(07-02-2012 11:55 AM)Silvanoshi Wrote:
(06-02-2012 10:40 PM)XDDante Wrote:
I have answered this on a number of occasions before. There are no plans to refund those who received +3 weapons. The +3 weapons provide the performance boost within the current game balance that is felt to be fair.
(06-02-2012 05:22 PM)c2-BlackAdder Wrote:
yeah is also noticed myself that Silvanoshi is only answering to his convenience...he only reads and answers as long as the question has nothing to do with refund for "+3" users,how despicable...
(06-02-2012 01:25 PM)misssska Wrote: silvanoshi...why cant u answer to XDDantes question???
its a disclimination...u r answering only nooob questions..........
That says it all realy.
Thank you for your patience on this matter, I know it must suck to be hammered, repeatedly, by people asking the same question over and over again...
So, may I ask one thing, well, maybe 2...
1. What logic possessed you (as a group), to introduce these +3 weapons and call it balanced? Especially if we are to take you (as a group, for the rest of this post you = group) at your word that these weapons (or something equivalent or better than these) will be introduced at a later time? This, IMO, screams of "sorry noobs, you can't have the extra power because you missed the early days of OB and "supported" us..."
2. At first, the thought I had was the shift to the attachment system was purely to get off the "permanency wagon": sell through current permanent items - make stronger item to drive "repeated" sales - nerf back into balance once items get too strong (game breaking) - repeat - system that DICE had ran with through the veterans/elite system, in that rental only items drive repeated purchases without the introduction of new toys. Now that I see permanent attachments, I wonder why you can't/couldn't/won't make a "better" balance system by removing the whole extra "+3 tier", and instead issue a set of attachments that would closely approximate the prior veterans/elite specifications to all prior veterans/elite owners?
Yes, I know that I may be asking for "classified" internal decision making information, however, I feel that without knowing even the final rationales for these decisions all I see is a desire to shaft those of us who owned "permanent" weapons before by making us re-buy the stuff that gives us the specifications we had before 1 Dec (because the 1-20 Dec specs were in error and not due us).