I know that this mechanic (under a 3 or 4 star MT zeta lead) must have been unintended. It needs a hard counter.
This mechanic can auto any meta team with a f2p (No paywall) NS squad, consisting of zeta MT lead (two zetas on her help but aren't needed), Blue gear zombie, acolyte, Daka, and Asajj. 70k gp works fine. It gives any meta-esque team fits trying to figure out kill order. And they just auto every battle and win, except against a good troopers team (which isn't viable in arena)
A. 4 star zzMT with this team hung out in 4th all day, with inferior mods to most of our shard yesterday and almost never talked or if the top 10. Against all the meta and near meta teams.
This couldn't have been the intention. The mechanic must have been unforseen. Please resolve before this becomes the new go to hack to bypass all the really endgame teams we've been building for months.
Wow you really don't know what a pay wall is do you. MT is behind a pay wall, maybe learn to play before you make an ignorant post. It takes months to gear and star an NS team.
MT is behind a pay wall to get to 7*, but the poster's point is that you don't need a 7* MT to have this team work, and 4* MT is not behind a pay wall.
There has always been characters that work at low stars. Shore trooper, baze, there was just recently a squad on my shard running a 4* kru top 10 everyday. In a Nov. 15 shard stars aren't that important. That's why the devs made gear 12 7* only. They needed to give players a reason to spend on characters.
I know that this mechanic (under a 3 or 4 star MT zeta lead) must have been unintended. It needs a hard counter.
This mechanic can auto any meta team with a f2p (No paywall) NS squad, consisting of zeta MT lead (two zetas on her help but aren't needed), Blue gear zombie, acolyte, Daka, and Asajj. 70k gp works fine. It gives any meta-esque team fits trying to figure out kill order. And they just auto every battle and win, except against a good troopers team (which isn't viable in arena)
A. 4 star zzMT with this team hung out in 4th all day, with inferior mods to most of our shard yesterday and almost never talked or if the top 10. Against all the meta and near meta teams.
This couldn't have been the intention. The mechanic must have been unforseen. Please resolve before this becomes the new go to hack to bypass all the really endgame teams we've been building for months.
Wow you really don't know what a pay wall is do you. MT is behind a pay wall, maybe learn to play before you make an ignorant post. It takes months to gear and star an NS team.
MT is behind a pay wall to get to 7*, but the poster's point is that you don't need a 7* MT to have this team work, and 4* MT is not behind a pay wall.
DN, Sith assassin, R2, Thrawn, EP, Chirruit, Baze, GK just some of many characters that have been used all over arena and winning without being 7*.
Not relevant to what I posted. Yes, there are characters that are viable without being 7*. That has nothing to do with the question of whether the ability to run an effective NS team is behind a paywall.
I know that this mechanic (under a 3 or 4 star MT zeta lead) must have been unintended. It needs a hard counter.
This mechanic can auto any meta team with a f2p (No paywall) NS squad, consisting of zeta MT lead (two zetas on her help but aren't needed), Blue gear zombie, acolyte, Daka, and Asajj. 70k gp works fine. It gives any meta-esque team fits trying to figure out kill order. And they just auto every battle and win, except against a good troopers team (which isn't viable in arena)
A. 4 star zzMT with this team hung out in 4th all day, with inferior mods to most of our shard yesterday and almost never talked or if the top 10. Against all the meta and near meta teams.
This couldn't have been the intention. The mechanic must have been unforseen. Please resolve before this becomes the new go to hack to bypass all the really endgame teams we've been building for months.
Wow you really don't know what a pay wall is do you. MT is behind a pay wall, maybe learn to play before you make an ignorant post. It takes months to gear and star an NS team.
MT is behind a pay wall to get to 7*, but the poster's point is that you don't need a 7* MT to have this team work, and 4* MT is not behind a pay wall.
To take number 1 on my shard you cannot run anything below a 6 star MT. TRY AGAIN.
Then maybe you should have said that in response to Starseed instead of insulting him. Maybe that's true on your shard (I have no idea), but it's not true across the board. Plenty of people are successful in plenty of shards with less than a 6* MT.
So tell me all these people complaining about how NS are so easily farmed and they didn't have to go through a paywall like they did to get their characters. How are CLS, GK, R2, Zolo, Zarriss, Chaze and RJT locked behind a paywall. I don't recall having to ever pay for them and CLS was unlocked as a 7 star for free.
How about the people complaining that they took months to gear and level their character and it's unfair that NS don't have to. It took me just as long for me to get NS geared as you did, and the worst part is in order for me to get MT to gl12 I have to wait another 1 or 2 more years or spend 200 more to get her 7 star.
You also do not need DN, CLS, GK, Thrawn or anyone to 7* for them to be effective, gear and mods > stars. So don't give me this **** that its unfair that MT doesn't need to be 7* to be effective **** when that is true for more than just NS, or that Zombie is too powerful for a 3 * low gl character, because she is not, she is pathetically weak she only makes other characters stronger. Also the zombie isn't even what feeds Asajj and Daka most of the time, unless you keep killing the zombie when it's your turn when he doesn't have taunt. I would be more worried about the team that lets Daka, or MT die and then just does basic attacks on your highest HP/protection character till he has 30 stacks on Asajj. Zombie feeds so much less than a good NS players MT and Daka. I love it when someone kills MT or Daka, because every time I use a basic I either am calling Daka to stun or MT to apply more plague on everyone who is alive basic.
What are you even talking about? haha
Glad it's not just me. I don't understand how a single thing in that post relates to anything I said. I haven't lodged a complaint about anything in this thread.
it's ok reading comprehension is your friend, practice it and you will communicate better.
My Arena is STILL stuffed up with the same CLS meta, even post new Rey... Just me and another dude with our NS ripping it up.
I got four Zeta's on my team and 3 g12's - that's more work then the Chaze-cheeze or the Wiggs Cheese we've had in the past.
Everyone complaining about NS gets a big fat #nerfrey reward.
Read above, suggestions regarding AoE are plentiful. SOME of us like seeing MORE then CLS and GK's face in their Arena day in, day out, every week, of every month, since the current Meta was set....
On my server we have a guy with a **** team of NS who thinks his place is in top 10, well the shard has decided not to go down the cheap route, we beat him back constantly.
As someone who runs NS, I have to say, one of my favorite things about them is how they make all the entitled shard colluders mad.
On my server we have a guy with a **** team of NS who thinks his place is in top 10, well the shard has decided not to go down the cheap route, we beat him back constantly.
As someone who runs NS, I have to say, one of my favorite things about them is how they make all the entitled shard colluders mad.
There's no such thing as shard collusion. Calling cooperation that is neither illegal nor secret collusion is a misnomer.
Using a word that doesn't really fit to make something seems worse than it is, is manipulative. Accusing people of doing something they aren't doing is lying.
In other words, saying there is "shard collusion" is being a manipulative liar (probably unintentionally, but true nonetheless).
On my server we have a guy with a **** team of NS who thinks his place is in top 10, well the shard has decided not to go down the cheap route, we beat him back constantly.
As someone who runs NS, I have to say, one of my favorite things about them is how they make all the entitled shard colluders mad.
There's no such thing as shard collusion. Calling cooperation that is neither illegal nor secret collusion is a misnomer.
Using a word that doesn't really fit to make something seems worse than it is, is manipulative. Accusing people of doing something they aren't doing is lying.
In other words, saying there is "shard collusion" is being a manipulative liar (probably unintentionally, but true nonetheless).
On my server we have a guy with a **** team of NS who thinks his place is in top 10, well the shard has decided not to go down the cheap route, we beat him back constantly.
As someone who runs NS, I have to say, one of my favorite things about them is how they make all the entitled shard colluders mad.
There's no such thing as shard collusion. Calling cooperation that is neither illegal nor secret collusion is a misnomer.
Using a word that doesn't really fit to make something seems worse than it is, is manipulative. Accusing people of doing something they aren't doing is lying.
In other words, saying there is "shard collusion" is being a manipulative liar (probably unintentionally, but true nonetheless).
You must be so fun to hang around.
I'm lots of fun to hang around... as long as you aren't making incorrect inflammatory statements around me.
And if you like to do things like that, I wouldn't want to hang around you either.
On my server we have a guy with a **** team of NS who thinks his place is in top 10, well the shard has decided not to go down the cheap route, we beat him back constantly.
As someone who runs NS, I have to say, one of my favorite things about them is how they make all the entitled shard colluders mad.
There's no such thing as shard collusion. Calling cooperation that is neither illegal nor secret collusion is a misnomer.
Using a word that doesn't really fit to make something seems worse than it is, is manipulative. Accusing people of doing something they aren't doing is lying.
In other words, saying there is "shard collusion" is being a manipulative liar (probably unintentionally, but true nonetheless).
You must be so fun to hang around.
I'm lots of fun to hang around... as long as you aren't making incorrect inflammatory statements around me.
And if you like to do things like that, I wouldn't want to hang around you either.
Since I was told not to insult you I will instead educate you.
Definition of collusion
: secret agreement or cooperation especially for an illegal or deceitful purpose acting in collusion with the enemy
— collusive play \kə-ˈlü-siv, -ziv\ adjective
— collusively adverb
No where in the definition of collusion does it say ONLY for illegal purposes. There is indeed shard collusion, you may not be aware of it but there is. Every shard has some sort of way of communicating with others on their shard, in that group they talk about all kinds of things, including things that would be considered collusion with the enemy.
No where in the definition of collusion does it specifically state that collusion has to be secret, in fact it actually gives a 2nd option of cooperation.
It's OK this neither makes him a liar or manipulative, but it makes a you kind of a ****.
But I digress, the zombie is working as intended. There is no rule that keeps low level characters out of arena, if someone chooses to do that more power to him.
On my server we have a guy with a **** team of NS who thinks his place is in top 10, well the shard has decided not to go down the cheap route, we beat him back constantly.
As someone who runs NS, I have to say, one of my favorite things about them is how they make all the entitled shard colluders mad.
There's no such thing as shard collusion. Calling cooperation that is neither illegal nor secret collusion is a misnomer.
Using a word that doesn't really fit to make something seems worse than it is, is manipulative. Accusing people of doing something they aren't doing is lying.
In other words, saying there is "shard collusion" is being a manipulative liar (probably unintentionally, but true nonetheless).
You must be so fun to hang around.
I'm lots of fun to hang around... as long as you aren't making incorrect inflammatory statements around me.
And if you like to do things like that, I wouldn't want to hang around you either.
Since I was told not to insult you I will instead educate you.
Definition of collusion
: secret agreement or cooperation especially for an illegal or deceitful purpose acting in collusion with the enemy
— collusive play \kə-ˈlü-siv, -ziv\ adjective
— collusively adverb
No where in the definition of collusion does it say ONLY for illegal purposes. There is indeed shard collusion, you may not be aware of it but there is. Every shard has some sort of way of communicating with others on their shard, in that group they talk about all kinds of things, including things that would be considered collusion with the enemy.
No where in the definition of collusion does it specifically state that collusion has to be secret, in fact it actually gives a 2nd option of cooperation.
It's OK this neither makes him a liar or manipulative, but it makes a you kind of a ****.
But I digress, the zombie is working as intended. There is no rule that keeps low level characters out of arena, if someone chooses to do that more power to him.
Let me correct your misinterpretation of that definition: a secret agreement...
Notice I said neither secret nor illegal in my initial post...
Shard cooperation is neither secret nor illegal, therefore not collusion, so yes it is manipulative and lying to call it such.
Not understanding that it doesn't actually fit, doesn't make calling it so a non-inflammatory statement since it is technically a manipulative lie.
So thanks for the attempt to educate me. I'm glad we were able to use it as a chance to teach you something.
Oh, and about the not insulting me: calling me a **** is insulting me. Me feeling insulted for being called a cheater when I brake no rules doesn't make me a ****.
On my server we have a guy with a **** team of NS who thinks his place is in top 10, well the shard has decided not to go down the cheap route, we beat him back constantly.
As someone who runs NS, I have to say, one of my favorite things about them is how they make all the entitled shard colluders mad.
There's no such thing as shard collusion. Calling cooperation that is neither illegal nor secret collusion is a misnomer.
Using a word that doesn't really fit to make something seems worse than it is, is manipulative. Accusing people of doing something they aren't doing is lying.
In other words, saying there is "shard collusion" is being a manipulative liar (probably unintentionally, but true nonetheless).
You must be so fun to hang around.
I'm lots of fun to hang around... as long as you aren't making incorrect inflammatory statements around me.
And if you like to do things like that, I wouldn't want to hang around you either.
Since I was told not to insult you I will instead educate you.
Definition of collusion
: secret agreement or cooperation especially for an illegal or deceitful purpose acting in collusion with the enemy
— collusive play \kə-ˈlü-siv, -ziv\ adjective
— collusively adverb
No where in the definition of collusion does it say ONLY for illegal purposes. There is indeed shard collusion, you may not be aware of it but there is. Every shard has some sort of way of communicating with others on their shard, in that group they talk about all kinds of things, including things that would be considered collusion with the enemy.
No where in the definition of collusion does it specifically state that collusion has to be secret, in fact it actually gives a 2nd option of cooperation.
It's OK this neither makes him a liar or manipulative, but it makes a you kind of a ****.
But I digress, the zombie is working as intended. There is no rule that keeps low level characters out of arena, if someone chooses to do that more power to him.
Let me correct your misinterpretation of that definition: a secret agreement...
Notice I said neither secret nor illegal in my initial post...
Shard cooperation is neither secret nor illegal, therefore not collusion, so yes it is manipulative and lying to call it such.
Not understanding that it doesn't actually fit, doesn't make calling it so a non-inflammatory statement since it is technically a manipulative lie.
So thanks for the attempt to educate me. I'm glad we were able to use it as a chance to teach you something.
Oh, and about the not insulting me: calling me a **** is insulting me. Me feeling insulted for being called a cheater when I brake no rules doesn't make me a ****.
Unless you are in the chat it is a secret. I couldn't tell you who is colluding and who isn't. I'm guessing when Biggs becomes the lead in the top spot that there is collusion but don't really know who it is. It's a secret.
On my server we have a guy with a **** team of NS who thinks his place is in top 10, well the shard has decided not to go down the cheap route, we beat him back constantly.
As someone who runs NS, I have to say, one of my favorite things about them is how they make all the entitled shard colluders mad.
There's no such thing as shard collusion. Calling cooperation that is neither illegal nor secret collusion is a misnomer.
Using a word that doesn't really fit to make something seems worse than it is, is manipulative. Accusing people of doing something they aren't doing is lying.
In other words, saying there is "shard collusion" is being a manipulative liar (probably unintentionally, but true nonetheless).
You must be so fun to hang around.
I'm lots of fun to hang around... as long as you aren't making incorrect inflammatory statements around me.
And if you like to do things like that, I wouldn't want to hang around you either.
Since I was told not to insult you I will instead educate you.
Definition of collusion
: secret agreement or cooperation especially for an illegal or deceitful purpose acting in collusion with the enemy
— collusive play \kə-ˈlü-siv, -ziv\ adjective
— collusively adverb
No where in the definition of collusion does it say ONLY for illegal purposes. There is indeed shard collusion, you may not be aware of it but there is. Every shard has some sort of way of communicating with others on their shard, in that group they talk about all kinds of things, including things that would be considered collusion with the enemy.
No where in the definition of collusion does it specifically state that collusion has to be secret, in fact it actually gives a 2nd option of cooperation.
It's OK this neither makes him a liar or manipulative, but it makes a you kind of a ****.
But I digress, the zombie is working as intended. There is no rule that keeps low level characters out of arena, if someone chooses to do that more power to him.
Let me correct your misinterpretation of that definition: a secret agreement...
Notice I said neither secret nor illegal in my initial post...
Shard cooperation is neither secret nor illegal, therefore not collusion, so yes it is manipulative and lying to call it such.
Not understanding that it doesn't actually fit, doesn't make calling it so a non-inflammatory statement since it is technically a manipulative lie.
So thanks for the attempt to educate me. I'm glad we were able to use it as a chance to teach you something.
Oh, and about the not insulting me: calling me a **** is insulting me. Me feeling insulted for being called a cheater when I brake no rules doesn't make me a ****.
Unless you are in the chat it is a secret. I couldn't tell you who is colluding and who isn't. I'm guessing when Biggs becomes the lead in the top spot that there is collusion but don't really know who it is. It's a secret.
Not true. If you know there is a shard chat, then it isn't secret even if you don't know all the details, therefore it isn't collusion.
Unless the fact that they are meeting is a secret, it isn't collusion.
I'll end by saying this. Most people only know because of the results of what is seen not because anyone said stinks to be you because we are colluding against you.
I'll end by saying this. Most people only know because of the results of what is seen not because anyone said stinks to be you because we are colluding against you.
That's an impossible scenario. If someone told you they were colluding against you, it would be a lie because you would then know about it, which would make it secret and not collusion...
Shard chats are created from posts made on the forums, Redditt, etc. The construction of them is all done publicly. I used an abbreviated statement "if you know" instead of elaborating this earlier, but what it really is is: "as long as they aren't trying to hide it".
Doesn't matter if it is exclusive. Doesn't matter if it is known to a lot of people or not. If they built it through public avenues and aren't trying to hide it, it simply isn't collusion.
Even I was being loose with the definition by saying it could apply to illegal things that aren't hidden. but either way, the word simply doesn't fit what's occurring.
It's not good to insult a ton of people in this game just because you don't agree with their actions by labeling an acceptable act as a nefarious one.
Just use Nihilus, Vader, Kylo, Deathtrooper, Wedge, or anyone else who has an AoE. If they're blue gear why aren't you going before them? Are you using tier 1 gear?
Just use Nihilus, Vader, Kylo, Deathtrooper, Wedge, or anyone else who has an AoE. If they're blue gear why aren't you going before them? Are you using tier 1 gear?
Yes, that's why they're complaining. They can't beat teams with higher gear than their own.
@leef I don't know what you're Doing. Clearly this is now a thread about collusion definition and what is secret and not secret. Please stop trying to take this thread back to the original topic.
@leef I don't know what you're Doing. Clearly this is now a thread about collusion definition and what is secret and not secret. Please stop trying to take this thread back to the original topic.
haha, sorry.
Maybe i'll just have to make a thread of my own debating whether toons should potentially perform better at low gear/stars than at high gear/stars. Preferably without people who're just **** about zombi or collusion, haha.
i think they are complaining because ungear with no zeta 60-70k ns can beat well moded zeta team. Everyone know how to beat them i think you can stop posting how to do it
AOE beats it. Also. I run this team and have been seeing a bunch of jyn leads with Baze. Even with AI they occasionally clear stealth and wreck my acolyte. And if by some miracle of god I kill Baze, jyn revives him. Also kenobi+zariss+captain Han. The heals are ridiculous. Plus revives. And there’s no real way to take the Han out. I rarely actually die. But I definitely have no hope of beating those teams.
Also, I avoid zaul teams. Especially with low star zombie maul just repeatedly resets his AOE if he gets going. Any other heavy AOE teams I avoid like the plague. Veers imperial teams are a pain. Just because thrawn and cls are no longer the kill all win all characters does not mean that nightsisters are op. It’s called rock, paper, scissors. If there was a nuclear weapon option that beats all three then the game becomes pointless. And before nightsister rework. Thrawn/cls/kenobi was that nuclear weapon.
They just need to make it so Zombie doesn't revive unless there is an unstealthed NS ally. Broken issue solved.
While they are at it. Make it so zariss can’t heal more damage than is inflicted on Crit. Make it so Baze and kenobi gain taunt at the end of their turn rather than forcing you to rely on buff immunity/focusing two of the beefiest tanks in game first. Make it so cls cant solo entire teams. Make it so raid Han can’t one shot a character from full health and protection before fight even starts. I could go on. There are plenty of ridiculously strong characters and combos in the game. I’m sorry that you are so stubborn you won’t let go of whatever single target reliant team you are running. But once you learn what AOE is, and that you can use it. Maybe acolyte zombie will feel less “broken” to you.
Shard cooperation is neither secret nor illegal, therefore not collusion, so yes it is manipulative and lying to call it such.
You know you're wrong when you're arguing semantics over content.
"It's not illegal, therefore we can do it!" Okay, cool. Enjoy those crystals, but those of us with ethics are going to compete in the literal only part of the game that involves direct competition.
Okay, what arena positions are we taking about here? No way a blue gear zombie stays top 20 on defense on any shard older than one year.
On offense it can't even climb to top 5 on my shard. And if it can it's not bc blue gear zombie, but bc god mods.
The number 3 team on my shard is g12 7 star nightsisters+g6 3 star zombie. Yes they have good mods. My shard is from a month after game was released roughly 2-3 years ago.
Not saying she is op. But a lot of top teams on my shard are single target. And probably too stubborn to change. So yea. Nightsisters will probably stay up there. I’m rank 80-100 with a 4 star g9 zombie, but my mods suck
Replies
it's ok reading comprehension is your friend, practice it and you will communicate better.
I got four Zeta's on my team and 3 g12's - that's more work then the Chaze-cheeze or the Wiggs Cheese we've had in the past.
Everyone complaining about NS gets a big fat #nerfrey reward.
Read above, suggestions regarding AoE are plentiful. SOME of us like seeing MORE then CLS and GK's face in their Arena day in, day out, every week, of every month, since the current Meta was set....
As someone who runs NS, I have to say, one of my favorite things about them is how they make all the entitled shard colluders mad.
There's no such thing as shard collusion. Calling cooperation that is neither illegal nor secret collusion is a misnomer.
Using a word that doesn't really fit to make something seems worse than it is, is manipulative. Accusing people of doing something they aren't doing is lying.
In other words, saying there is "shard collusion" is being a manipulative liar (probably unintentionally, but true nonetheless).
You must be so fun to hang around.
I'm lots of fun to hang around... as long as you aren't making incorrect inflammatory statements around me.
And if you like to do things like that, I wouldn't want to hang around you either.
And fun is why I play swgoh.
Since I was told not to insult you I will instead educate you.
Definition of collusion
: secret agreement or cooperation especially for an illegal or deceitful purpose acting in collusion with the enemy
— collusive play \kə-ˈlü-siv, -ziv\ adjective
— collusively adverb
No where in the definition of collusion does it say ONLY for illegal purposes. There is indeed shard collusion, you may not be aware of it but there is. Every shard has some sort of way of communicating with others on their shard, in that group they talk about all kinds of things, including things that would be considered collusion with the enemy.
No where in the definition of collusion does it specifically state that collusion has to be secret, in fact it actually gives a 2nd option of cooperation.
It's OK this neither makes him a liar or manipulative, but it makes a you kind of a ****.
But I digress, the zombie is working as intended. There is no rule that keeps low level characters out of arena, if someone chooses to do that more power to him.
Let me correct your misinterpretation of that definition: a secret agreement...
Notice I said neither secret nor illegal in my initial post...
Shard cooperation is neither secret nor illegal, therefore not collusion, so yes it is manipulative and lying to call it such.
Not understanding that it doesn't actually fit, doesn't make calling it so a non-inflammatory statement since it is technically a manipulative lie.
So thanks for the attempt to educate me. I'm glad we were able to use it as a chance to teach you something.
Oh, and about the not insulting me: calling me a **** is insulting me. Me feeling insulted for being called a cheater when I brake no rules doesn't make me a ****.
Unless you are in the chat it is a secret. I couldn't tell you who is colluding and who isn't. I'm guessing when Biggs becomes the lead in the top spot that there is collusion but don't really know who it is. It's a secret.
Not true. If you know there is a shard chat, then it isn't secret even if you don't know all the details, therefore it isn't collusion.
Unless the fact that they are meeting is a secret, it isn't collusion.
That's an impossible scenario. If someone told you they were colluding against you, it would be a lie because you would then know about it, which would make it secret and not collusion...
Shard chats are created from posts made on the forums, Redditt, etc. The construction of them is all done publicly. I used an abbreviated statement "if you know" instead of elaborating this earlier, but what it really is is: "as long as they aren't trying to hide it".
Doesn't matter if it is exclusive. Doesn't matter if it is known to a lot of people or not. If they built it through public avenues and aren't trying to hide it, it simply isn't collusion.
Even I was being loose with the definition by saying it could apply to illegal things that aren't hidden. but either way, the word simply doesn't fit what's occurring.
It's not good to insult a ton of people in this game just because you don't agree with their actions by labeling an acceptable act as a nefarious one.
Yes, that's why they're complaining. They can't beat teams with higher gear than their own.
haha, sorry.
Maybe i'll just have to make a thread of my own debating whether toons should potentially perform better at low gear/stars than at high gear/stars. Preferably without people who're just **** about zombi or collusion, haha.
On offense it can't even climb to top 5 on my shard. And if it can it's not bc blue gear zombie, but bc god mods.
yes absolutely. Nov 15 shard. blue gear zombie top 15 all day long. probably top 10 if people didn't bust out the troopers.
We have no problem with it, they have their counters.
Also, I avoid zaul teams. Especially with low star zombie maul just repeatedly resets his AOE if he gets going. Any other heavy AOE teams I avoid like the plague. Veers imperial teams are a pain. Just because thrawn and cls are no longer the kill all win all characters does not mean that nightsisters are op. It’s called rock, paper, scissors. If there was a nuclear weapon option that beats all three then the game becomes pointless. And before nightsister rework. Thrawn/cls/kenobi was that nuclear weapon.
While they are at it. Make it so zariss can’t heal more damage than is inflicted on Crit. Make it so Baze and kenobi gain taunt at the end of their turn rather than forcing you to rely on buff immunity/focusing two of the beefiest tanks in game first. Make it so cls cant solo entire teams. Make it so raid Han can’t one shot a character from full health and protection before fight even starts. I could go on. There are plenty of ridiculously strong characters and combos in the game. I’m sorry that you are so stubborn you won’t let go of whatever single target reliant team you are running. But once you learn what AOE is, and that you can use it. Maybe acolyte zombie will feel less “broken” to you.
"It's not illegal, therefore we can do it!" Okay, cool. Enjoy those crystals, but those of us with ethics are going to compete in the literal only part of the game that involves direct competition.
The number 3 team on my shard is g12 7 star nightsisters+g6 3 star zombie. Yes they have good mods. My shard is from a month after game was released roughly 2-3 years ago.
Not saying she is op. But a lot of top teams on my shard are single target. And probably too stubborn to change. So yea. Nightsisters will probably stay up there. I’m rank 80-100 with a 4 star g9 zombie, but my mods suck