet was a judgment of intellectual worth we'd all be in trouble because the things on the internet that get the most likes are almost always sassy... with no knowledge.
Share guides, tips, and tricks for Star Wars: Galaxy of Heroes, discuss Arena strats, and help new players get started.Latest Activity: 3 hours ago22,890 Posts
