Premium Insurance

BattlecryGWJ, on May 23 2018 - 10:34, said:   Agreed, based on the forum response it looks like most people don't agree with me, though its also been discussed previously how the forums aren't necessarily representative of the player base as a whole given that its only the people who are aware of the issue and bothered by it that tend to come to the forums to complain about things.  If someone is happy about it, doesn't care, or is completely unaware then they tend to simply continue playing the game.  My intention was not to push my position as that of the majority of players, but simply to offer a dissenting perspective from the prevailing theme.     Without actual data, stating that it will be bottom tier 60% of the time is as much of an assumption as WG's statement that removing the preferential 8's will fix the issues with them being bottom tier so often.  I suspect you're right, but again, just pointing out the relative arbitrariness of the statement.     I tend to agree with that.  While the improved gun characteristics at least give it some viable fire power the armor changes without accompanying changes to mobility are unlikely to make it a meaningful contributor.     Agreed, they certainly created an PR problem that they didn't need to as evidenced by your choice of the word "milk" and insistent that its an absolute 2000 gold they're trying to pull rather than "up to" that much.  If they had actually released details of their expected trade in program then players might not have taken as much of an issue (and the option to keep, trade in or get a straight gold refund would have provided the best coverage), but since one if left to assume the worst, that tends to be what happens.     Given the part in bold, doesn't that tend to negate the concept of bait and switch?  If I've told you that the product I'm selling is going to be changed and you choose to buy it regardless, that decision would seem to be on the purchaser, not the seller.