I paid top dollar for these, and now you’re just handing out for free. I want a refund! Would of used that money on a premium squad.
5 Likes
The worst part is the tech tree isn’t even better off with the new Thompson, sure it has a higher rpm but that isn’t always a good thing, the allies didn’t even need another 50 round Thompson, a 100 round version would be more welcome.
8 Likes
The thompson we bought is actually very nice to use because it has really low dispersion
Really felt decent to use at BR 5…now that its tech tree they have reason to remove the low dispersion to be consistent with everyone other tech tree smg
As long as they dont touch the one we paid for lol
Then i “would” want a refund
1 Like
I don’t want to start a fight but I like the new Thompson. It adds a nice change, with higher fire rate, nice sights (in my opinion), and a fore grip.
Thanks for your time
Blah blah blah iconic gangster tommy go brrrt (for free!)
2 Likes
Yeah it’s by far the best thompson out there (except for maybe the nvkd squad for russia), and yes it’s a nice addition to the TT (even though I’m getting really sick of thompsons now), but the main point is they sold us something “unique/exclusive” (which wasn’t cheap either) then give out the exact same thing in the TT for free not very long after. If it gets 100rds and the TT gets 50rds i wouldn’t be so mad even though i still would not have bought them knowing they’re going to TT. I would much rather have spent that money on the upcoming japanese paratrooper squad instead.
You spent that money multiple months ago with the guise of getting a unique weapon… had it for plenty of time and now choose to complain because rightfully so it went into the tech tree… and i’m pretty sure the prohibition has darker wood grain but i could be wrong there and it’s just the lighting in showcase.
Hah…good one. If you actually read what I said, you would know I have nothing against something being in tech tree itself. That’s not the argument here. It’s that they sold us a unique weapon, then put said weapon in TT. Don’t be salty at the people who actually pay for stuff in the game and help support it. We should all agree the practice of doing what they just did here is wrong, and just because I’ve had it for a few months doesn’t mean shit. A unique weapon is a unique weapon, end of story. It wasn’t sold as a skin. There’s literally no logical defense for this.
I bought four of the Prohibition Thompsons, and love them. So, I guess I don’t care if they become TT as it makes it possible to own more. However, I use very few Thompsons at BR5, so in the long run, they really won’t help me much.
However, if the Dev’s did the right thing and unlocked premium squads we BOUGHT, then I could probably build a nice Thompson BR5 squad, however, all my premium squads are locked at other BR levels, or just sit unused because I’ve bought to many over the years that since I can’t change them, THEY SIT UNUSED. Thanks for penalizing me for supporting your game by purchasing TO MANY PREMIUM SQUADS. There is nothing unique about a squad that sits unused, that’s called a WASTE! 
Do the right thing Dev’s and give those who buy a perk by unlocking our damn squads. 
1 Like
The question is, would you have bought them had you known they would shortly be free? This is borderline fraudulent and there’s reason to believe there’s a viable law suit over this. It’s illegal to sell people things when they don’t truly know what they’re getting. Can’t speak for everyone, but I do not and will not spend money on something that i can get for free. If it was in the TT first then sold as a skin that’s a different story. The other skins sold also had letters behind the names to identify it as a skin. The ac thomson never had that. Gonna go take some screenshots before it gets changed
1 Like
No. 
However I don’t see a chance in hell that this greedy group will every consider giving us our money back.
It’s kind of like the T-20 as I had bought four from the BP store before they added them to the TT.
1 Like
Yes, i bought some too, and they’ve done similar things else where as well. However i consider this to be much worse. The t20e1 atleast has a bipod differentiating the two, and you could of also gotten them with gold orders for free. So while i still think that’s a bit scummy, the situation with ac thompson is on a whole new level and crosses a line that should not have been crossed.
1 Like
@Euthymia07-live, @MajorMcDonalds
This needs to be forwarded to the snail. I want a refund if the assets i paid for end up being just a skin (i use the word skin lightly because it looks the exact same)
- Consumer Protection Laws
In most countries (U.S., EU, UK, etc.), it can be illegal to mislead consumers about what they are purchasing.
If the game marketed the item as a unique in-game item (implying exclusivity, special function, or permanence), and later retroactively reclassified it as just a “weapon skin,” regulators could see that as false or deceptive advertising.
The key factor is whether a reasonable consumer would have been misled at the time of purchase.
- EULAs & “Virtual Goods”
Almost all games have End User License Agreements (EULAs) that say players don’t “own” items — they’re just licensed digital assets that can be changed or removed.
That gives companies a lot of legal cover.
But EULAs don’t override consumer protection law. If a company knowingly misrepresented an item to induce purchases, it can still face legal or regulatory issues.
- Possible Legal Risks
Civil liability: Players could sue (usually through a class action) claiming false advertising or unfair business practices.
Regulatory action: Agencies like the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) or UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) could investigate if the practice was widespread.
Not criminal: This wouldn’t be a “go to jail” crime, but rather a consumer rights violation leading to refunds, fines, or mandated disclosures.
- Practical Reality
It’s a gray area because companies can argue:
“We never guaranteed exclusivity.”
“The item always functioned as a cosmetic (skin), we just later released a similar/free version.”
Whether it’s illegal would depend on exact wording of the sale, how it was marketed, and the jurisdiction’s consumer protection standards.
Bottom line:
If a game sold you something while strongly implying it was a unique item, then months later gave everyone the same thing for free and rebranded yours as just a skin, it could be considered false or misleading advertising under consumer protection law. But whether it’s actually illegal depends on how it was marketed and your country’s regulations.
1 Like
I’m not going to say that what is happening is fair, but it’s not the first time. So… you should have known… I guess?
1 Like
You are in between these two… skip depression over your 40$ and hit acceptance… a lot of enlisted players lack that ability.
People who bought premium 20 rounder Thompson for BR2:
3 Likes
It was quite obvious it’s just a reskin of weapon that’s going to be released in future. Otherwise it wouldn’t have the special nickname.
I still use it all the time, but I’m still holding out for the Devs to rid br2 of the 30rd Thompson and put a 20rd version in its place.
2 Likes