You know it just occurred to me lol and dont get me wrong this game is trash regardless

It has far bigger problems, BUT all you loud and proud "NMS" people, especially the ones who would regularly on every platform possible SAY how you were "beating the system" so to speak. Having fun, making a good team, profiting off investments and card flipping etc....

All you did was tell ea what to take away and change to make more money. Lol just an observation, like a random shower thought kinda thing. Like i said the game is terrible even if the greed and stuff hadnt got exponentially worse in the past two or three years. Its just interesting to me bc alot of these same people would say "just don't buy packs or ea will never change" well since you guys gave them the answers to the test, thats kind of the only way left. 🤷

idk, im nms and i have endless coins still.  it's never been hard to make coins in mut, still isnt'

twitchtaxpro said:

idk, im nms and i have endless coins still.  it's never been hard to make coins in mut, still isnt'

Well im glad youre still having fun and unaffected but every other day i see someone banned for legitimately flipping cards (i have no dog in this fight as i dont do stuff like that, especially since the menus became super laggy permanently a few years ago) and hear people complaining about how hard it is to have a good team without either spending tons of money or literally having no life and just playing madden 24/7. 

Ijs, trickle down economics was working in this case. When the whales (or people like you or other NMS savvy people or grinders) had more success in their methods, the "normies" buying their cards on the AH were paying lower prices. A mediocre small name "ltd" with no special abilities being  2M or more used to be unheard of, especially before spring. Now every release, most ltds are 1.5-2.5m, especially if theyre actually good (which is rare, usually theyre just expensive and not good)

NMS coin stackers and whales are the same in a sense. One uses a lot of money and the other uses a lot of time. It’s still all EA’s greed for limiting the pack odds to the point where you have to spend money for a good pull. They know how the human mind and nature work and exploit it.

SosaChamberlain said:

NMS coin stackers and whales are the same in a sense. One uses a lot of money and the other uses a lot of time. It’s still all EA’s greed for limiting the pack odds to the point where you have to spend money for a good pull. They know how the human mind and nature work and exploit it.

Cant disagree with any of that.

Still have no clue why people take pride in being NMS. I mean if you're happy that you're NMS then fine but why do you feel the need to announce it? It doesn't make you special or different and you just look like a tool.

SosaChamberlain said:

NMS coin stackers and whales are the same in a sense. One uses a lot of money and the other uses a lot of time. It’s still all EA’s greed for limiting the pack odds to the point where you have to spend money for a good pull. They know how the human mind and nature work and exploit it.

Yup, lots and lots of time. It's really just about watching the store offers and not buying them. They tell you what cards are going to influx into the market so that you can buy them from people spending money and selling them cheap and then sell them high when the supply is gone. Easier said than done though, if you don't pay close attention and constantly have an eye on the market you miss the buy and sell windows. 
Sometimes the investments miss entirely, but overall it's a good strategy to pair with prebuilding sets. Time investment usually isn't worth it either, it has become too much

EA is certainly squeezing as many methods as they can. In my opinion they want people to focus on sets. It makes the economy easier to manage. When they combine this strategy with offers that are largely limited to a champ/LTD or a chance at a champ/LTD and 2-3 of the cards you would need to build a champ and offer few other content generation options it has resulted in dependence on sets for high level cards/content and has additional resulted in an AH that is utilized less and less by the average user.

To say we don’t share some culpability would be delusional but I wouldn’t blame this strategy on anyone but EA. Yes when people openly discuss methods you should always expect it to get blown up and always do the math for yourself. EA didn’t need anyone to tell them the methods we are using. They are well aware and as much involved in what methods are being used as we are. EAs greed is inevitable, systematic and deliberate. They are a snowflake in a world of manure or simply put they are a very special piece of shit. That sounds more spiteful and resentful than I intended but oh well. When actions feel purposefully designed (doesn’t matter if it’s true or not) to adversely affect users it shouldn’t surprise EA that people feel that way towards them. Any strategy that is reactive in nature is going to have additional vulnerabilities and I put sets in that category. I think of it as doing business in a third world country with a corrupt overreaching government that changes the rules as they see fit for their gains. Damn I always take that too far. Regardless sets can remain viable and profitable. It is certainly necessary at this point for a significant percentage of users to do sets. This doesn’t even touch the subject that a dependency on sets also gives EA a way to milk time played.

The “look what you made me do” approach is convenient for those looking to blame others for their actions and/or justify those awful actions.

Odog123 said:

EA is certainly squeezing as many methods as they can. In my opinion they want people to focus on sets. It makes the economy easier to manage. When they combine this strategy with offers that are largely limited to a champ/LTD or a chance at a champ/LTD and 2-3 of the cards you would need to build a champ and offer few other content generation options it has resulted in dependence on sets for high level cards/content and has additional resulted in an AH that is utilized less and less by the average user.

 

To say we don’t share some culpability would be delusional but I wouldn’t blame this strategy on anyone but EA. Yes when people openly discuss methods you should always expect it to get blown up and always do the math for yourself. EA didn’t need anyone to tell them the methods we are using. They are well aware and as much involved in what methods are being used as we are. EAs greed is inevitable, systematic and deliberate. They are a snowflake in a world of manure or simply put they are a very special piece of shit. That sounds more spiteful and resentful than I intended but oh well. When actions feel purposefully designed (doesn’t matter if it’s true or not) to adversely affect users it shouldn’t surprise EA that people feel that way towards them. Any strategy that is reactive in nature is going to have additional vulnerabilities and I put sets in that category. I think of it as doing business in a third world country with a corrupt overreaching government that changes the rules as they see fit for their gains. Damn I always take that too far. Regardless sets can remain viable and profitable. It is certainly necessary at this point for a significant percentage of users to do sets. This doesn’t even touch the subject that a dependency on sets also gives EA a way to milk time played.

 

The “look what you made me do” approach is convenient for those looking to blame others for their actions and/or justify those awful actions.

Very well said.

Just tell them they don't have a life and they are usually quiet

I feel like you're flailing, but I'm not particularly happy with the situation either.

Bottom line: The way for ordinary players to put the hurt on EA is to deprive the whales of the shameless beatdowns they administer on casuals: Simply refuse to play head-to-head. The whole pay-to-play model crumbles when the pay-to-players have long waits during matchmaking sessions. And it becomes very difficult for EA to answer to their shareholders when server loads are light and the number of unique players is way down.

I suggested this before Zero Chill, and got absolutely zero traction, and it's because people aren't actually willing to do what it takes to make a company take notice: Show them their game is inadequate by not playing it.