I don't think they anticipated so many people being all pouty-pants.
This is the part that I find funny.. that they thought this somehow would not happen. Like, I knew this would happen the moment I saw that the "Showing up" rewards were only slightly worse then actually putting in effort to win. With the 8 battles having better prizes, winning for them will be the incentive... but you will still have people losing on purpose for free stuff. Show up 3 times to do your 3 loser matches and get rewarded for showing up.
AND THEN you get a by and get better free stuff for showing up.
Just noticed as long as a player sets one zone no points r awarded for empty zones. I still won as I only have 2 zones but this type of stooping low tactics to try to win can be extremely exploited for those with more zones.
As u will give ur opponent more points for conquering zones and the battle points then u would earn from setting defense squads.
Won by like 30 points really don’t want to have to stoop this low to only setting one zone and seeing who can not lose health with battles or protection to get win.
I guess when whales meet F2P that outmatch them they have to call on extreme measures smh.
Firstly I’ll preface this by saying that I’m well aware you can’t win a GA by not setting any defense, that’s not the point of this post.
The issue is more with the players not setting defense but still being able to get the credit bonus from killing squads while also working on quests, while their opponent can do nothing in return and loses both benefits.
A potential solution to this would be to lock out territories for attack for players that don’t set a defense.
ie:
Player A sets a full defense
Player B sets no defense
As player B sets nothing, both of the player A territories are now locked out and unable to be attacked, meaning that player B cannot gain the credits nor quest progression, on top of losing the GA.
If Player B were to set defense in one territory only, then they would only have one of Player As territories open for attack, as Player A also then gets a chance to attack Player B in only one territory. Player A would still win the GA overall regardless.
Easiest solution would be if you Join, and don't set a D within the setup phase, it's a void battle and opponent wins by default; you don't get 2nd place rewards either
Solution is already in place. No defense = -90 banners. Nothing to attack = - up to 64 banners. Setting no defense puts you at a 26 banner disadvantage per team.
Solution is already in place. No defense = -90 banners. Nothing to attack = - up to 64 banners. Setting no defense puts you at a 26 banner disadvantage per team.
OP is talking more about the fact that those of us facing opponents who haven't set any defence are unable to progress on quests, plus we miss out on 100k per battle.
My opponent didn't set any defence and took out 5 of my teams on offence. He loses, but still gets 500k credits I can't get and also gets progress towards the quests, which again I can't get. Given the quest rewards are zeta mats, it stings a little.
There's still the matter of those who don't even attack anyway. So really the best would be to auto deploy (randomly or by whatever mean) if nothing is set at the end of the phase.
Agreed.If opponent sets no defense, they should get no rewards and be locked out of the attack phase.
People don't learn unless they are penalized for it
Agreed.If opponent sets no defense, they should get no rewards and be locked out of the attack phase.
People don't learn unless they are penalized for it
The thing is, they ARE penalized for it. This is just a one-and-done event with two players so there are only two tiers of rewards. But not deploying anything and auto-losing in a real Grand Arena will give you the lowest tier of reward out of eight.
People don’t care, this game is not made for pvp, it’s not even pvp when you play CG AI which is painfully bad.
I understand some of you feel cheated but suck it up cause you can’t expect people to put in effort in something that isn’t fun for them.
If I see one more **** attacking a Jedi with a blaster pistol, then I'll kill them myself!
Agreed.If opponent sets no defense, they should get no rewards and be locked out of the attack phase.
People don't learn unless they are penalized for it
The thing is, they ARE penalized for it. This is just a one-and-done event with two players so there are only two tiers of rewards. But not deploying anything and auto-losing in a real Grand Arena will give you the lowest tier of reward out of eight.
i'm also curious if you'll even be eligible for rewards if you didn't get any banners at all (no def teams and no offensive wins). iirc you won't get any rewards in TW if you don't have banners, so maybe it's the same for GA.
Agreed.If opponent sets no defense, they should get no rewards and be locked out of the attack phase.
People don't learn unless they are penalized for it
I know some people got a "You did not participate and do not get rewards" message when the first attempt at GA run ended, so my guess is that they are trying to address this in some way.
Not clear what is required to count as participating, whether it specifically looks at just whether you set a defense, just whether you attack, whether you either attack or set defenses, or if you have to do both. That doesn't help with not being able to get the credits for defeating squads or progressing on quests, but it should remove incentive to sign up and not participate so hopefully over time it will be less and less common.
Again this is my guess based on people reporting that "did not participate" message, this part hasn't been explicitly addressed I don't think.
The thing is, they ARE penalized for it. This is just a one-and-done event with two players so there are only two tiers of rewards. But not deploying anything and auto-losing in a real Grand Arena will give you the lowest tier of reward out of eight.
Still, some might not prioritize GA alltogether since they believe to not be able to compete (regardless of whether that's true or not). If they then just "join and do nothing", they shouldn't be rewarded with anything, unless they participated in positioning squads. I think a good idea might be a minimum amount of defensive squads placed (e.g., in the 4 fights set at least 75% possible defensive squads).
It really is frustrating to not face any team in GA - well yeah free win yay! But it's honestly no fun. Additionally, the quest will take so much longer to be fulfilled - and omg those yummy rewards!
They should auto-fill just like they said it would.
I know some have already said that they were only supposed to auto-fill between rounds, but clearly they have the capability of doing this. When I go to do any battle for the first time, there's always a team set, so why not just do that? I would be disappointed if I found out that my teams were auto set with no synergies or anything, but it would be something I could control (y'know...by setting defenses next time). The way it is now is 10X more frustrating because you can't control whether or not your opponent is going to set their defenses and it hurts you in missing out on achievements and potential win bonuses.
Auto-fill empty slots like everyone expected in the first place and everything is fine.
Same here. Not like I waited 3 days or anything. Def more the player's fault than CG though.
Well, perhaps. But it also might have been the fact that despite the excellent matchmaking (our GP was almost identical), he was scared off by my 53 g12 toons.....to his 19.
So what your saying.... is your opponent selflessly leveled/modded/and geared a bunch of trash toons to 85/g8 in order to help out his guild for TB, and is now being punished for this act of teamwork by being matched with someone who left his trash at level 1/g 0?
I don't care if the other guy gets his full rewards, less rewards for a loss, or no rewards at all. Taking away his rewards isn't going to improve my experience in any way. You can talk about it being a deterrent all you want, but it'll still happen. Make it so that it can't happen (auto-fill) and then my ability to participate in an event is no longer contingent on the random guy I get matched up with's participation.
Solution is already in place. No defense = -90 banners. Nothing to attack = - up to 64 banners. Setting no defense puts you at a 26 banner disadvantage per team.
Clearly you didn’t bother to read the first line of my post. Well done
Haven’t seen this mentioned yet but only skimmed through. This is only an exhibition match to get kinks out and feedback. While this is feedback I feel it’s important to remember that this will be played out tournament style in game when it starts for real. If they don’t set defense when this starts take the easy win and move on to bigger better rewards and be matched against others that did set defenses as they won theirs also.
This was posted to facebook a while ago. Someone forgot to post defense and ended up winning. What is going on here???
It was posted here that they will earn the conquer points when they go into the grand arena. So in this situation they havent entered since attack phase started.
Easy fix ... no defense squads = conquered territory and points awarded to the would be attacker. Given you can’t earn more on attacking than you can through setting defense, impossible for no defense to win.
Again things like this is why they want to do a trial run. Personally don’t understand why they didn’t set up an auto lose thing like that prior to an exhibition
Easy fix ... no defense squads = conquered territory and points awarded to the would be attacker. Given you can’t earn more on attacking than you can through setting defense, impossible for no defense to win.
This is already how it works, you can’t win by not setting defense
This was posted to facebook a while ago. Someone forgot to post defense and ended up winning. What is going on here???
What's going on is that the opponent who DID set the defenses has not entered Grand Arena since this round started. As soon as he/she goes in, they will receive their territory conquer banners and therefore win. The one who didn't set any defenses will not win.
Agreed.If opponent sets no defense, they should get no rewards and be locked out of the attack phase.
People don't learn unless they are penalized for it
The thing is, they ARE penalized for it. This is just a one-and-done event with two players so there are only two tiers of rewards. But not deploying anything and auto-losing in a real Grand Arena will give you the lowest tier of reward out of eight.
Maybe but maybe you wont get paired with immortal opponents in the 2nd round or 3rd whatnot
I would have thought that was case and given it is then I don’t understand why this is such an issue. I feel their matching is far more of one than people not putting up a defense. Silly people
I would have thought that was case and given it is then I don’t understand why this is such an issue. I feel their matching is far more of one than people not putting up a defense. Silly people
Because there are a lot of stupid people who still think you can win by not setting defense and are turning it into a much bigger problem than it actually it.
The only real issue is that the people who don’t set defense can still attack meaning they still get the credit and quest bonuses while denying both to their opponent.
The matchmaking is fine as well imo, people are just complaining when they come up against someone with a better structured roster than themselves.
Replies
You want bonus and quests from me....... no bonus no quests for you six months.
This is the part that I find funny.. that they thought this somehow would not happen. Like, I knew this would happen the moment I saw that the "Showing up" rewards were only slightly worse then actually putting in effort to win. With the 8 battles having better prizes, winning for them will be the incentive... but you will still have people losing on purpose for free stuff. Show up 3 times to do your 3 loser matches and get rewarded for showing up.
AND THEN you get a by and get better free stuff for showing up.
As u will give ur opponent more points for conquering zones and the battle points then u would earn from setting defense squads.
Won by like 30 points really don’t want to have to stoop this low to only setting one zone and seeing who can not lose health with battles or protection to get win.
I guess when whales meet F2P that outmatch them they have to call on extreme measures smh.
The issue is more with the players not setting defense but still being able to get the credit bonus from killing squads while also working on quests, while their opponent can do nothing in return and loses both benefits.
A potential solution to this would be to lock out territories for attack for players that don’t set a defense.
ie:
Player A sets a full defense
Player B sets no defense
As player B sets nothing, both of the player A territories are now locked out and unable to be attacked, meaning that player B cannot gain the credits nor quest progression, on top of losing the GA.
If Player B were to set defense in one territory only, then they would only have one of Player As territories open for attack, as Player A also then gets a chance to attack Player B in only one territory. Player A would still win the GA overall regardless.
Thoughts?
OP is talking more about the fact that those of us facing opponents who haven't set any defence are unable to progress on quests, plus we miss out on 100k per battle.
My opponent didn't set any defence and took out 5 of my teams on offence. He loses, but still gets 500k credits I can't get and also gets progress towards the quests, which again I can't get. Given the quest rewards are zeta mats, it stings a little.
Discord: Iona Starbound#5299
People don't learn unless they are penalized for it
The thing is, they ARE penalized for it. This is just a one-and-done event with two players so there are only two tiers of rewards. But not deploying anything and auto-losing in a real Grand Arena will give you the lowest tier of reward out of eight.
I understand some of you feel cheated but suck it up cause you can’t expect people to put in effort in something that isn’t fun for them.
i'm also curious if you'll even be eligible for rewards if you didn't get any banners at all (no def teams and no offensive wins). iirc you won't get any rewards in TW if you don't have banners, so maybe it's the same for GA.
I know some people got a "You did not participate and do not get rewards" message when the first attempt at GA run ended, so my guess is that they are trying to address this in some way.
Not clear what is required to count as participating, whether it specifically looks at just whether you set a defense, just whether you attack, whether you either attack or set defenses, or if you have to do both. That doesn't help with not being able to get the credits for defeating squads or progressing on quests, but it should remove incentive to sign up and not participate so hopefully over time it will be less and less common.
Again this is my guess based on people reporting that "did not participate" message, this part hasn't been explicitly addressed I don't think.
Still, some might not prioritize GA alltogether since they believe to not be able to compete (regardless of whether that's true or not). If they then just "join and do nothing", they shouldn't be rewarded with anything, unless they participated in positioning squads. I think a good idea might be a minimum amount of defensive squads placed (e.g., in the 4 fights set at least 75% possible defensive squads).
It really is frustrating to not face any team in GA - well yeah free win yay! But it's honestly no fun. Additionally, the quest will take so much longer to be fulfilled - and omg those yummy rewards!
I know some have already said that they were only supposed to auto-fill between rounds, but clearly they have the capability of doing this. When I go to do any battle for the first time, there's always a team set, so why not just do that? I would be disappointed if I found out that my teams were auto set with no synergies or anything, but it would be something I could control (y'know...by setting defenses next time). The way it is now is 10X more frustrating because you can't control whether or not your opponent is going to set their defenses and it hurts you in missing out on achievements and potential win bonuses.
Auto-fill empty slots like everyone expected in the first place and everything is fine.
So what your saying.... is your opponent selflessly leveled/modded/and geared a bunch of trash toons to 85/g8 in order to help out his guild for TB, and is now being punished for this act of teamwork by being matched with someone who left his trash at level 1/g 0?
Clearly you didn’t bother to read the first line of my post. Well done
It was posted here that they will earn the conquer points when they go into the grand arena. So in this situation they havent entered since attack phase started.
This is already how it works, you can’t win by not setting defense
What's going on is that the opponent who DID set the defenses has not entered Grand Arena since this round started. As soon as he/she goes in, they will receive their territory conquer banners and therefore win. The one who didn't set any defenses will not win.
Maybe but maybe you wont get paired with immortal opponents in the 2nd round or 3rd whatnot
Could even squeak out a 4th i think
Because there are a lot of stupid people who still think you can win by not setting defense and are turning it into a much bigger problem than it actually it.
The only real issue is that the people who don’t set defense can still attack meaning they still get the credit and quest bonuses while denying both to their opponent.
The matchmaking is fine as well imo, people are just complaining when they come up against someone with a better structured roster than themselves.