Galactic Power Adjustment

Replies

  • No_Try
    4051 posts Member
    edited January 2019
    Gannon wrote: »
    No_Try wrote: »
    No_Try wrote: »
    Whatelse73 wrote: »
    Whatelse73 wrote: »
    The problem with the current GA system is that CG wants us to be "collectors" because they make more money that way, but GA calculating GP to create opponents punishes collectors for having more characters unlocked, 7 star, geared up, etc., vs the person who has like 30 gear 12 characters. I know because I faced someone like that in my last GA. He had twice as many gear 12 characters as me, more zetas, but half his "roster" was level 1 characters that weren't even touched.

    I don't think CG wants you to collect all characters and gear them only to g7. They want you to go big and have a g12 7 star full roster. If you had that you'd be able to win ga.

    If you collect and hear everything to g7 and can't use it, that's on you.

    There is plenty of incentive to get several teams to g12 that this is not a surprise. For hstr, you need g12 teams to do well and most of those teams are also good in ga. The chewie event and 3PO events required higher gear both on teams that were good in ga. Tb combat has required higher geared teams to complete on the last tier for over a year now. Tw has req good teams (maxed out is better) for nearly a year.

    So the writing has been on the wall that to do well endgame, you need a pretty deep roster of g12 teams. If you ignored all that and collected and just geared everything to g7 that's on you.

    Not sure where I said anything about "gear 7". I only stated 7 star characters. And of course CG wants us to collect and max out every character. That still makes someone a collector. Lastly, just because you have a fully maxed roster doesn't mean you have any better of a chance to win GA. Why? Because you're facing other players with a fully maxed roster too. I still did 2-1 in each GA so I was able to win. I just had one opponent that I messed up my attacks with and the other I just couldn't get past a couple of his teams because they were too strong for me (in the 3v3 version). 4-2 is decent enough I'd say.

    Again, GA has nothing to do with "end game" because it is setup to accommodate all levels of player. Having Gear 12 characters or not is only an issue when you are a collector vs someone who is focused on only certain teams. TB is another incentive to increase your roster, especially toons you don't use because they will end up being needed in platoons. But, that's got nothing to do with the discussion here. (I've specifically 7*'d characters so that we can fill platoons in TB and that's all they are there for.)

    Being a super focused player on only certain teams gives you a better chance in GA because it is solely based on "GP". There should be other parameters that come into account for matchmaking, like zeta count, gear 12 count, and so on.

    I just don't get why, as you did in your response, there is such a quick response to always say, "That's your fault dude!" to a player who has a challenge, or can't accomplish something in this game. Yes, I play the way I play, I collect how I want to collect. I do my best to stay on target. But just because I bring up an issue and provide an alternate point of view doesn't mean there's a need to throw in the "well you aren't playing right, that's your fault!" stuff. Especially when you misread what I stated. :wink:

    I was simply stating that ga does not discourage you to gear characters. It may discourage gearing to a certain level characters that aren't used a lot but you still need to gear characters. So I don't believe it goes against the devs wanting you to gear characters.

    And unless you are an ultra kracken, you can't get g12 on every character. As much as the devs would love everyone to spend that much, it doesn't happen. I used that as an example of the goal post the devs want not an ideal ga roster. Since we are not at maxed out rosters, we all make choices about what to gear up.

    Some choose to be competitive and some choose to be collectors. I haven't said that either choice is wrong. One does lead to more ga wins though. But if ga wins isn't important to you then do your thing of course. But don't complain on the forums about the consequences of your choices.

    Because ultimately, the choices you make in building your roster determine your likelihood of winning ga far more than the matchmaking does.

    Where are those collectors? I've yet to see anyone who says "hey dude, I just like collecting, I don't care about being competetive". You seem to be inflating a fringe case to a norm and make an argument based on that. When you check my roster and see that I have most toons collected, do you think it's because I'm a collector?

    I've seen many argue that the reason they aren't competitive is because their play style is more collector than competitive. And yes you get the shards for a lot of characters by the time you've played for 2 or 3 years just through osmosis.

    I think the real difference comes down to whether you are willing to use regular or cantina energy to farm shards of characters that aren't terribly useful. Competitive players likely pass on that. Players that like to collect would likely still farm them. And of course these are the extremes on a bell curve and the vast majority of players fall somewhere in the middle.

    Cantina energy for example, I'm sure almost everyone is farming something out of there unless you have the shop farmed out. But someone who has a goal to unlock and 7 star every character may use crystals to refresh even if the character isn't all that useful. While a competitive minded player would likely either skip the farm although or at the very least only use the energy they can't save towards it and hoard the crystals for the next character that will make their roster more competitive.

    You can call it casual vs competitive if you want but it changes little. Those that build rosters for winning pvp game modes do better than those that don't.

    Ok, I understand what you are saying now. I'm certainly a competetive player and I also farm the hell out of every toon avaliable on maps. I think in a few months my farmability back catalogue will expire where I'll have to wait for new releases. Though in CGs recent mindset which is driven by panic farms for powerful toons I'm advantegous for doing it like this, not less competetive for certain. Only thing that **** on my competetiveness is the current matchmaking system.

    I'm the same way, but I can say that for the first time since starting, I'm intentionally not adding new stars or gear to toons that aren't either TW/ GA viable, or requirements for events (ewoks). Everything else, although some can be useful, will just inflate my gp without adding much use, so it can wait.
    That's not really a good thing, is it?

    This.

    And this is the source of the mismatching issues people are having when matching total GP from players historical choices.

    And it doesnt even need to be taken to extremes. "focused and narrow" rosters vs "broader and G7'd" rosters are generating matches where its a not a contest at all.

    The way ahead to gain an advantage. What you (and no doubt many others) are doing. Intentionally not gear and level your toons.

    I agree this is highly unhealthy for the game. I doubt the intention of the developers is to stop people investing in their characters.

    But you aren't not gearing characters. (Other than useless ones) you are simply focusing your gear to toons that give you more bang for your buck.

    It isn't any different than saving 3 zetas up before you will unlock a hero's journey character.

    And the solution for useless characters is occasionally reworking them to keep/make them relevant. Then there'll be a reason to gear them.

    I'm certainly -not gearing- toons that won't see immediate use from the time GA was introduced. Otherwise I would gear them upto where the bottlenecks occur. This is sandbagging and I'm doing it proudly to protest against the current GP calculation. Or are you claiming you are managing your resources by not using 5 of those items you have at least 5k of?

    So it's not really the anything like your zeta example. This has nothing to do with the focus point of my development which I would do regardless of bottlenecks.
  • No_Try wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    No_Try wrote: »
    No_Try wrote: »
    Whatelse73 wrote: »
    Whatelse73 wrote: »
    The problem with the current GA system is that CG wants us to be "collectors" because they make more money that way, but GA calculating GP to create opponents punishes collectors for having more characters unlocked, 7 star, geared up, etc., vs the person who has like 30 gear 12 characters. I know because I faced someone like that in my last GA. He had twice as many gear 12 characters as me, more zetas, but half his "roster" was level 1 characters that weren't even touched.

    I don't think CG wants you to collect all characters and gear them only to g7. They want you to go big and have a g12 7 star full roster. If you had that you'd be able to win ga.

    If you collect and hear everything to g7 and can't use it, that's on you.

    There is plenty of incentive to get several teams to g12 that this is not a surprise. For hstr, you need g12 teams to do well and most of those teams are also good in ga. The chewie event and 3PO events required higher gear both on teams that were good in ga. Tb combat has required higher geared teams to complete on the last tier for over a year now. Tw has req good teams (maxed out is better) for nearly a year.

    So the writing has been on the wall that to do well endgame, you need a pretty deep roster of g12 teams. If you ignored all that and collected and just geared everything to g7 that's on you.

    Not sure where I said anything about "gear 7". I only stated 7 star characters. And of course CG wants us to collect and max out every character. That still makes someone a collector. Lastly, just because you have a fully maxed roster doesn't mean you have any better of a chance to win GA. Why? Because you're facing other players with a fully maxed roster too. I still did 2-1 in each GA so I was able to win. I just had one opponent that I messed up my attacks with and the other I just couldn't get past a couple of his teams because they were too strong for me (in the 3v3 version). 4-2 is decent enough I'd say.

    Again, GA has nothing to do with "end game" because it is setup to accommodate all levels of player. Having Gear 12 characters or not is only an issue when you are a collector vs someone who is focused on only certain teams. TB is another incentive to increase your roster, especially toons you don't use because they will end up being needed in platoons. But, that's got nothing to do with the discussion here. (I've specifically 7*'d characters so that we can fill platoons in TB and that's all they are there for.)

    Being a super focused player on only certain teams gives you a better chance in GA because it is solely based on "GP". There should be other parameters that come into account for matchmaking, like zeta count, gear 12 count, and so on.

    I just don't get why, as you did in your response, there is such a quick response to always say, "That's your fault dude!" to a player who has a challenge, or can't accomplish something in this game. Yes, I play the way I play, I collect how I want to collect. I do my best to stay on target. But just because I bring up an issue and provide an alternate point of view doesn't mean there's a need to throw in the "well you aren't playing right, that's your fault!" stuff. Especially when you misread what I stated. :wink:

    I was simply stating that ga does not discourage you to gear characters. It may discourage gearing to a certain level characters that aren't used a lot but you still need to gear characters. So I don't believe it goes against the devs wanting you to gear characters.

    And unless you are an ultra kracken, you can't get g12 on every character. As much as the devs would love everyone to spend that much, it doesn't happen. I used that as an example of the goal post the devs want not an ideal ga roster. Since we are not at maxed out rosters, we all make choices about what to gear up.

    Some choose to be competitive and some choose to be collectors. I haven't said that either choice is wrong. One does lead to more ga wins though. But if ga wins isn't important to you then do your thing of course. But don't complain on the forums about the consequences of your choices.

    Because ultimately, the choices you make in building your roster determine your likelihood of winning ga far more than the matchmaking does.

    Where are those collectors? I've yet to see anyone who says "hey dude, I just like collecting, I don't care about being competetive". You seem to be inflating a fringe case to a norm and make an argument based on that. When you check my roster and see that I have most toons collected, do you think it's because I'm a collector?

    I've seen many argue that the reason they aren't competitive is because their play style is more collector than competitive. And yes you get the shards for a lot of characters by the time you've played for 2 or 3 years just through osmosis.

    I think the real difference comes down to whether you are willing to use regular or cantina energy to farm shards of characters that aren't terribly useful. Competitive players likely pass on that. Players that like to collect would likely still farm them. And of course these are the extremes on a bell curve and the vast majority of players fall somewhere in the middle.

    Cantina energy for example, I'm sure almost everyone is farming something out of there unless you have the shop farmed out. But someone who has a goal to unlock and 7 star every character may use crystals to refresh even if the character isn't all that useful. While a competitive minded player would likely either skip the farm although or at the very least only use the energy they can't save towards it and hoard the crystals for the next character that will make their roster more competitive.

    You can call it casual vs competitive if you want but it changes little. Those that build rosters for winning pvp game modes do better than those that don't.

    Ok, I understand what you are saying now. I'm certainly a competetive player and I also farm the hell out of every toon avaliable on maps. I think in a few months my farmability back catalogue will expire where I'll have to wait for new releases. Though in CGs recent mindset which is driven by panic farms for powerful toons I'm advantegous for doing it like this, not less competetive for certain. Only thing that **** on my competetiveness is the current matchmaking system.

    I'm the same way, but I can say that for the first time since starting, I'm intentionally not adding new stars or gear to toons that aren't either TW/ GA viable, or requirements for events (ewoks). Everything else, although some can be useful, will just inflate my gp without adding much use, so it can wait.
    That's not really a good thing, is it?

    This.

    And this is the source of the mismatching issues people are having when matching total GP from players historical choices.

    And it doesnt even need to be taken to extremes. "focused and narrow" rosters vs "broader and G7'd" rosters are generating matches where its a not a contest at all.

    The way ahead to gain an advantage. What you (and no doubt many others) are doing. Intentionally not gear and level your toons.

    I agree this is highly unhealthy for the game. I doubt the intention of the developers is to stop people investing in their characters.

    But you aren't not gearing characters. (Other than useless ones) you are simply focusing your gear to toons that give you more bang for your buck.

    It isn't any different than saving 3 zetas up before you will unlock a hero's journey character.

    And the solution for useless characters is occasionally reworking them to keep/make them relevant. Then there'll be a reason to gear them.

    I'm certainly -not gearing- toons that won't see immediate use from the time GA was introduced. Otherwise I would gear them upto where the bottlenecks occur. This is sandbagging and I'm doing it proudly to protest against the current GP calculation. Or are you claiming you are managing your resources by not using 5 of those items you have at least 5k of?

    So it's not really the anything like your zeta example. This has nothing to do with the focus point of my development which I would do regardless of bottlenecks.

    Of course it is , not using pieces of gear you have thousands of is just good resource management, lmfao
    sorry, could not even type that with a straight face, wonder how they do it.
  • No_Try
    4051 posts Member

    Of course it is , not using pieces of gear you have thousands of is just good resource management, lmfao
    sorry, could not even type that with a straight face, wonder how they do it.

    Maybe they are not doing it with a straight face but ****-faced. And I'm certain we should go and join them for tonite xD.

  • No_Try wrote: »

    Of course it is , not using pieces of gear you have thousands of is just good resource management, lmfao
    sorry, could not even type that with a straight face, wonder how they do it.

    Maybe they are not doing it with a straight face but ****-faced. And I'm certain we should go and join them for tonite xD.

    Good idea
  • No_Try wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    No_Try wrote: »
    No_Try wrote: »
    Whatelse73 wrote: »
    Whatelse73 wrote: »
    The problem with the current GA system is that CG wants us to be "collectors" because they make more money that way, but GA calculating GP to create opponents punishes collectors for having more characters unlocked, 7 star, geared up, etc., vs the person who has like 30 gear 12 characters. I know because I faced someone like that in my last GA. He had twice as many gear 12 characters as me, more zetas, but half his "roster" was level 1 characters that weren't even touched.

    I don't think CG wants you to collect all characters and gear them only to g7. They want you to go big and have a g12 7 star full roster. If you had that you'd be able to win ga.

    If you collect and hear everything to g7 and can't use it, that's on you.

    There is plenty of incentive to get several teams to g12 that this is not a surprise. For hstr, you need g12 teams to do well and most of those teams are also good in ga. The chewie event and 3PO events required higher gear both on teams that were good in ga. Tb combat has required higher geared teams to complete on the last tier for over a year now. Tw has req good teams (maxed out is better) for nearly a year.

    So the writing has been on the wall that to do well endgame, you need a pretty deep roster of g12 teams. If you ignored all that and collected and just geared everything to g7 that's on you.

    Not sure where I said anything about "gear 7". I only stated 7 star characters. And of course CG wants us to collect and max out every character. That still makes someone a collector. Lastly, just because you have a fully maxed roster doesn't mean you have any better of a chance to win GA. Why? Because you're facing other players with a fully maxed roster too. I still did 2-1 in each GA so I was able to win. I just had one opponent that I messed up my attacks with and the other I just couldn't get past a couple of his teams because they were too strong for me (in the 3v3 version). 4-2 is decent enough I'd say.

    Again, GA has nothing to do with "end game" because it is setup to accommodate all levels of player. Having Gear 12 characters or not is only an issue when you are a collector vs someone who is focused on only certain teams. TB is another incentive to increase your roster, especially toons you don't use because they will end up being needed in platoons. But, that's got nothing to do with the discussion here. (I've specifically 7*'d characters so that we can fill platoons in TB and that's all they are there for.)

    Being a super focused player on only certain teams gives you a better chance in GA because it is solely based on "GP". There should be other parameters that come into account for matchmaking, like zeta count, gear 12 count, and so on.

    I just don't get why, as you did in your response, there is such a quick response to always say, "That's your fault dude!" to a player who has a challenge, or can't accomplish something in this game. Yes, I play the way I play, I collect how I want to collect. I do my best to stay on target. But just because I bring up an issue and provide an alternate point of view doesn't mean there's a need to throw in the "well you aren't playing right, that's your fault!" stuff. Especially when you misread what I stated. :wink:

    I was simply stating that ga does not discourage you to gear characters. It may discourage gearing to a certain level characters that aren't used a lot but you still need to gear characters. So I don't believe it goes against the devs wanting you to gear characters.

    And unless you are an ultra kracken, you can't get g12 on every character. As much as the devs would love everyone to spend that much, it doesn't happen. I used that as an example of the goal post the devs want not an ideal ga roster. Since we are not at maxed out rosters, we all make choices about what to gear up.

    Some choose to be competitive and some choose to be collectors. I haven't said that either choice is wrong. One does lead to more ga wins though. But if ga wins isn't important to you then do your thing of course. But don't complain on the forums about the consequences of your choices.

    Because ultimately, the choices you make in building your roster determine your likelihood of winning ga far more than the matchmaking does.

    Where are those collectors? I've yet to see anyone who says "hey dude, I just like collecting, I don't care about being competetive". You seem to be inflating a fringe case to a norm and make an argument based on that. When you check my roster and see that I have most toons collected, do you think it's because I'm a collector?

    I've seen many argue that the reason they aren't competitive is because their play style is more collector than competitive. And yes you get the shards for a lot of characters by the time you've played for 2 or 3 years just through osmosis.

    I think the real difference comes down to whether you are willing to use regular or cantina energy to farm shards of characters that aren't terribly useful. Competitive players likely pass on that. Players that like to collect would likely still farm them. And of course these are the extremes on a bell curve and the vast majority of players fall somewhere in the middle.

    Cantina energy for example, I'm sure almost everyone is farming something out of there unless you have the shop farmed out. But someone who has a goal to unlock and 7 star every character may use crystals to refresh even if the character isn't all that useful. While a competitive minded player would likely either skip the farm although or at the very least only use the energy they can't save towards it and hoard the crystals for the next character that will make their roster more competitive.

    You can call it casual vs competitive if you want but it changes little. Those that build rosters for winning pvp game modes do better than those that don't.

    Ok, I understand what you are saying now. I'm certainly a competetive player and I also farm the hell out of every toon avaliable on maps. I think in a few months my farmability back catalogue will expire where I'll have to wait for new releases. Though in CGs recent mindset which is driven by panic farms for powerful toons I'm advantegous for doing it like this, not less competetive for certain. Only thing that **** on my competetiveness is the current matchmaking system.

    I'm the same way, but I can say that for the first time since starting, I'm intentionally not adding new stars or gear to toons that aren't either TW/ GA viable, or requirements for events (ewoks). Everything else, although some can be useful, will just inflate my gp without adding much use, so it can wait.
    That's not really a good thing, is it?

    This.

    And this is the source of the mismatching issues people are having when matching total GP from players historical choices.

    And it doesnt even need to be taken to extremes. "focused and narrow" rosters vs "broader and G7'd" rosters are generating matches where its a not a contest at all.

    The way ahead to gain an advantage. What you (and no doubt many others) are doing. Intentionally not gear and level your toons.

    I agree this is highly unhealthy for the game. I doubt the intention of the developers is to stop people investing in their characters.

    But you aren't not gearing characters. (Other than useless ones) you are simply focusing your gear to toons that give you more bang for your buck.

    It isn't any different than saving 3 zetas up before you will unlock a hero's journey character.

    And the solution for useless characters is occasionally reworking them to keep/make them relevant. Then there'll be a reason to gear them.

    I'm certainly -not gearing- toons that won't see immediate use from the time GA was introduced. Otherwise I would gear them upto where the bottlenecks occur. This is sandbagging and I'm doing it proudly to protest against the current GP calculation. Or are you claiming you are managing your resources by not using 5 of those items you have at least 5k of?

    So it's not really the anything like your zeta example. This has nothing to do with the focus point of my development which I would do regardless of bottlenecks.

    There's a blue piece of gear that you need well before g7 (not sure the name sorry) that I never have enough of. And it's not worth the effort to go through and gear toons to g4 or 5 for the very limited use you get on tb deploying. It's not like I use them frequently.

    I have a rancor solo team and a team that can do 3 phases of haat. Nothing below g10 is remotely viable in hstr. Even that is pushing it. Nothing below g8 or g9 is viable for tb combat missions. Nothing beliw g9 or g10 is viable in tw.

    So with hitting the bottleneck (at least to the point you have to spend energy or shop currency that can be used to buy other needed gear) well before gear 8. You gain very little from having them sit at g7. And I've had to farm g5 gear when gearing up meta toons because it was used on a useless toon. That by itself is reason enough to not to bother gearing them.
  • Gannon
    1475 posts Member
    No_Try wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    No_Try wrote: »
    No_Try wrote: »
    Whatelse73 wrote: »
    Whatelse73 wrote: »
    The problem with the current GA system is that CG wants us to be "collectors" because they make more money that way, but GA calculating GP to create opponents punishes collectors for having more characters unlocked, 7 star, geared up, etc., vs the person who has like 30 gear 12 characters. I know because I faced someone like that in my last GA. He had twice as many gear 12 characters as me, more zetas, but half his "roster" was level 1 characters that weren't even touched.

    I don't think CG wants you to collect all characters and gear them only to g7. They want you to go big and have a g12 7 star full roster. If you had that you'd be able to win ga.

    If you collect and hear everything to g7 and can't use it, that's on you.

    There is plenty of incentive to get several teams to g12 that this is not a surprise. For hstr, you need g12 teams to do well and most of those teams are also good in ga. The chewie event and 3PO events required higher gear both on teams that were good in ga. Tb combat has required higher geared teams to complete on the last tier for over a year now. Tw has req good teams (maxed out is better) for nearly a year.

    So the writing has been on the wall that to do well endgame, you need a pretty deep roster of g12 teams. If you ignored all that and collected and just geared everything to g7 that's on you.

    Not sure where I said anything about "gear 7". I only stated 7 star characters. And of course CG wants us to collect and max out every character. That still makes someone a collector. Lastly, just because you have a fully maxed roster doesn't mean you have any better of a chance to win GA. Why? Because you're facing other players with a fully maxed roster too. I still did 2-1 in each GA so I was able to win. I just had one opponent that I messed up my attacks with and the other I just couldn't get past a couple of his teams because they were too strong for me (in the 3v3 version). 4-2 is decent enough I'd say.

    Again, GA has nothing to do with "end game" because it is setup to accommodate all levels of player. Having Gear 12 characters or not is only an issue when you are a collector vs someone who is focused on only certain teams. TB is another incentive to increase your roster, especially toons you don't use because they will end up being needed in platoons. But, that's got nothing to do with the discussion here. (I've specifically 7*'d characters so that we can fill platoons in TB and that's all they are there for.)

    Being a super focused player on only certain teams gives you a better chance in GA because it is solely based on "GP". There should be other parameters that come into account for matchmaking, like zeta count, gear 12 count, and so on.

    I just don't get why, as you did in your response, there is such a quick response to always say, "That's your fault dude!" to a player who has a challenge, or can't accomplish something in this game. Yes, I play the way I play, I collect how I want to collect. I do my best to stay on target. But just because I bring up an issue and provide an alternate point of view doesn't mean there's a need to throw in the "well you aren't playing right, that's your fault!" stuff. Especially when you misread what I stated. :wink:

    I was simply stating that ga does not discourage you to gear characters. It may discourage gearing to a certain level characters that aren't used a lot but you still need to gear characters. So I don't believe it goes against the devs wanting you to gear characters.

    And unless you are an ultra kracken, you can't get g12 on every character. As much as the devs would love everyone to spend that much, it doesn't happen. I used that as an example of the goal post the devs want not an ideal ga roster. Since we are not at maxed out rosters, we all make choices about what to gear up.

    Some choose to be competitive and some choose to be collectors. I haven't said that either choice is wrong. One does lead to more ga wins though. But if ga wins isn't important to you then do your thing of course. But don't complain on the forums about the consequences of your choices.

    Because ultimately, the choices you make in building your roster determine your likelihood of winning ga far more than the matchmaking does.

    Where are those collectors? I've yet to see anyone who says "hey dude, I just like collecting, I don't care about being competetive". You seem to be inflating a fringe case to a norm and make an argument based on that. When you check my roster and see that I have most toons collected, do you think it's because I'm a collector?

    I've seen many argue that the reason they aren't competitive is because their play style is more collector than competitive. And yes you get the shards for a lot of characters by the time you've played for 2 or 3 years just through osmosis.

    I think the real difference comes down to whether you are willing to use regular or cantina energy to farm shards of characters that aren't terribly useful. Competitive players likely pass on that. Players that like to collect would likely still farm them. And of course these are the extremes on a bell curve and the vast majority of players fall somewhere in the middle.

    Cantina energy for example, I'm sure almost everyone is farming something out of there unless you have the shop farmed out. But someone who has a goal to unlock and 7 star every character may use crystals to refresh even if the character isn't all that useful. While a competitive minded player would likely either skip the farm although or at the very least only use the energy they can't save towards it and hoard the crystals for the next character that will make their roster more competitive.

    You can call it casual vs competitive if you want but it changes little. Those that build rosters for winning pvp game modes do better than those that don't.

    Ok, I understand what you are saying now. I'm certainly a competetive player and I also farm the hell out of every toon avaliable on maps. I think in a few months my farmability back catalogue will expire where I'll have to wait for new releases. Though in CGs recent mindset which is driven by panic farms for powerful toons I'm advantegous for doing it like this, not less competetive for certain. Only thing that **** on my competetiveness is the current matchmaking system.

    I'm the same way, but I can say that for the first time since starting, I'm intentionally not adding new stars or gear to toons that aren't either TW/ GA viable, or requirements for events (ewoks). Everything else, although some can be useful, will just inflate my gp without adding much use, so it can wait.
    That's not really a good thing, is it?

    This.

    And this is the source of the mismatching issues people are having when matching total GP from players historical choices.

    And it doesnt even need to be taken to extremes. "focused and narrow" rosters vs "broader and G7'd" rosters are generating matches where its a not a contest at all.

    The way ahead to gain an advantage. What you (and no doubt many others) are doing. Intentionally not gear and level your toons.

    I agree this is highly unhealthy for the game. I doubt the intention of the developers is to stop people investing in their characters.

    But you aren't not gearing characters. (Other than useless ones) you are simply focusing your gear to toons that give you more bang for your buck.

    It isn't any different than saving 3 zetas up before you will unlock a hero's journey character.

    And the solution for useless characters is occasionally reworking them to keep/make them relevant. Then there'll be a reason to gear them.

    I'm certainly -not gearing- toons that won't see immediate use from the time GA was introduced. Otherwise I would gear them upto where the bottlenecks occur. This is sandbagging and I'm doing it proudly to protest against the current GP calculation. Or are you claiming you are managing your resources by not using 5 of those items you have at least 5k of?

    So it's not really the anything like your zeta example. This has nothing to do with the focus point of my development which I would do regardless of bottlenecks.

    There's a blue piece of gear that you need well before g7 (not sure the name sorry) that I never have enough of. And it's not worth the effort to go through and gear toons to g4 or 5 for the very limited use you get on tb deploying. It's not like I use them frequently.

    I have a rancor solo team and a team that can do 3 phases of haat. Nothing below g10 is remotely viable in hstr. Even that is pushing it. Nothing below g8 or g9 is viable for tb combat missions. Nothing beliw g9 or g10 is viable in tw.

    So with hitting the bottleneck (at least to the point you have to spend energy or shop currency that can be used to buy other needed gear) well before gear 8. You gain very little from having them sit at g7. And I've had to farm g5 gear when gearing up meta toons because it was used on a useless toon. That by itself is reason enough to not to bother gearing them.

    I'm right there with ya If it's those annoying blue things you need sets of five of, and like 8 sets per part, those are pretty annoying. Bacta gel or something.
    I dunno if I'd set the bar that high with your viability outlook tho. I kind of like using the way undergeared stuff, makes it more of a challenge. Plus your really just fighting ai, which is super easy most of the time, it's pretty easy to throw in a super low toon protected behind the big guys.
  • "I'm saving my mk 4 baw armor mod. I have 5000+ but Jedi Luke may need 10,000. Resource management!"
    I find it amusing that people are so delusional they convince themselves their sandbagging is actually resource management.
  • Gannon
    1475 posts Member
    "I'm saving my mk 4 baw armor mod. I have 5000+ but Jedi Luke may need 10,000. Resource management!"
    I find it amusing that people are so delusional they convince themselves their sandbagging is actually resource management.

    No, we've been pretty honest about it. If you read back a few replies, you'll see it lol we even talk about how it's not good for the future of the game.. But sometimes there are actual bottlenecks with gear also, which make a great place to draw that line.
    😆
  • Liath
    5140 posts Member
    "I'm saving my mk 4 baw armor mod. I have 5000+ but Jedi Luke may need 10,000. Resource management!"
    I find it amusing that people are so delusional they convince themselves their sandbagging is actually resource management.

    There are pieces of gear like that that I have thousands of excess of, but there are other white/blue/green pieces I’ve struggled with at various points over the last year, including mk3 detonators, mk3 blastechs, mk5 blastechs and all the pieces that go into them, mk1 gels, and others. Nearly every character needs one or more of this sort of piece before g7, and often well before. With the rework of the guild store I’ve solved some of these issues, but I see no reason to spend guild currency for the sake of getting characters I have no intention of using to g7.

    If you go far enough back in my posting history you will find a conversation I had here probably close to a year ago about exactly this point, explaining why I, personally, was not following the oft-discussed strategy of putting every character to at least g7. It had nothing to do with a game mode that probably hadn’t even been conceived yet, it wasn’t delusional, and it certainly wasn’t sandbagging of any kind.
  • GodlikeNay wrote: »
    GodlikeNay wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    GodlikeNay wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    GodlikeNay wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »

    Um, that's not right. Much of your assessment isn't accurate. Gp is a measure of completion of a toon, but it can be seen mirrored on that toons stats, I have dozens of pics above that show this.

    Abilities add gp for each tier of completion.

    Mods add gp, based on dot count and tier.

    Gear adds specific stats, depending on the part (ex. +50 physical damage), but it also adds gp for the part. based on which gear tier it falls into, from what I can tell.

    Stars play the biggest role in gp tho, but add the most to stats at the same time. (Some stats are increased almost entirely by gear, such as speed, protection, & armor). This is why a 4* gear 11 has weaker stats than a 7* gear 6 toon.

    So there's not really a problem with gp at all, in my opinion. It measures how complete a toon is, and that completion seems to align fairly accurately with their stats, from my observations.
    (I'm sure there's always exceptions)

    As far as your #2, they can't isolate toons based on how difficult some people find them.
    I have at least 3 teams that can kill any meta palp line variant, mostly on auto.. That doesn't mean others don't struggle with em.

    I don't think you read my post close enough. Nothing you pointed out indicates what I said is inaccurate. I didn't go into the same level of detail that you did for current GP calculation, but everything you said reinforces what I said. The 2 mod examples I have produce same GP = broken. Gear level bumps produce 0 GP = broken. You agree that GP is not currently based on character stats, but rather other formulas that attempt to indicate power, when what actually indicates power (aside from meta) is the stats... so they should just calculate GP from the stats. It would be way more accurate and consistent. None of this why is my 6 * G7 weaker than my 5 * G11 or whatever. Base it on the stats, and none of that matters and the in-game impact is accurately reflected.

    I did. I'll give examples:
    "Anyways, as I see it, the main issue with #1 is that GP doesn't reflect character attributes."
    It does, or at least gp is increased at the same rate, so it reflects it fairly well.

    "For example, when a toon moves from G6 to G7, there is a huge impact to that toon getting protection, but that bump is not reflected in the GP at all. That's broken. Every new gear level comes with massive stat bumps, but those stat changes produce exactly 0 GP. That's broken."
    It is, and you even mention that in your next sentence. Clicking the 'upgrade' button simply unlocks the next gear tier, it ads no extra gp or stats, as well it shouldn't. The gp increases for each piece you add, by a number that seems to be tied to which tier it falls into. Every piece of gear adds gp.

    "Same thing should be done for leveling up toons to new star levels. The real impact for the level ups is the stats, so base the GP on the stats and not some flat value model."
    yes, adding a new star level adds to stats like health, etc. It increases at the same time as gp, so what's to say it's not tied together? The value of the stat increase is different for each toon, but always the same total value. It's just split across the three stat modifiers: strength, agility, & tactics..

    "The 2 mod examples I have produce same GP = broken."
    Mod gp is based on dot count (higher dots have more drastic increases), level (increases admit of boosts), and tier (the amount of boosts total). A five dot gold mod will always be more gp than a five dot blue, as there's more upgrades. Can't base it on speed, sometimes other factors are more important.

    "You agree that GP is not currently based on character stats, but rather other formulas that attempt to indicate power, when what actually indicates power (aside from meta) is the stats... so they should just calculate GP from the stats."
    There's no way to tell if gp is based on stats, as both increase at fairly equal levels. Due to this similar increase, it doesn't matter, chicken or egg.

    "None of this why is my 6 * G7 weaker than my 5 * G11 or whatever. "
    Stars increase gp and stats faster and more broadly with stars than gear.. A 5* g11 will have much lower stats than most g11s you'll face, as they'll likely have higher stars. So it'll likely get killed in one or two shots.

    So yes, I read it carefully. Wanted to clarify.

    I'm sorry, but you are wrong. Gear bumps produce stats all by themselves. When I add my last gear item for G6 before going to G7, I get a bump for whatever item I just added. My GP reflects that. However, before I hit the "Update" button to take me to G7, I have no protection. Once I hit the Update button, in addition to the numerous other stat bumps, I also get protection for the first time. I get 0 GP from that massive stat bump or from any of the other gear bumps (which are even larger).

    You are also wrong about the mods in the sense that GP accurately reflects their impact. I thought this went without saying, but let's take the example I provided and extrapolate that out to 6 mods. We both agree that the 2 mod examples I provided give the exact same GP value since they are both 5 dot gold mods. For the sake of the discussion, let's say that a toon has 6 of each value to fill all their mod slots. What you have with the first toon is a bump of:
    90 Speed
    3.6% Health
    4.5% Crit Chance
    2400 Protection

    What you have with the second set of mods (which currently give the EXACT SAME amount of GP) is:

    150 Speed
    12% Health
    12% Crit Chance
    6600 Protection

    That is a difference of:
    60 Speed
    8.4% Health
    7.5% Crit Chance
    4200 Protection

    That is a HUGE discrepancy in stats and could ENTIRELY determine the difference between winning and losing a battle between two otherwise similar units (yes, that's a difference for just one unit, not even a whole squad). GP currently does not account for that AT ALL and you're going to tell me it does a good job of reflecting the stats. Come on!

    Upgrading a gear tier doesn't add stats by itself, it increases the multipliers (str, agi, tac), which is affected by everything else.
    As far as protection, not positive, but I think it's locked out of these stat increases until g7. So it seems to jump up from nowhere. (That is an assumption)
    As far as mods, you're giving them your own opinion of value. If two mods are both 5 dot gold mods, they're equal. How the stats rolled is entirely random, and makes no difference to the gp of the mod. Sliced mods will get slightly lower upgrades per level also, but have the same total gp.

    I'm sorry, but you're just wrong. Next time you're about to bump a gear level, add the last gear item but don't hit upgrade yet. Then open your unit's attributes and write down or screenshot them. Then go hit upgrade and look at the attributes again. You'll notice a bump in every area that quickly flashes by when you hit the upgrade button. I do it all the time, although I'm usually only looking for speed and protection because it is flashing so quickly and hard to track.

    I can't believe you even said what you did about 5 dot gold mods. Yes the stats are all random RNG, but not every 5 dot gold mod is equal in its impact on the unit... you can't possibly think that's true. The example I provided makes that crystal clear. The second mod is way better than the first.

    The example you listed was unrealistic and I pointed that out. You just ignored it.

    OMG, it was just an example to show how massive the discrepancy of mods can be for the same kind of mod. Those values I gave are not likely, but I do believe they fall within what is possible for mods, both on the high and the low side of things.

    No they don't. That is my point. The mod with higher speed would have all the other stats lower due to speed rolling not the other stats. The only way you get two mods like the ones you're comparing is if you got an extra roll or two and rolled one 6 times. Which you cannot do.

    Ok, I was just guessing on the ranges and it looks like I may have been off a bit, but not too bad. The 25 speed is definitely possible. The health should have a low around .5% and a high around 1%. The crit chance should have had a low at about 1.1% and a high of about 2.1%. The protection should have a low of about 400 and a high of 900. So, the gaps should be a little closer than what I presented, but the fact of the matter remains that 2 mods of the same level and rarity can be drastically different in stat values. That was the point I was trying to make even though my numbers weren't perfect.
  • No_Try
    4051 posts Member
    Liath wrote: »
    "I'm saving my mk 4 baw armor mod. I have 5000+ but Jedi Luke may need 10,000. Resource management!"
    I find it amusing that people are so delusional they convince themselves their sandbagging is actually resource management.

    There are pieces of gear like that that I have thousands of excess of, but there are other white/blue/green pieces I’ve struggled with at various points over the last year, including mk3 detonators, mk3 blastechs, mk5 blastechs and all the pieces that go into them, mk1 gels, and others. Nearly every character needs one or more of this sort of piece before g7, and often well before. With the rework of the guild store I’ve solved some of these issues, but I see no reason to spend guild currency for the sake of getting characters I have no intention of using to g7.

    If you go far enough back in my posting history you will find a conversation I had here probably close to a year ago about exactly this point, explaining why I, personally, was not following the oft-discussed strategy of putting every character to at least g7. It had nothing to do with a game mode that probably hadn’t even been conceived yet, it wasn’t delusional, and it certainly wasn’t sandbagging of any kind.

    I see... so a few blue/green bottleneck that takes 1 piece a pop or 5 pieces a pop at most is the hill you decided to fall on when our active gearing takes 300-400 pieces a gear tier and counting upwards as you go by tiers.

    - You weren't sandbagging back then, noone had any idea what impact CG would bring differentiating players. you just made a choice, same as us.

    - Starting from the time when GA was introduced what you and me and mostly everyone else that tries be competetive is doing is sandbagging. It's an informed decision taken in the light matchmaking based on GP and how GP is calculated itself. You can still be doing what you've done all along, but now there's no subjectivity involved in you keep doing it that way, it's a very much informed decision.
    One can push this argument back to when TW is introduced but TW matchmaking algo is much more complex and TW also have increasing GP reward tiers.

    - Regardless of how anyone dunnit what way, the system needs to be fair and impartial. The question becomes if the GP bumps across various upgrades warranted to justify the ingame effect they are taking... as in for the most basic of examples is a g7-8 toon worth half the GP of a g12 full maxed one in terms of stats of the same toon. Stats aren't an arbitrary choice as it directly translates into their effect when played.

    - We had already managed to agree on the baseline and what's at stake when others came flooding in with their side points deriding the topic into fuzzy thinking where monsters of subjectivity dwell.

    - So do you think GP already aligns with the gameplay realities? If so by all means illustrate in what way it happens. If it is already in line with gameplay, then I'm getting exactly the pop for my bang as in my g7 toons are already as powerful as their GP worth. You can leave your toons locked at 0 GP and I can take them wherever I want them to be, after all the 1M GP extra I get for these less than optimal toons are utterly warranted of it's worth. We're not talking about toon kits, so please don't go there.

  • Liath
    5140 posts Member
    I see... so a few blue/green bottleneck that takes 1 piece a pop or 5 pieces a pop at most is the hill you decided to fall on when our active gearing takes 300-400 pieces a gear tier and counting upwards as you go by tiers.

    I have no idea what this means. You need all the pieces at each gear tier to finish the tier. If a gear tier requires 400 things I have a surplus of plus a stun gun, the 400 things I have a surplus of don't in any way make it easy for me to complete that gear tier when I don't have any stun guns (or mk3 blastechs, or whatever the case may be).
    - Starting from the time when GA was introduced what you and me and mostly everyone else that tries be competetive is doing is sandbagging. It's an informed decision taken in the light matchmaking based on GP and how GP is calculated itself. You can still be doing what you've done all along, but now there's no subjectivity involved in you keep doing it that way, it's a very much informed decision.

    Your definition makes no sense to me. It isn't sandbagging for me to continue to play the game in exactly the way I have always played it. I have made ZERO changes to how I play this game in response to Grand Arena matchmaking.
    - We had already managed to agree on the baseline and what's at stake when others came flooding in with their side points deriding the topic into fuzzy thinking where monsters of subjectivity dwell.

    I chose to respond to a post on this thread that I found offensively absurd. What else you felt you had agreed to with somebody else has no bearing on my right to do that.
    - So do you think GP already aligns with the gameplay realities?

    I think it aligns reasonably well with what it is intended to align with, which is the amount of investment placed in one's roster. If they changed the weight of stars or gear tiers or whatever in a way that made you happy, that would be fine too, I really don't care either way.
  • No_Try
    4051 posts Member
    edited January 2019
    Liath wrote: »
    I see... so a few blue/green bottleneck that takes 1 piece a pop or 5 pieces a pop at most is the hill you decided to fall on when our active gearing takes 300-400 pieces a gear tier and counting upwards as you go by tiers.

    I have no idea what this means. You need all the pieces at each gear tier to finish the tier. If a gear tier requires 400 things I have a surplus of plus a stun gun, the 400 things I have a surplus of don't in any way make it easy for me to complete that gear tier when I don't have any stun guns (or mk3 blastechs, or whatever the case may be).

    Compare the amount of things that goes into a gear tier along with their farmability costs. Discounting what we all have in abundance, the blue/green bottleneck aren't comparable to any other bottlenecks we have. I can either farm a single carbanti slot or g7-8 20 characters. The comparison is beyond scale. So the resource management as in choosing to divert your resources either one way or the other is moot.

    You are playing as you did and you are now also sandbagging being well aware that it gets you advantage in GA.

    If it aligns with investment please showcase that it does. This is one of the main threads we can possibly base GP calculations. It should either be calculated on the investment (by quantifying the amount of resources that goes into gear/level/star and by calculating the cost correlation in between them) or stats (=gameplay impact). This is the gear GP table. Make sense of it from resources viewpoint.

    npi800gl1xrv.png


    I won't add anything in response in the future, since you don't seem to have any intention to honestly look at the topic and contribute to it.

  • Liath
    5140 posts Member
    No_Try wrote: »
    Liath wrote: »
    I see... so a few blue/green bottleneck that takes 1 piece a pop or 5 pieces a pop at most is the hill you decided to fall on when our active gearing takes 300-400 pieces a gear tier and counting upwards as you go by tiers.

    I have no idea what this means. You need all the pieces at each gear tier to finish the tier. If a gear tier requires 400 things I have a surplus of plus a stun gun, the 400 things I have a surplus of don't in any way make it easy for me to complete that gear tier when I don't have any stun guns (or mk3 blastechs, or whatever the case may be).

    Compare the amount of things that goes into a gear tier along with their farmability costs. Discounting what we all have in abundance, the blue/green bottleneck aren't comparable to any other bottlenecks we have. I can either farm a single carbanti slot or g7-8 20 characters. The comparison is beyond scale. So the resource management as in choosing to divert your resources either one way or the other is moot.


    This has absolutely nothing to do with the post I responded to. Whether it would take a lot of limited resources to get those ~50 characters to g7 or just a little bit of limited resources is irrelevant - either way it's a reasonable choice not to spend those limited resources on things that don't matter. Why exactly should I spend guild currency or farming energy for something I don't care about instead of something that I do care about? How exactly is it delusional of me to claim that I chose not to do that for resource management reasons and not sandbagging reasons?

    You appear to just be angry that there's a side conversation going on in your thread that isn't what you wanted your thread to be about. Welcome to the forums, buddy. You don't get to dictate what happens in your thread just because you started it. If somebody says something preposterous he deserves to be called out on it regardless of whether it fits in the narrow vision you had for your thread.
  • No_Try
    4051 posts Member
    Liath wrote: »
    No_Try wrote: »
    Liath wrote: »
    I see... so a few blue/green bottleneck that takes 1 piece a pop or 5 pieces a pop at most is the hill you decided to fall on when our active gearing takes 300-400 pieces a gear tier and counting upwards as you go by tiers.

    I have no idea what this means. You need all the pieces at each gear tier to finish the tier. If a gear tier requires 400 things I have a surplus of plus a stun gun, the 400 things I have a surplus of don't in any way make it easy for me to complete that gear tier when I don't have any stun guns (or mk3 blastechs, or whatever the case may be).

    Compare the amount of things that goes into a gear tier along with their farmability costs. Discounting what we all have in abundance, the blue/green bottleneck aren't comparable to any other bottlenecks we have. I can either farm a single carbanti slot or g7-8 20 characters. The comparison is beyond scale. So the resource management as in choosing to divert your resources either one way or the other is moot.


    This has absolutely nothing to do with the post I responded to. Whether it would take a lot of limited resources to get those ~50 characters to g7 or just a little bit of limited resources is irrelevant - either way it's a reasonable choice not to spend those limited resources on things that don't matter. Why exactly should I spend guild currency or farming energy for something I don't care about instead of something that I do care about? How exactly is it delusional of me to claim that I chose not to do that for resource management reasons and not sandbagging reasons?

    You appear to just be angry that there's a side conversation going on in your thread that isn't what you wanted your thread to be about. Welcome to the forums, buddy. You don't get to dictate what happens in your thread just because you started it. If somebody says something preposterous he deserves to be called out on it regardless of whether it fits in the narrow vision you had for your thread.

    You made a claim in response to me. Now I'm holding you upto your claim. "I think it aligns reasonably well with what it is intended to align with, which is the amount of investment placed in one's roster."

    Ignore the bottlenecks, they are player problems to manage. Just look at the cost of total amount of gear that goes into a tier (with a multiplier on the lowest map nodes they can be farmed from). Since that's not even consistent between toons, one may be able to take an averaging approach over a few toons. Compare any gear tier and show how any of them correlates with the GP they create.
  • Liath
    5140 posts Member
    No_Try wrote: »
    Liath wrote: »
    No_Try wrote: »
    Liath wrote: »
    I see... so a few blue/green bottleneck that takes 1 piece a pop or 5 pieces a pop at most is the hill you decided to fall on when our active gearing takes 300-400 pieces a gear tier and counting upwards as you go by tiers.

    I have no idea what this means. You need all the pieces at each gear tier to finish the tier. If a gear tier requires 400 things I have a surplus of plus a stun gun, the 400 things I have a surplus of don't in any way make it easy for me to complete that gear tier when I don't have any stun guns (or mk3 blastechs, or whatever the case may be).

    Compare the amount of things that goes into a gear tier along with their farmability costs. Discounting what we all have in abundance, the blue/green bottleneck aren't comparable to any other bottlenecks we have. I can either farm a single carbanti slot or g7-8 20 characters. The comparison is beyond scale. So the resource management as in choosing to divert your resources either one way or the other is moot.


    This has absolutely nothing to do with the post I responded to. Whether it would take a lot of limited resources to get those ~50 characters to g7 or just a little bit of limited resources is irrelevant - either way it's a reasonable choice not to spend those limited resources on things that don't matter. Why exactly should I spend guild currency or farming energy for something I don't care about instead of something that I do care about? How exactly is it delusional of me to claim that I chose not to do that for resource management reasons and not sandbagging reasons?

    You appear to just be angry that there's a side conversation going on in your thread that isn't what you wanted your thread to be about. Welcome to the forums, buddy. You don't get to dictate what happens in your thread just because you started it. If somebody says something preposterous he deserves to be called out on it regardless of whether it fits in the narrow vision you had for your thread.

    You made a claim in response to me. Now I'm holding you upto your claim. "I think it aligns reasonably well with what it is intended to align with, which is the amount of investment placed in one's roster."

    Ignore the bottlenecks, they are player problems to manage. Just look at the cost of total amount of gear that goes into a tier (with a multiplier on the lowest map nodes they can be farmed from). Since that's not even consistent between toons, one may be able to take an averaging approach over a few toons. Compare any gear tier and show how any of them correlates with the GP they create.

    What happened to "I won't add anything in response in the future, since you don't seem to have any intention to honestly look at the topic and contribute to it." I always love when people write an entire essay and then end it with "but I'm not going to talk to you anymore because you aren't worth it."

    You asked me what I thought. I told you what I thought. I did not offer to or concede that I have some sort of obligation to justify my belief. How about you just stick to your promise?
  • No_Try
    4051 posts Member
    Liath wrote: »
    No_Try wrote: »
    Liath wrote: »
    No_Try wrote: »
    Liath wrote: »
    I see... so a few blue/green bottleneck that takes 1 piece a pop or 5 pieces a pop at most is the hill you decided to fall on when our active gearing takes 300-400 pieces a gear tier and counting upwards as you go by tiers.

    I have no idea what this means. You need all the pieces at each gear tier to finish the tier. If a gear tier requires 400 things I have a surplus of plus a stun gun, the 400 things I have a surplus of don't in any way make it easy for me to complete that gear tier when I don't have any stun guns (or mk3 blastechs, or whatever the case may be).

    Compare the amount of things that goes into a gear tier along with their farmability costs. Discounting what we all have in abundance, the blue/green bottleneck aren't comparable to any other bottlenecks we have. I can either farm a single carbanti slot or g7-8 20 characters. The comparison is beyond scale. So the resource management as in choosing to divert your resources either one way or the other is moot.


    This has absolutely nothing to do with the post I responded to. Whether it would take a lot of limited resources to get those ~50 characters to g7 or just a little bit of limited resources is irrelevant - either way it's a reasonable choice not to spend those limited resources on things that don't matter. Why exactly should I spend guild currency or farming energy for something I don't care about instead of something that I do care about? How exactly is it delusional of me to claim that I chose not to do that for resource management reasons and not sandbagging reasons?

    You appear to just be angry that there's a side conversation going on in your thread that isn't what you wanted your thread to be about. Welcome to the forums, buddy. You don't get to dictate what happens in your thread just because you started it. If somebody says something preposterous he deserves to be called out on it regardless of whether it fits in the narrow vision you had for your thread.

    You made a claim in response to me. Now I'm holding you upto your claim. "I think it aligns reasonably well with what it is intended to align with, which is the amount of investment placed in one's roster."

    Ignore the bottlenecks, they are player problems to manage. Just look at the cost of total amount of gear that goes into a tier (with a multiplier on the lowest map nodes they can be farmed from). Since that's not even consistent between toons, one may be able to take an averaging approach over a few toons. Compare any gear tier and show how any of them correlates with the GP they create.

    What happened to "I won't add anything in response in the future, since you don't seem to have any intention to honestly look at the topic and contribute to it." I always love when people write an entire essay and then end it with "but I'm not going to talk to you anymore because you aren't worth it."

    You asked me what I thought. I told you what I thought. I did not offer to or concede that I have some sort of obligation to justify my belief. How about you just stick to your promise?

    Ah ok, you'll just revert to pettiness since this is the forums after all. Thanks for your lack of meaningful input.
  • Gannon
    1475 posts Member
    Liath wrote: »
    No_Try wrote: »
    Liath wrote: »
    No_Try wrote: »
    Liath wrote: »
    I see... so a few blue/green bottleneck that takes 1 piece a pop or 5 pieces a pop at most is the hill you decided to fall on when our active gearing takes 300-400 pieces a gear tier and counting upwards as you go by tiers.

    I have no idea what this means. You need all the pieces at each gear tier to finish the tier. If a gear tier requires 400 things I have a surplus of plus a stun gun, the 400 things I have a surplus of don't in any way make it easy for me to complete that gear tier when I don't have any stun guns (or mk3 blastechs, or whatever the case may be).

    Compare the amount of things that goes into a gear tier along with their farmability costs. Discounting what we all have in abundance, the blue/green bottleneck aren't comparable to any other bottlenecks we have. I can either farm a single carbanti slot or g7-8 20 characters. The comparison is beyond scale. So the resource management as in choosing to divert your resources either one way or the other is moot.


    This has absolutely nothing to do with the post I responded to. Whether it would take a lot of limited resources to get those ~50 characters to g7 or just a little bit of limited resources is irrelevant - either way it's a reasonable choice not to spend those limited resources on things that don't matter. Why exactly should I spend guild currency or farming energy for something I don't care about instead of something that I do care about? How exactly is it delusional of me to claim that I chose not to do that for resource management reasons and not sandbagging reasons?

    You appear to just be angry that there's a side conversation going on in your thread that isn't what you wanted your thread to be about. Welcome to the forums, buddy. You don't get to dictate what happens in your thread just because you started it. If somebody says something preposterous he deserves to be called out on it regardless of whether it fits in the narrow vision you had for your thread.

    You made a claim in response to me. Now I'm holding you upto your claim. "I think it aligns reasonably well with what it is intended to align with, which is the amount of investment placed in one's roster."

    Ignore the bottlenecks, they are player problems to manage. Just look at the cost of total amount of gear that goes into a tier (with a multiplier on the lowest map nodes they can be farmed from). Since that's not even consistent between toons, one may be able to take an averaging approach over a few toons. Compare any gear tier and show how any of them correlates with the GP they create.

    What happened to "I won't add anything in response in the future, since you don't seem to have any intention to honestly look at the topic and contribute to it." I always love when people write an entire essay and then end it with "but I'm not going to talk to you anymore because you aren't worth it."

    You asked me what I thought. I told you what I thought. I did not offer to or concede that I have some sort of obligation to justify my belief. How about you just stick to your promise?
    No_Try wrote: »
    Liath wrote: »
    No_Try wrote: »
    Liath wrote: »
    No_Try wrote: »
    Liath wrote: »
    I see... so a few blue/green bottleneck that takes 1 piece a pop or 5 pieces a pop at most is the hill you decided to fall on when our active gearing takes 300-400 pieces a gear tier and counting upwards as you go by tiers.

    I have no idea what this means. You need all the pieces at each gear tier to finish the tier. If a gear tier requires 400 things I have a surplus of plus a stun gun, the 400 things I have a surplus of don't in any way make it easy for me to complete that gear tier when I don't have any stun guns (or mk3 blastechs, or whatever the case may be).

    Compare the amount of things that goes into a gear tier along with their farmability costs. Discounting what we all have in abundance, the blue/green bottleneck aren't comparable to any other bottlenecks we have. I can either farm a single carbanti slot or g7-8 20 characters. The comparison is beyond scale. So the resource management as in choosing to divert your resources either one way or the other is moot.


    This has absolutely nothing to do with the post I responded to. Whether it would take a lot of limited resources to get those ~50 characters to g7 or just a little bit of limited resources is irrelevant - either way it's a reasonable choice not to spend those limited resources on things that don't matter. Why exactly should I spend guild currency or farming energy for something I don't care about instead of something that I do care about? How exactly is it delusional of me to claim that I chose not to do that for resource management reasons and not sandbagging reasons?

    You appear to just be angry that there's a side conversation going on in your thread that isn't what you wanted your thread to be about. Welcome to the forums, buddy. You don't get to dictate what happens in your thread just because you started it. If somebody says something preposterous he deserves to be called out on it regardless of whether it fits in the narrow vision you had for your thread.

    You made a claim in response to me. Now I'm holding you upto your claim. "I think it aligns reasonably well with what it is intended to align with, which is the amount of investment placed in one's roster."

    Ignore the bottlenecks, they are player problems to manage. Just look at the cost of total amount of gear that goes into a tier (with a multiplier on the lowest map nodes they can be farmed from). Since that's not even consistent between toons, one may be able to take an averaging approach over a few toons. Compare any gear tier and show how any of them correlates with the GP they create.

    What happened to "I won't add anything in response in the future, since you don't seem to have any intention to honestly look at the topic and contribute to it." I always love when people write an entire essay and then end it with "but I'm not going to talk to you anymore because you aren't worth it."

    You asked me what I thought. I told you what I thought. I did not offer to or concede that I have some sort of obligation to justify my belief. How about you just stick to your promise?

    Ah ok, you'll just revert to pettiness since this is the forums after all. Thanks for your lack of meaningful input.

    awww, don't give up yet, y'all were about to figure out how similar your arguments really are.

    although we all use resource management skills, and have for a long time, since GA started ppl keep calling it sandbagging.. Which is dumb, cuz we're just doing what we always have.
    And the personal gear bottlenecks are usually where we really leave toons alone to focus more important ones..

  • No_Try
    4051 posts Member
    Gannon wrote: »
    Liath wrote: »
    No_Try wrote: »
    Liath wrote: »
    No_Try wrote: »
    Liath wrote: »
    I see... so a few blue/green bottleneck that takes 1 piece a pop or 5 pieces a pop at most is the hill you decided to fall on when our active gearing takes 300-400 pieces a gear tier and counting upwards as you go by tiers.

    I have no idea what this means. You need all the pieces at each gear tier to finish the tier. If a gear tier requires 400 things I have a surplus of plus a stun gun, the 400 things I have a surplus of don't in any way make it easy for me to complete that gear tier when I don't have any stun guns (or mk3 blastechs, or whatever the case may be).

    Compare the amount of things that goes into a gear tier along with their farmability costs. Discounting what we all have in abundance, the blue/green bottleneck aren't comparable to any other bottlenecks we have. I can either farm a single carbanti slot or g7-8 20 characters. The comparison is beyond scale. So the resource management as in choosing to divert your resources either one way or the other is moot.


    This has absolutely nothing to do with the post I responded to. Whether it would take a lot of limited resources to get those ~50 characters to g7 or just a little bit of limited resources is irrelevant - either way it's a reasonable choice not to spend those limited resources on things that don't matter. Why exactly should I spend guild currency or farming energy for something I don't care about instead of something that I do care about? How exactly is it delusional of me to claim that I chose not to do that for resource management reasons and not sandbagging reasons?

    You appear to just be angry that there's a side conversation going on in your thread that isn't what you wanted your thread to be about. Welcome to the forums, buddy. You don't get to dictate what happens in your thread just because you started it. If somebody says something preposterous he deserves to be called out on it regardless of whether it fits in the narrow vision you had for your thread.

    You made a claim in response to me. Now I'm holding you upto your claim. "I think it aligns reasonably well with what it is intended to align with, which is the amount of investment placed in one's roster."

    Ignore the bottlenecks, they are player problems to manage. Just look at the cost of total amount of gear that goes into a tier (with a multiplier on the lowest map nodes they can be farmed from). Since that's not even consistent between toons, one may be able to take an averaging approach over a few toons. Compare any gear tier and show how any of them correlates with the GP they create.

    What happened to "I won't add anything in response in the future, since you don't seem to have any intention to honestly look at the topic and contribute to it." I always love when people write an entire essay and then end it with "but I'm not going to talk to you anymore because you aren't worth it."

    You asked me what I thought. I told you what I thought. I did not offer to or concede that I have some sort of obligation to justify my belief. How about you just stick to your promise?
    No_Try wrote: »
    Liath wrote: »
    No_Try wrote: »
    Liath wrote: »
    No_Try wrote: »
    Liath wrote: »
    I see... so a few blue/green bottleneck that takes 1 piece a pop or 5 pieces a pop at most is the hill you decided to fall on when our active gearing takes 300-400 pieces a gear tier and counting upwards as you go by tiers.

    I have no idea what this means. You need all the pieces at each gear tier to finish the tier. If a gear tier requires 400 things I have a surplus of plus a stun gun, the 400 things I have a surplus of don't in any way make it easy for me to complete that gear tier when I don't have any stun guns (or mk3 blastechs, or whatever the case may be).

    Compare the amount of things that goes into a gear tier along with their farmability costs. Discounting what we all have in abundance, the blue/green bottleneck aren't comparable to any other bottlenecks we have. I can either farm a single carbanti slot or g7-8 20 characters. The comparison is beyond scale. So the resource management as in choosing to divert your resources either one way or the other is moot.


    This has absolutely nothing to do with the post I responded to. Whether it would take a lot of limited resources to get those ~50 characters to g7 or just a little bit of limited resources is irrelevant - either way it's a reasonable choice not to spend those limited resources on things that don't matter. Why exactly should I spend guild currency or farming energy for something I don't care about instead of something that I do care about? How exactly is it delusional of me to claim that I chose not to do that for resource management reasons and not sandbagging reasons?

    You appear to just be angry that there's a side conversation going on in your thread that isn't what you wanted your thread to be about. Welcome to the forums, buddy. You don't get to dictate what happens in your thread just because you started it. If somebody says something preposterous he deserves to be called out on it regardless of whether it fits in the narrow vision you had for your thread.

    You made a claim in response to me. Now I'm holding you upto your claim. "I think it aligns reasonably well with what it is intended to align with, which is the amount of investment placed in one's roster."

    Ignore the bottlenecks, they are player problems to manage. Just look at the cost of total amount of gear that goes into a tier (with a multiplier on the lowest map nodes they can be farmed from). Since that's not even consistent between toons, one may be able to take an averaging approach over a few toons. Compare any gear tier and show how any of them correlates with the GP they create.

    What happened to "I won't add anything in response in the future, since you don't seem to have any intention to honestly look at the topic and contribute to it." I always love when people write an entire essay and then end it with "but I'm not going to talk to you anymore because you aren't worth it."

    You asked me what I thought. I told you what I thought. I did not offer to or concede that I have some sort of obligation to justify my belief. How about you just stick to your promise?

    Ah ok, you'll just revert to pettiness since this is the forums after all. Thanks for your lack of meaningful input.

    awww, don't give up yet, y'all were about to figure out how similar your arguments really are.

    although we all use resource management skills, and have for a long time, since GA started ppl keep calling it sandbagging.. Which is dumb, cuz we're just doing what we always have.
    And the personal gear bottlenecks are usually where we really leave toons alone to focus more important ones..

    As I said before, almost any competetive player is now doing this -act- whatever you wanna call it or sugar coat it to feel better about what you are doing. You aren't doing it with your previous rationale why you got into the habit of doing it in the first place anymore. It has one paramount purpose in mind, to keep your competetiveness level in GA still at worst and to gain advantage over others who won't do it at best. This is not a subjective ground anymore, it's objectively, yet incrementally better to do this until things change.

    Some say "I won't stop my progression since it makes little difference anyway.". I haven't quantified how much GP difference it made yet. Disregarding the mod footplay one can do, I think I have bagged around 50k gp so far since GA was released. It will keep adding up. Within that GP threshold 2-2.5 maxed toons fit. Each toon release that I won't use immediately will allow me to bag another 10-12k GP I would get otherwise. Each ship release bags me 3x the amount. The ones I can't go back from in the past is worth 1.28M GP approx just to make you see how significant the difference can be.

    You admitted that your mindset similarly shifted. I'm already reaping the rewards with the very little I did of this -inaction-.

    On a side note I'm now getting into the habit of maxing previously g9-10 toons I was fully fine to stay that way. This is a consolidation tactic in order to increase my passive competetiveness on matchmaking. It will allow me to dismantle premium teams one by one with suicide runs if the case calls for it. But it's rather a side track to the argument.
  • Gannon
    1475 posts Member
    No_Try wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    Liath wrote: »
    No_Try wrote: »
    Liath wrote: »
    No_Try wrote: »
    Liath wrote: »
    I see... so a few blue/green bottleneck that takes 1 piece a pop or 5 pieces a pop at most is the hill you decided to fall on when our active gearing takes 300-400 pieces a gear tier and counting upwards as you go by tiers.

    I have no idea what this means. You need all the pieces at each gear tier to finish the tier. If a gear tier requires 400 things I have a surplus of plus a stun gun, the 400 things I have a surplus of don't in any way make it easy for me to complete that gear tier when I don't have any stun guns (or mk3 blastechs, or whatever the case may be).

    Compare the amount of things that goes into a gear tier along with their farmability costs. Discounting what we all have in abundance, the blue/green bottleneck aren't comparable to any other bottlenecks we have. I can either farm a single carbanti slot or g7-8 20 characters. The comparison is beyond scale. So the resource management as in choosing to divert your resources either one way or the other is moot.


    This has absolutely nothing to do with the post I responded to. Whether it would take a lot of limited resources to get those ~50 characters to g7 or just a little bit of limited resources is irrelevant - either way it's a reasonable choice not to spend those limited resources on things that don't matter. Why exactly should I spend guild currency or farming energy for something I don't care about instead of something that I do care about? How exactly is it delusional of me to claim that I chose not to do that for resource management reasons and not sandbagging reasons?

    You appear to just be angry that there's a side conversation going on in your thread that isn't what you wanted your thread to be about. Welcome to the forums, buddy. You don't get to dictate what happens in your thread just because you started it. If somebody says something preposterous he deserves to be called out on it regardless of whether it fits in the narrow vision you had for your thread.

    You made a claim in response to me. Now I'm holding you upto your claim. "I think it aligns reasonably well with what it is intended to align with, which is the amount of investment placed in one's roster."

    Ignore the bottlenecks, they are player problems to manage. Just look at the cost of total amount of gear that goes into a tier (with a multiplier on the lowest map nodes they can be farmed from). Since that's not even consistent between toons, one may be able to take an averaging approach over a few toons. Compare any gear tier and show how any of them correlates with the GP they create.

    What happened to "I won't add anything in response in the future, since you don't seem to have any intention to honestly look at the topic and contribute to it." I always love when people write an entire essay and then end it with "but I'm not going to talk to you anymore because you aren't worth it."

    You asked me what I thought. I told you what I thought. I did not offer to or concede that I have some sort of obligation to justify my belief. How about you just stick to your promise?
    No_Try wrote: »
    Liath wrote: »
    No_Try wrote: »
    Liath wrote: »
    No_Try wrote: »
    Liath wrote: »
    I see... so a few blue/green bottleneck that takes 1 piece a pop or 5 pieces a pop at most is the hill you decided to fall on when our active gearing takes 300-400 pieces a gear tier and counting upwards as you go by tiers.

    I have no idea what this means. You need all the pieces at each gear tier to finish the tier. If a gear tier requires 400 things I have a surplus of plus a stun gun, the 400 things I have a surplus of don't in any way make it easy for me to complete that gear tier when I don't have any stun guns (or mk3 blastechs, or whatever the case may be).

    Compare the amount of things that goes into a gear tier along with their farmability costs. Discounting what we all have in abundance, the blue/green bottleneck aren't comparable to any other bottlenecks we have. I can either farm a single carbanti slot or g7-8 20 characters. The comparison is beyond scale. So the resource management as in choosing to divert your resources either one way or the other is moot.


    This has absolutely nothing to do with the post I responded to. Whether it would take a lot of limited resources to get those ~50 characters to g7 or just a little bit of limited resources is irrelevant - either way it's a reasonable choice not to spend those limited resources on things that don't matter. Why exactly should I spend guild currency or farming energy for something I don't care about instead of something that I do care about? How exactly is it delusional of me to claim that I chose not to do that for resource management reasons and not sandbagging reasons?

    You appear to just be angry that there's a side conversation going on in your thread that isn't what you wanted your thread to be about. Welcome to the forums, buddy. You don't get to dictate what happens in your thread just because you started it. If somebody says something preposterous he deserves to be called out on it regardless of whether it fits in the narrow vision you had for your thread.

    You made a claim in response to me. Now I'm holding you upto your claim. "I think it aligns reasonably well with what it is intended to align with, which is the amount of investment placed in one's roster."

    Ignore the bottlenecks, they are player problems to manage. Just look at the cost of total amount of gear that goes into a tier (with a multiplier on the lowest map nodes they can be farmed from). Since that's not even consistent between toons, one may be able to take an averaging approach over a few toons. Compare any gear tier and show how any of them correlates with the GP they create.

    What happened to "I won't add anything in response in the future, since you don't seem to have any intention to honestly look at the topic and contribute to it." I always love when people write an entire essay and then end it with "but I'm not going to talk to you anymore because you aren't worth it."

    You asked me what I thought. I told you what I thought. I did not offer to or concede that I have some sort of obligation to justify my belief. How about you just stick to your promise?

    Ah ok, you'll just revert to pettiness since this is the forums after all. Thanks for your lack of meaningful input.

    awww, don't give up yet, y'all were about to figure out how similar your arguments really are.

    although we all use resource management skills, and have for a long time, since GA started ppl keep calling it sandbagging.. Which is dumb, cuz we're just doing what we always have.
    And the personal gear bottlenecks are usually where we really leave toons alone to focus more important ones..

    As I said before, almost any competetive player is now doing this -act- whatever you wanna call it or sugar coat it to feel better about what you are doing. You aren't doing it with your previous rationale why you got into the habit of doing it in the first place anymore. It has one paramount purpose in mind, to keep your competetiveness level in GA still at worst and to gain advantage over others who won't do it at best. This is not a subjective ground anymore, it's objectively, yet incrementally better to do this until things change.

    Some say "I won't stop my progression since it makes little difference anyway.". I haven't quantified how much GP difference it made yet. Disregarding the mod footplay one can do, I think I have bagged around 50k gp so far since GA was released. It will keep adding up. Within that GP threshold 2-2.5 maxed toons fit. Each toon release that I won't use immediately will allow me to bag another 10-12k GP I would get otherwise. Each ship release bags me 3x the amount. The ones I can't go back from in the past is worth 1.28M GP approx just to make you see how significant the difference can be.

    You admitted that your mindset similarly shifted. I'm already reaping the rewards with the very little I did of this -inaction-.

    On a side note I'm now getting into the habit of maxing previously g9-10 toons I was fully fine to stay that way. This is a consolidation tactic in order to increase my passive competetiveness on matchmaking. It will allow me to dismantle premium teams one by one with suicide runs if the case calls for it. But it's rather a side track to the argument.

    I'm with you, although you have the disadvantage of being nearly at the max on everything.
    Most ppl with toons at 330/0 or whatever just decided not to work on toons they don't like or feel are useless to them, it's only recently it's been dubbed as "evil sandbagging". But now others want to do it too, just for GA and maybe TW.. But avoiding extraneous toons is helpful in the current matchmaking setup, so now most ppl are going to do it. It's prolly bad for the game, but good for personal gain in these types of events.
    I will definitely 'sandbag', but in also going to work on useful toons/teams as the same time. Except ships, cuz I hate ships. Lol

    Resource management has become synonymous with sandbagging, and I think that's more detrimental to the game than anything at this point, as it is a pillar tat the game was created on.
  • Choosing to not develop characters for an advantage should never be a thing. And if a new game mode punishes a player for growing their roster, or for doing so in the past and not offering a way to ”depower” them, then that needs to be adjusted.

    Whether adding more diversity to the GA themes, such as needing 14 defense teams to utilize the entire roster once in a while, or adjusting a more precise and fair matchmaking engine, something needs to be done. Arguing against that for the sake of arguing is petty. Just because you’re a player that doesn’t feel affected by inflated “fluff” GP doesn’t mean it’s not seriously giving others a disadvantage. Especially when preestablished game modes like TB encouraged it.

    And if you’re arguing against adjustment because you want to maintain an advantage, then your poor sportsmanship makes your opinion voided in my view. People need to at least pause and consider the views of those claiming disadvantage before instantly attacking them with facile arguments.
    Member of ‘Thugs in White Armor’
  • Whatelse73 wrote: »
    Whatelse73 wrote: »
    The problem with the current GA system is that CG wants us to be "collectors" because they make more money that way, but GA calculating GP to create opponents punishes collectors for having more characters unlocked, 7 star, geared up, etc., vs the person who has like 30 gear 12 characters. I know because I faced someone like that in my last GA. He had twice as many gear 12 characters as me, more zetas, but half his "roster" was level 1 characters that weren't even touched.

    I don't think CG wants you to collect all characters and gear them only to g7. They want you to go big and have a g12 7 star full roster. If you had that you'd be able to win ga.

    If you collect and hear everything to g7 and can't use it, that's on you.

    There is plenty of incentive to get several teams to g12 that this is not a surprise. For hstr, you need g12 teams to do well and most of those teams are also good in ga. The chewie event and 3PO events required higher gear both on teams that were good in ga. Tb combat has required higher geared teams to complete on the last tier for over a year now. Tw has req good teams (maxed out is better) for nearly a year.

    So the writing has been on the wall that to do well endgame, you need a pretty deep roster of g12 teams. If you ignored all that and collected and just geared everything to g7 that's on you.

    Not sure where I said anything about "gear 7". I only stated 7 star characters. And of course CG wants us to collect and max out every character. That still makes someone a collector. Lastly, just because you have a fully maxed roster doesn't mean you have any better of a chance to win GA. Why? Because you're facing other players with a fully maxed roster too. I still did 2-1 in each GA so I was able to win. I just had one opponent that I messed up my attacks with and the other I just couldn't get past a couple of his teams because they were too strong for me (in the 3v3 version). 4-2 is decent enough I'd say.

    Again, GA has nothing to do with "end game" because it is setup to accommodate all levels of player. Having Gear 12 characters or not is only an issue when you are a collector vs someone who is focused on only certain teams. TB is another incentive to increase your roster, especially toons you don't use because they will end up being needed in platoons. But, that's got nothing to do with the discussion here. (I've specifically 7*'d characters so that we can fill platoons in TB and that's all they are there for.)

    Being a super focused player on only certain teams gives you a better chance in GA because it is solely based on "GP". There should be other parameters that come into account for matchmaking, like zeta count, gear 12 count, and so on.

    I just don't get why, as you did in your response, there is such a quick response to always say, "That's your fault dude!" to a player who has a challenge, or can't accomplish something in this game. Yes, I play the way I play, I collect how I want to collect. I do my best to stay on target. But just because I bring up an issue and provide an alternate point of view doesn't mean there's a need to throw in the "well you aren't playing right, that's your fault!" stuff. Especially when you misread what I stated. :wink:

    I was simply stating that ga does not discourage you to gear characters. It may discourage gearing to a certain level characters that aren't used a lot but you still need to gear characters. So I don't believe it goes against the devs wanting you to gear characters.

    And unless you are an ultra kracken, you can't get g12 on every character. As much as the devs would love everyone to spend that much, it doesn't happen. I used that as an example of the goal post the devs want not an ideal ga roster. Since we are not at maxed out rosters, we all make choices about what to gear up.

    Some choose to be competitive and some choose to be collectors. I haven't said that either choice is wrong. One does lead to more ga wins though. But if ga wins isn't important to you then do your thing of course. But don't complain on the forums about the consequences of your choices.

    Because ultimately, the choices you make in building your roster determine your likelihood of winning ga far more than the matchmaking does.

    Once again, "That's all your fault dude! You're playing it wrong!" I'm not complaining. "But you're disagreeing with what I'm saying, so that's complaining!" It's a worthwhile discussion with people providing their input, calling it complaining/whining doesn't make your point of view any more viable.

    I'm stating that the GP could be too narrow of a choice to determine pools for competition. I also indicated that while CG would love for every player to be a collector, GA would discourage that because those with more focused rosters are going to have a more competitive roster in GA compared to those who collect and build up every character to a certain point. (Including activating characters, pulling them up to 85, 7 starring them, and/or gearing them up.) Someone with 15 Gear 12 characters and most of the rest of their roster 85 and 7* will have a tougher time competing against someone with 30 gear 12 characters and half their roster being level 1, inactive, ungeared, etc. Which would indicate they are spending less money on the game compared to someone who is a collector and neither being F2P.
  • I hear a number of different points being made and I agree with some and disagree with others.

    1. GA game mode seems to be encouraging people to not develop units unless they are needed. This helps keep your GP down and allows you to be more competitive in this specific game mode.
    2. Not developing your units on purpose to keep your GP down is being called sandbagging and some associate it with a connotation of cheating.
    3. Some players have intentionally not developed units in the past to focus their efforts and resources on units that they prioritized as valuable and are bothered by people labeling them as sandbaggers just because of the development choices they made in the past.
    4. Regardless of why you may have not developed units in the past, if you don't develop all your units now, you are knowingly sandbagging.
    5. Sandbagging is bad for the game.

    #1 - I agree with this.
    #2 - I understand the frustration being expressed and why the label has been given, but because of #3 and possibly other reasons, it seems a bit presumptuous to try and label everyone and their intentions.
    #3 - I totally agree with this and personally fall into this group. I have to be laser focused with my development because I'm a newish player (by comparison) in a very developed guild so I'm playing catch up and trying to be relevant.
    #4 - I disagree with this almost completely. The only truth this viewpoint has is that everyone that makes this decision now does it knowing that it gives them an advantage in GA, but you are wrong to assume it is the intention and motivation.
    #5 - This is probably true and I do completely understand the frustration being expressed by those with deep roosters of G7 units and the disadvantage it presents them in GA and the inability to do anything about it.
  • No_Try
    4051 posts Member
    GodlikeNay wrote: »
    I hear a number of different points being made and I agree with some and disagree with others.

    1. GA game mode seems to be encouraging people to not develop units unless they are needed. This helps keep your GP down and allows you to be more competitive in this specific game mode.
    2. Not developing your units on purpose to keep your GP down is being called sandbagging and some associate it with a connotation of cheating.
    3. Some players have intentionally not developed units in the past to focus their efforts and resources on units that they prioritized as valuable and are bothered by people labeling them as sandbaggers just because of the development choices they made in the past.
    4. Regardless of why you may have not developed units in the past, if you don't develop all your units now, you are knowingly sandbagging.
    5. Sandbagging is bad for the game.

    #1 - I agree with this.
    #2 - I understand the frustration being expressed and why the label has been given, but because of #3 and possibly other reasons, it seems a bit presumptuous to try and label everyone and their intentions.
    #3 - I totally agree with this and personally fall into this group. I have to be laser focused with my development because I'm a newish player (by comparison) in a very developed guild so I'm playing catch up and trying to be relevant.
    #4 - I disagree with this almost completely. The only truth this viewpoint has is that everyone that makes this decision now does it knowing that it gives them an advantage in GA, but you are wrong to assume it is the intention and motivation.
    #5 - This is probably true and I do completely understand the frustration being expressed by those with deep roosters of G7 units and the disadvantage it presents them in GA and the inability to do anything about it.

    You are misrepresenting #4 imo. I heard noone saying you have to develop your roster as much as you can and unless you do you'd be sandbagging. It's that if you do not develop your lower tail of your roster with the primary intention of getting advantage in matchmaking you are sandbagging. Nuance.

    You may have not developed it in the past for various reasons. I bet if the matchmaking called for the reverse case you'd now be hurriedly trying to develop the inconsequential on resources portion as much as you can. True?

    There's no cheating element to sandbagging, I dunno why people despise being called so. Prolly has to do with some of it's worst historical precedents. It's very contextual, in our current case I believe it's more than justified.

    We can come up with many examples where it borders on being morally wrong or just being a poker-like tactic that's also a smart practise. For example I try to feign ignorance of the match playing time to stress out my opponent, or I feign I got drained out of my options stopping at some point or I play the banners game to first see how far my opponent can get. The last one got me a 4 banners difference victory last time which certainly wouldn't be the case if I rushed into it. We all used to sandbagged by slowing down when I was serving mandatory military duty, because there's no shortage of work to get finished and noone is able to gauge our skills and speed. Otherwise we'd be constantly drained and noone would be thankful for it either. These all exemplifies the umbrella term I think.
  • Someone who neglected to grow their bottom roster in the past and who now has an advantage is a scenario no different from those who neglected to grow their Paper NS Zombie and had an advantage over those who geared her.

    The past is the past and those with top heavy rosters wern't cheating then nor are they cheating now, but they still have an advantage in a brand new game mode. A game mode which now encourages keeping GP as low as possible without anyway for players to reduce their GP.

    This affects guilds working toward completing Territory Battles. It encourages hoarding resources rather than spending them. And quite frankly, it trivializes this new game mode because a large amount of the player base is not having fun being fed to lions rather than being given a fair opportunity to test their skills against an appropriate opponent.

    I really don’t understand the controversy of this topic. There’s 100 potential adjustments that can be made by the developers to ensure a more equal playing field.
    Member of ‘Thugs in White Armor’
  • Gannon
    1475 posts Member
    Yes exactly, see? We're all arguing mostly the same things 😁
    Although the view varies slightly, we all take issue with the gp minimization being rewarded, especially since you can't shrink gp after the fact. Intentional or not, it's pretty bad for both players and the game overall to gain advantage by progressing less.
    Perhaps gp should be adjusted..

    Ps. Disclaimer: I do think gp does a pretty good job factoring unbiased total progression of toons and Total investment, as it's meant to. but exactly for that reason, it may not be a good matchmaking determinant.
  • GP has its uses but it’s a lazy system to solely rely on for every new game mode. I may be wrong, but I believe even TW has more precision in its matchmaking than just GP.
    Member of ‘Thugs in White Armor’
  • Gannon
    1475 posts Member
    GP has its uses but it’s a lazy system to solely rely on for every new game mode. I may be wrong, but I believe even TW has more precision in its matchmaking than just GP.

    Exactly. Today's GA matchup for me was same gp, neither of us could beat the other's ships, but I destroyed all his toons on auto, with 4 man squads.. Was kinda boring. He beat one team. Same numbers of g12 and stuff, and he should have the advantage with mods..
    I don't know if there's any sure way to match ppl for this type of event, there's so many choices and stuff..
    even with same gp, g12s, and better mods these guys are terrible sometimes..
    I wish they'd quit trying to push "pvp" (which is still technically pve cuz you're fighting ai)
  • Gannon wrote: »
    GP has its uses but it’s a lazy system to solely rely on for every new game mode. I may be wrong, but I believe even TW has more precision in its matchmaking than just GP.

    Exactly. Today's GA matchup for me was same gp, neither of us could beat the other's ships, but I destroyed all his toons on auto, with 4 man squads.. Was kinda boring. He beat one team. Same numbers of g12 and stuff, and he should have the advantage with mods..
    I don't know if there's any sure way to match ppl for this type of event, there's so many choices and stuff..
    even with same gp, g12s, and better mods these guys are terrible sometimes..
    I wish they'd quit trying to push "pvp" (which is still technically pve cuz you're fighting ai)

    Then you deserved to win if it was a fair matchup and the dude was just bad/made bad resource choices.
    Member of ‘Thugs in White Armor’
  • Yes Decomm please. My gear 11 lumi and eeth koth begs you.
Sign In or Register to comment.