Chris
Jack
I respond here to keep the conversation focussed.
If the change is not to generate meaningful revenue, then I implore you to either reverse the decision, or change the cost to a single token if you wish to combat constant name changes. It is sad as in multiple leagues I race in, we have people saying they can no longer afford (as a free player) to partake in our team mechanics. This is so sad, and I hope you can reverse this quickly just like you have done with the team colour, perhaps as a nice touch to your long-time players.
I think Chris is right, changes are not necessary from a dev or owner perspective, but I believe it will not help how the game is viewed by the general playerbase.
The new changes that are bringing in money have caused discontent among some, but in general has been received well with some cool new features, which in turn provide a new stream of income for the game to use as a springboard to new heights.
However, I believe there is a difference between introducing these new features with an appropriate cost, and changing a fundamental and basic feature of the game to come with a cost. This creates an impression among the playerbase that everything will be monetised in an extreme p2w situation, when in reality there were only a few additional token costs that will change from the previous dynamic.
I don't think this negative impression is a good idea, but I understand what is trying to be achieved. If the goal is to prevent people from constantly changing their name, then perhaps the better way to go about it would be to have a cooldown to changing your team name (Maybe a couple of weeks), during which you can pay tokens to change your name immediately.
I believe this would be a more effective way to restrict the frequency of name changes, while also maintaining a positive relationship with the playerbase.