Well I dont have time to look up the quote but they said GA was supposed to be their ultimate competitive game mode, or something similar.
So, in order to encourage that spirit:
FIRST: Put a message on the signup page with a confirmation popup that says something like:
THIS IS A COMPETITIVE GAME MODE. YOU CAN WIN OR LOSE. IT WILL BE DIFFICULT AND YOU ARE EXPECTED TO PARTICIPATE. IF YOU DO NOT YOUR REWARDS WILL BE SEVERYLY LIMITED.
On the D, There are lots of possible solutions, examples below can be done alone or in combination depending on how many carrots and sticks you want to use:
1. The game auto sets D by randomly choosing 5 characters somehow. Probably best is to choose 5 random toons from 5 different factions, alternating to just GP once the faction condition can no longer be satisfied. This would wreck their ability for O while giving the other player something to attack. Their ability for O needs to be ruined so they wont do what people are doing here just use their whole roster to obtain offensive rewards.
2. If Auto Set D happens, the player gets a DNF tag (Did Not Finish, or Did not Fight) and does not get credit awards for attacking that round and cannot win that round.
3. If a player gets 2 DNF tags during a full 3 game bracket, they get a 5th prize tier of DNF. It awards something like 100k credits and 100 Mark 1 Medpack Salvage and 5 green ability mats.
I understand the issues of matchmaking from both the Dev and Player side, and understand that it can never be perfect. I also understand that they will never give us the full matchmaking algorithim. They may already do this, But spitballing I would say something like:
Assign a flag for X# of hero's journey, legendaries, and raid reward characters. Probably Revan and Traya (and future similar) should have their own Flags as they are literal Trump cards against people that dont have them.
Assign a flag for X# of Heroic Raids Completed of each raid (3 flags).
Then sort and match from flags + GP and then when flag matches run out just sort GP.
Ships makes it more difficult but I think they should be fully included in GP everytime to encourage people to work on them.
It wont be perfect, but might help reduce the amount of "I'm going to be crushed why play?" Feelings.
Finally, make winning mean something to give people a reason to want to win. A title. Or 3 zeta mats. Or a full carbanti or stun gun. That should get people motivated.
Its a hard problem with soultions that will never make everyone happy. But a message at the start that it is a game mode that is intented to be competitive and challenging and there will be winners and loser will help. A little. Maybe.
Sorry for typos and spellings but I'm on my phone. Good luck.
you can only attack spots where you placed a team on your side
credits will be given not after defeating a team but at the end of the round for each cleared spot
This still wouldn't solve the problems people have with ruined gameplay. You could easily chose to not set a def if you don't plan on attacking anyway, taking away your opponent's ability to enjoy the game in the process.
I keep wanting to do this, and I should have not set D on the first round, I just forgot that was an option. lol.
I do so wish I'd get someone who doesn't set D though, I'd love a free win and free rewards, lol.
I still can't believe people are complaining about this still. Why can't you give me all your free wins, I'd gladly go up against people who don't set D, it is there right to do so, they can play the game how they like
What’s the point of winning a game you can’t even play ? Where is the fun in winning a game you didn’t get to participate in ?
GUUUMMIIIE my Defense ppl : "CG this is not fair.... I wanted to embarass my opponent and then mock him over text relentlessly (something that should be dealt with)
GUUMMIIIEE my Defense ppl ": "CG do you realize I have not mocked anyone in a month what's the point of getting first place rewards when I can't mock anyone or feel good aboot muyself
hahaha, what? You think anyone who beats you is "mocking you?" Are you seriously that insecure? Who hurt you?
Aw man, I love when one guy calls someone’s whole side negative, and then some guy from his side is really negative so that I can say that his whole side is negative, but nah man. Humans were born negativity.
Yes i think the people voluntarily not setting defenses while still attacking are selfish and negative people. Nowhere has it been said they were the only negative people in the world, nowhere has it been said that not setting defense while attacking was the only problem of the human race. It would be nice if people stopped bringing unrelated stuff for... what reason exactly? What was the point ? « Some people are insulting others when they win so let’s not make it so you can’t attack if you don’t set defenses. » Is that a real point ? Or are people just throwing anything to fight here.
Until they “fix” GA, I will continue not setting defense. Why? Because it’s a legal game move. Is it moral? Doesn’t matter. Most business is immoral. This is what I will do to protest GA and get out of it what I can. It’s poorly designed.
Honestly good for you they cry about you taking away their choice while trying to take away yours....and winning the best rewards while doing it..... it's hilarious
We are asking for a change in the game that would secure our ability to actually play, to have fun, which is why most of us downloaded the game in the first place. You did nothing here except moking, belittling and trolling. So of course negative people such as you will be fine ruining other’s experiences just because. We know selfish, unfun people exist (we can see quite a few on this very thread), we’re meeting them in ga already. Personally i’m not interested in hearing poor justifications, i’m here to ask for their negative impact to be removed from the game.
Nihion summed it all up. Negative people will spread their negativity as long as they have the possibility to do so, because they can and that’s what they do. So we are asking for a change so that they won’t be able to do so anymore. It’s simple and really, as VonZant said, does not warrant any kind of argument.
Except it does as its your selfish point of view. Because those ppl who set no D also have an issue with how this event is set up. But only your opinion matters right? If they punished ppl for not setting Defense based on fair play or what not , theyd have to eliminate shards. You know for fair play so ppl cant be kept from rewards they earned. So since thatll never happen, neither will this
It’s selfish of me to want to actually play the game ? Sure, you can say what you want for the sake of being argumentative, i don’t mind.
The issue they have with the game mode (mostly balance issue) has nothing to do with this thread. Their opponents have nothing to do with the matchmaking, they are not responsible for the issues they have and they can’t do anything to change it. They are just people like them, trying to have fun in a game they like.
You talk about punishment, i don’t see any punishment anywhere. So i don’t understand what you mean here. No one asked for punishments.
You keep bringing shard chats, i don’t know why since again it’s 100% unrelated to this thread and the fact that people in ga right now are deprived of actual gameplay by others, and we are asking for that to not be possible anymore, so that all can have fun playing the game.
I haven’t said anywhere that only my opinion matters. Some people here just seem to be out looking for fights and arguments just for the sake of it. I admit i don’t understand that.
Because thats how i feel ,exactly , about the arena lol. But the shard chats keeps me out and stops me from enjoying my game. AND negatively affects my rewards. On a much higher level than not setting a D in GA. They have refused to fix that , why should this be any different.
If people want to not set D to use their toons on offense to maximize what they will get, they should be allowed to do it.
Or are you saying they should have to set a defense so they cant get their credits for winning on offense, and certainly wont win the match, thereby getting nothing, so you can have fun ?
Or should they have to set something, lets say 1 toon or a group of 5 lvl 1 toons, does that create fun? No only gets you 600k credits. So is it the credits? Cause thats an easy fix for cg to give the credits for no defense set.
Your fun doesnt override someone elses gameplay.
I feel exactly the same as you about shard chat, i think arena ranking is absolute garbage and collusion is disgusting and unfun. But really it has nothing to do with what we’re discussing there, and there are enough threads about it already^^
I absolutely don’t care about the credits, even though it’s an easy way to show why it shouldn’t work the way it does now. We are playing a game mode where if someone doesn’t set defense and still attack, they A-get to play while you don’t and B-get to earn rewards you won’t have access to. It’s not about winning or losing. It’s about fairness and gameplay.
I don’t want to override their gameplay what’s up with that ? I want to play. I want to play. What’s so hard to understand ? I want to play. They get to play and i don’t. Can people understand ? I’m not taking away their choice. If they want to not set defenses and forfeit the round they can. They just wont be able to attack, same as me. What’s the problem ? You all keep telling me that it doesn’t matter anyway apparently. At least everyone is in the same boat. Either both players don’t play or both do. I can’t understand how that’s a problem for anyone. If it’s not a problem currently that i don’t get to play, it shouldn’t be a problem for them either. So it wouldn’t change anything for them, but at least if my opponent play i’ll be able to play too.
No.
I will continue to not set defense. Call me negative and rude if you want, but I’m literally giving my opponent free stuff.
My argument was 100% related to what you said: You claimed that I represented all the negativity of people who don’t set defense. And then someone on your side spread negativity by claiming that people who don’t set defense don’t have lives. So I’m not the source of negativity.
Look, I understand you’re frustrated because your opponent didn’t set defense so you couldn’t progress your quests or whatever, but I should be able to make LEGAL MOVES without being called rude. I can’t stress enough that until it’s fixed, I have a right to do this.
Why should you be able to make « legal moves » without being called rude ? What you are doing is rude and selfish. And you keep repeating again and again that you know it’s upsetting people, but you will keep doing it because you can. You want me to congratulate you on your stand out behavior ? Say that you’re a pleasure to play with ?
I said you are a negative person. The fact that some other people are negative too doesn’t change that.
Honestly i don’t understand you. You already said on this very thread that you were doing this on purpose. You know you are robbing people of their fun. You do it because that’s what you playing is your way of protesting the game mode because you don’t like it.
So reactions like mine should be exactly what you wanted by doing this. And now you come here and shoot us down ? I have no clue.
@leef There is an obvious and very simple solution : if you don’t have defenses, you forfeited and therefore the round is not played.
If cg wants to set up an auto deploy feature they can. If you are asking what i would personally do, an opt-in auto feature setting prepared teams would be nice. So you only need to set up defensive teams in some kind of squad selection page, and check the box if you want the feature. This way, if you don’t touch anything it will deploy the defense you prepared in advance.
Regarding the credits, they could award a smaller sum than now but based on the defenses you set. Or better even, give credit rewards for successful defenses on top of successful offenses.
The problem is not that gameplay is ruined because your opponent didn’t set defense. This is inevitable unless you create a systematic feature forcing defenses, which i really don’t like. The problem is that right now people can ruin your gameplay while having fun themselves in the same time. Which is completely unfair. The same people have access to rewards you don’t have access to, which is completely unfair. They are like the kids in kindergarten sharing a toy, suddenly one of them take the toy and turn then back to play alone with it.
Fine. I’m a horrible person who does this on purpose. But I won’t stop because that is how I play. If they create a fix, fine, but until then I will protest GA and very possibly upset people along the way. I’m sorry that what I do doesn’t fit in your standards of morality, but honestly I don’t care. Good day sir.
How exactly is what you are doing "protesting GA"?....... If you truly wanted to protest it, you wouldn't join..... Joining, not setting defence and accepting whatever rewards you get isn't a protest.....
Well I dont have time to look up the quote but they said GA was supposed to be their ultimate competitive game mode, or something similar.
So, in order to encourage that spirit:
FIRST: Put a message on the signup page with a confirmation popup that says something like:
THIS IS A COMPETITIVE GAME MODE. YOU CAN WIN OR LOSE. IT WILL BE DIFFICULT AND YOU ARE EXPECTED TO PARTICIPATE. IF YOU DO NOT YOUR REWARDS WILL BE SEVERYLY LIMITED.
Well, if you don't set a def you'll loose by default. What more can you expect in a "competative game mode"? The rewards for the losers are worse aswell.
i mean .. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Well I dont have time to look up the quote but they said GA was supposed to be their ultimate competitive game mode, or something similar.
So, in order to encourage that spirit:
FIRST: Put a message on the signup page with a confirmation popup that says something like:
THIS IS A COMPETITIVE GAME MODE. YOU CAN WIN OR LOSE. IT WILL BE DIFFICULT AND YOU ARE EXPECTED TO PARTICIPATE. IF YOU DO NOT YOUR REWARDS WILL BE SEVERYLY LIMITED.
Well, if you don't set a def you'll loose by default. What more can you expect in a "competative game mode"? The rewards for the losers are worse aswell.
i mean .. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
And your argument for willingly preventing others from playing the game is what? Spell it out for me? Justify it?
Well I dont have time to look up the quote but they said GA was supposed to be their ultimate competitive game mode, or something similar.
So, in order to encourage that spirit:
FIRST: Put a message on the signup page with a confirmation popup that says something like:
THIS IS A COMPETITIVE GAME MODE. YOU CAN WIN OR LOSE. IT WILL BE DIFFICULT AND YOU ARE EXPECTED TO PARTICIPATE. IF YOU DO NOT YOUR REWARDS WILL BE SEVERYLY LIMITED.
Well, if you don't set a def you'll loose by default. What more can you expect in a "competative game mode"? The rewards for the losers are worse aswell.
i mean .. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
And your argument for willingly preventing others from playing the game is what? Spell it out for me? Justify it?
I can't win, so i won't try. Simple as that.
What you want people to do? Place a def so that their opponent gets to enjoy the game mode while they themselves can't enjoy it because they're severely outmatched?
You got to realize the more you point the finger at the other guy, the more it becomes clear you only care about your own enjoyment of the game.
Well I dont have time to look up the quote but they said GA was supposed to be their ultimate competitive game mode, or something similar.
So, in order to encourage that spirit:
FIRST: Put a message on the signup page with a confirmation popup that says something like:
THIS IS A COMPETITIVE GAME MODE. YOU CAN WIN OR LOSE. IT WILL BE DIFFICULT AND YOU ARE EXPECTED TO PARTICIPATE. IF YOU DO NOT YOUR REWARDS WILL BE SEVERYLY LIMITED.
Well, if you don't set a def you'll loose by default. What more can you expect in a "competative game mode"? The rewards for the losers are worse aswell.
i mean .. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
And your argument for willingly preventing others from playing the game is what? Spell it out for me? Justify it?
I can't win, so i won't try. Simple as that.
What you want people to do? Place a def so that their opponent gets to enjoy the game mode while they themselves can't enjoy it because they're severely outmatched?
You got to realize the more you point the finger at the other guy, the more it becomes clear you only care about your own enjoyment of the game.
Well I dont have time to look up the quote but they said GA was supposed to be their ultimate competitive game mode, or something similar.
So, in order to encourage that spirit:
FIRST: Put a message on the signup page with a confirmation popup that says something like:
THIS IS A COMPETITIVE GAME MODE. YOU CAN WIN OR LOSE. IT WILL BE DIFFICULT AND YOU ARE EXPECTED TO PARTICIPATE. IF YOU DO NOT YOUR REWARDS WILL BE SEVERYLY LIMITED.
Well, if you don't set a def you'll loose by default. What more can you expect in a "competative game mode"? The rewards for the losers are worse aswell.
i mean .. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
And your argument for willingly preventing others from playing the game is what? Spell it out for me? Justify it?
I can't win, so i won't try. Simple as that.
What you want people to do? Place a def so that their opponent gets to enjoy the game mode while they themselves can't enjoy it because they're severely outmatched?
You got to realize the more you point the finger at the other guy, the more it becomes clear you only care about your own enjoyment of the game.
You could say that about your statement too though. "I can't have fun, so I'm gonna make sure he can't have fun either". That's also pretty selfish.
Well I dont have time to look up the quote but they said GA was supposed to be their ultimate competitive game mode, or something similar.
So, in order to encourage that spirit:
FIRST: Put a message on the signup page with a confirmation popup that says something like:
THIS IS A COMPETITIVE GAME MODE. YOU CAN WIN OR LOSE. IT WILL BE DIFFICULT AND YOU ARE EXPECTED TO PARTICIPATE. IF YOU DO NOT YOUR REWARDS WILL BE SEVERYLY LIMITED.
Well, if you don't set a def you'll loose by default. What more can you expect in a "competative game mode"? The rewards for the losers are worse aswell.
i mean .. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
And your argument for willingly preventing others from playing the game is what? Spell it out for me? Justify it?
I can't win, so i won't try. Simple as that.
What you want people to do? Place a def so that their opponent gets to enjoy the game mode while they themselves can't enjoy it because they're severely outmatched?
You got to realize the more you point the finger at the other guy, the more it becomes clear you only care about your own enjoyment of the game.
Then just dont join a competitive game mode.
Why not? It's not a given that i'll be outmatched, or that i won't have a chance to win in any of the other 2 rounds. Which makes your suggestion rather silly...
Well I dont have time to look up the quote but they said GA was supposed to be their ultimate competitive game mode, or something similar.
So, in order to encourage that spirit:
FIRST: Put a message on the signup page with a confirmation popup that says something like:
THIS IS A COMPETITIVE GAME MODE. YOU CAN WIN OR LOSE. IT WILL BE DIFFICULT AND YOU ARE EXPECTED TO PARTICIPATE. IF YOU DO NOT YOUR REWARDS WILL BE SEVERYLY LIMITED.
Well, if you don't set a def you'll loose by default. What more can you expect in a "competative game mode"? The rewards for the losers are worse aswell.
i mean .. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
And your argument for willingly preventing others from playing the game is what? Spell it out for me? Justify it?
I can't win, so i won't try. Simple as that.
What you want people to do? Place a def so that their opponent gets to enjoy the game mode while they themselves can't enjoy it because they're severely outmatched?
You got to realize the more you point the finger at the other guy, the more it becomes clear you only care about your own enjoyment of the game.
You could say that about your statement too though. "I can't have fun, so I'm gonna make sure he can't have fun either". That's also pretty selfish.
You could say that, but what purpose would that serve?
You play to win the game. That's the whole point in a pvp game mode.
You don't see the Browns just walk off the field or not even show up to a football game just because they are playing the far superior Patriots.
Well I dont have time to look up the quote but they said GA was supposed to be their ultimate competitive game mode, or something similar.
So, in order to encourage that spirit:
FIRST: Put a message on the signup page with a confirmation popup that says something like:
THIS IS A COMPETITIVE GAME MODE. YOU CAN WIN OR LOSE. IT WILL BE DIFFICULT AND YOU ARE EXPECTED TO PARTICIPATE. IF YOU DO NOT YOUR REWARDS WILL BE SEVERYLY LIMITED.
Well, if you don't set a def you'll loose by default. What more can you expect in a "competative game mode"? The rewards for the losers are worse aswell.
i mean .. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
And your argument for willingly preventing others from playing the game is what? Spell it out for me? Justify it?
I can't win, so i won't try. Simple as that.
What you want people to do? Place a def so that their opponent gets to enjoy the game mode while they themselves can't enjoy it because they're severely outmatched?
You got to realize the more you point the finger at the other guy, the more it becomes clear you only care about your own enjoyment of the game.
This.
As I pointed out earlier, it is a rational choice to attempt to maximize your rewards in the game. For some, the way to do this is to consolidate all of their resources into attacking. If it is not possible to win the match then the next best choice is to attempt to win battles on offense. Spitting your forces by deploying a moderate defense and moderate offense against a superior opponent is a losing proposition that will result in no rewards. This is the least rational choice available.
Well I dont have time to look up the quote but they said GA was supposed to be their ultimate competitive game mode, or something similar.
So, in order to encourage that spirit:
FIRST: Put a message on the signup page with a confirmation popup that says something like:
THIS IS A COMPETITIVE GAME MODE. YOU CAN WIN OR LOSE. IT WILL BE DIFFICULT AND YOU ARE EXPECTED TO PARTICIPATE. IF YOU DO NOT YOUR REWARDS WILL BE SEVERYLY LIMITED.
Well, if you don't set a def you'll loose by default. What more can you expect in a "competative game mode"? The rewards for the losers are worse aswell.
i mean .. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
And your argument for willingly preventing others from playing the game is what? Spell it out for me? Justify it?
I can't win, so i won't try. Simple as that.
What you want people to do? Place a def so that their opponent gets to enjoy the game mode while they themselves can't enjoy it because they're severely outmatched?
You got to realize the more you point the finger at the other guy, the more it becomes clear you only care about your own enjoyment of the game.
And why can't you win?
Because of choices you made in building your roster? Or did someone force those decisions upon you?
You know what, yeah, I think matchmaking can be improved. But take some **** responsibility. I've beaten a guy with Revan before I had him.
There are very few impossible matchups if you put some effort in. All matchups are impossible if you can't be bothered to take responsibility for your own actions. Essentially YOU haven't prepared for a PvP mode, YOU can't seem to take responsibility for that and therefore YOU think it's within your right to deny someone else the opportunity to enjoy the game. To punish someone for preparing better than you.
Well I dont have time to look up the quote but they said GA was supposed to be their ultimate competitive game mode, or something similar.
So, in order to encourage that spirit:
FIRST: Put a message on the signup page with a confirmation popup that says something like:
THIS IS A COMPETITIVE GAME MODE. YOU CAN WIN OR LOSE. IT WILL BE DIFFICULT AND YOU ARE EXPECTED TO PARTICIPATE. IF YOU DO NOT YOUR REWARDS WILL BE SEVERYLY LIMITED.
Well, if you don't set a def you'll loose by default. What more can you expect in a "competative game mode"? The rewards for the losers are worse aswell.
i mean .. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
And your argument for willingly preventing others from playing the game is what? Spell it out for me? Justify it?
I can't win, so i won't try. Simple as that.
What you want people to do? Place a def so that their opponent gets to enjoy the game mode while they themselves can't enjoy it because they're severely outmatched?
You got to realize the more you point the finger at the other guy, the more it becomes clear you only care about your own enjoyment of the game.
This.
As I pointed out earlier, it is a rational choice to attempt to maximize your rewards in the game. For some, the way to do this is to consolidate all of their resources into attacking. If it is not possible to win the match then the next best choice is to attempt to win battles on offense. Spitting your forces by deploying a moderate defense and moderate offense against a superior opponent is a losing proposition that will result in no rewards. This is the least rational choice available.
The logical choice in that situation would be to put a bunch of low level junk on defence and collect the points for it and then use all your best on attacks hoping to clear his board.....
Well I dont have time to look up the quote but they said GA was supposed to be their ultimate competitive game mode, or something similar.
So, in order to encourage that spirit:
FIRST: Put a message on the signup page with a confirmation popup that says something like:
THIS IS A COMPETITIVE GAME MODE. YOU CAN WIN OR LOSE. IT WILL BE DIFFICULT AND YOU ARE EXPECTED TO PARTICIPATE. IF YOU DO NOT YOUR REWARDS WILL BE SEVERYLY LIMITED.
Well, if you don't set a def you'll loose by default. What more can you expect in a "competative game mode"? The rewards for the losers are worse aswell.
i mean .. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
And your argument for willingly preventing others from playing the game is what? Spell it out for me? Justify it?
I can't win, so i won't try. Simple as that.
What you want people to do? Place a def so that their opponent gets to enjoy the game mode while they themselves can't enjoy it because they're severely outmatched?
You got to realize the more you point the finger at the other guy, the more it becomes clear you only care about your own enjoyment of the game.
This.
As I pointed out earlier, it is a rational choice to attempt to maximize your rewards in the game. For some, the way to do this is to consolidate all of their resources into attacking. If it is not possible to win the match then the next best choice is to attempt to win battles on offense. Spitting your forces by deploying a moderate defense and moderate offense against a superior opponent is a losing proposition that will result in no rewards. This is the least rational choice available.
The logical choice in that situation would be to put a bunch of low level junk on defence and collect the points for it and then use all your best on attacks hoping to clear his board.....
It is only the logical choice if you are absolutely assured of clearing all of your opponent's territories in one try. Otherwise, it is contributing to your opponent's victory. Points from defense don't matter if you underperform on offense. A variation on this would be to place junk in most places with a single strong defense squad in one territory. But this is only a winning strategy if this is done without weakening offense.
Looking at it from this standpoint, in order reduces the attractiveness of the empty defense strategy, there needs to be greater incentive to fill them out. Right now, incentives are heavily weighted towards offense: earning credits, match points and quest fulfillment. Defense only yields match points.
I keep wanting to do this, and I should have not set D on the first round, I just forgot that was an option. lol.
I do so wish I'd get someone who doesn't set D though, I'd love a free win and free rewards, lol.
I still can't believe people are complaining about this still. Why can't you give me all your free wins, I'd gladly go up against people who don't set D, it is there right to do so, they can play the game how they like
What’s the point of winning a game you can’t even play ? Where is the fun in winning a game you didn’t get to participate in ?
GUUUMMIIIE my Defense ppl : "CG this is not fair.... I wanted to embarass my opponent and then mock him over text relentlessly (something that should be dealt with)
GUUMMIIIEE my Defense ppl ": "CG do you realize I have not mocked anyone in a month what's the point of getting first place rewards when I can't mock anyone or feel good aboot muyself
hahaha, what? You think anyone who beats you is "mocking you?" Are you seriously that insecure? Who hurt you?
Aw man, I love when one guy calls someone’s whole side negative, and then some guy from his side is really negative so that I can say that his whole side is negative, but nah man. Humans were born negativity.
Yes i think the people voluntarily not setting defenses while still attacking are selfish and negative people. Nowhere has it been said they were the only negative people in the world, nowhere has it been said that not setting defense while attacking was the only problem of the human race. It would be nice if people stopped bringing unrelated stuff for... what reason exactly? What was the point ? « Some people are insulting others when they win so let’s not make it so you can’t attack if you don’t set defenses. » Is that a real point ? Or are people just throwing anything to fight here.
Until they “fix” GA, I will continue not setting defense. Why? Because it’s a legal game move. Is it moral? Doesn’t matter. Most business is immoral. This is what I will do to protest GA and get out of it what I can. It’s poorly designed.
Honestly good for you they cry about you taking away their choice while trying to take away yours....and winning the best rewards while doing it..... it's hilarious
We are asking for a change in the game that would secure our ability to actually play, to have fun, which is why most of us downloaded the game in the first place. You did nothing here except moking, belittling and trolling. So of course negative people such as you will be fine ruining other’s experiences just because. We know selfish, unfun people exist (we can see quite a few on this very thread), we’re meeting them in ga already. Personally i’m not interested in hearing poor justifications, i’m here to ask for their negative impact to be removed from the game.
Nihion summed it all up. Negative people will spread their negativity as long as they have the possibility to do so, because they can and that’s what they do. So we are asking for a change so that they won’t be able to do so anymore. It’s simple and really, as VonZant said, does not warrant any kind of argument.
Except it does as its your selfish point of view. Because those ppl who set no D also have an issue with how this event is set up. But only your opinion matters right? If they punished ppl for not setting Defense based on fair play or what not , theyd have to eliminate shards. You know for fair play so ppl cant be kept from rewards they earned. So since thatll never happen, neither will this
It’s selfish of me to want to actually play the game ? Sure, you can say what you want for the sake of being argumentative, i don’t mind.
The issue they have with the game mode (mostly balance issue) has nothing to do with this thread. Their opponents have nothing to do with the matchmaking, they are not responsible for the issues they have and they can’t do anything to change it. They are just people like them, trying to have fun in a game they like.
You talk about punishment, i don’t see any punishment anywhere. So i don’t understand what you mean here. No one asked for punishments.
You keep bringing shard chats, i don’t know why since again it’s 100% unrelated to this thread and the fact that people in ga right now are deprived of actual gameplay by others, and we are asking for that to not be possible anymore, so that all can have fun playing the game.
I haven’t said anywhere that only my opinion matters. Some people here just seem to be out looking for fights and arguments just for the sake of it. I admit i don’t understand that.
Because thats how i feel ,exactly , about the arena lol. But the shard chats keeps me out and stops me from enjoying my game. AND negatively affects my rewards. On a much higher level than not setting a D in GA. They have refused to fix that , why should this be any different.
If people want to not set D to use their toons on offense to maximize what they will get, they should be allowed to do it.
Or are you saying they should have to set a defense so they cant get their credits for winning on offense, and certainly wont win the match, thereby getting nothing, so you can have fun ?
Or should they have to set something, lets say 1 toon or a group of 5 lvl 1 toons, does that create fun? No only gets you 600k credits. So is it the credits? Cause thats an easy fix for cg to give the credits for no defense set.
Your fun doesnt override someone elses gameplay.
I feel exactly the same as you about shard chat, i think arena ranking is absolute garbage and collusion is disgusting and unfun. But really it has nothing to do with what we’re discussing there, and there are enough threads about it already^^
I absolutely don’t care about the credits, even though it’s an easy way to show why it shouldn’t work the way it does now. We are playing a game mode where if someone doesn’t set defense and still attack, they A-get to play while you don’t and B-get to earn rewards you won’t have access to. It’s not about winning or losing. It’s about fairness and gameplay.
I don’t want to override their gameplay what’s up with that ? I want to play. I want to play. What’s so hard to understand ? I want to play. They get to play and i don’t. Can people understand ? I’m not taking away their choice. If they want to not set defenses and forfeit the round they can. They just wont be able to attack, same as me. What’s the problem ? You all keep telling me that it doesn’t matter anyway apparently. At least everyone is in the same boat. Either both players don’t play or both do. I can’t understand how that’s a problem for anyone. If it’s not a problem currently that i don’t get to play, it shouldn’t be a problem for them either. So it wouldn’t change anything for them, but at least if my opponent play i’ll be able to play too.
No.
I will continue to not set defense. Call me negative and rude if you want, but I’m literally giving my opponent free stuff.
My argument was 100% related to what you said: You claimed that I represented all the negativity of people who don’t set defense. And then someone on your side spread negativity by claiming that people who don’t set defense don’t have lives. So I’m not the source of negativity.
Look, I understand you’re frustrated because your opponent didn’t set defense so you couldn’t progress your quests or whatever, but I should be able to make LEGAL MOVES without being called rude. I can’t stress enough that until it’s fixed, I have a right to do this.
Why should you be able to make « legal moves » without being called rude ? What you are doing is rude and selfish. And you keep repeating again and again that you know it’s upsetting people, but you will keep doing it because you can. You want me to congratulate you on your stand out behavior ? Say that you’re a pleasure to play with ?
I said you are a negative person. The fact that some other people are negative too doesn’t change that.
Honestly i don’t understand you. You already said on this very thread that you were doing this on purpose. You know you are robbing people of their fun. You do it because that’s what you playing is your way of protesting the game mode because you don’t like it.
So reactions like mine should be exactly what you wanted by doing this. And now you come here and shoot us down ? I have no clue.
@leef There is an obvious and very simple solution : if you don’t have defenses, you forfeited and therefore the round is not played.
If cg wants to set up an auto deploy feature they can. If you are asking what i would personally do, an opt-in auto feature setting prepared teams would be nice. So you only need to set up defensive teams in some kind of squad selection page, and check the box if you want the feature. This way, if you don’t touch anything it will deploy the defense you prepared in advance.
Regarding the credits, they could award a smaller sum than now but based on the defenses you set. Or better even, give credit rewards for successful defenses on top of successful offenses.
The problem is not that gameplay is ruined because your opponent didn’t set defense. This is inevitable unless you create a systematic feature forcing defenses, which i really don’t like. The problem is that right now people can ruin your gameplay while having fun themselves in the same time. Which is completely unfair. The same people have access to rewards you don’t have access to, which is completely unfair. They are like the kids in kindergarten sharing a toy, suddenly one of them take the toy and turn then back to play alone with it.
Fine. I’m a horrible person who does this on purpose. But I won’t stop because that is how I play. If they create a fix, fine, but until then I will protest GA and very possibly upset people along the way. I’m sorry that what I do doesn’t fit in your standards of morality, but honestly I don’t care. Good day sir.
How exactly is what you are doing "protesting GA"?....... If you truly wanted to protest it, you wouldn't join..... Joining, not setting defence and accepting whatever rewards you get isn't a protest.....
I am exploiting a weakness in the design for my benefit. That’s protesting.
I keep wanting to do this, and I should have not set D on the first round, I just forgot that was an option. lol.
I do so wish I'd get someone who doesn't set D though, I'd love a free win and free rewards, lol.
I still can't believe people are complaining about this still. Why can't you give me all your free wins, I'd gladly go up against people who don't set D, it is there right to do so, they can play the game how they like
What’s the point of winning a game you can’t even play ? Where is the fun in winning a game you didn’t get to participate in ?
GUUUMMIIIE my Defense ppl : "CG this is not fair.... I wanted to embarass my opponent and then mock him over text relentlessly (something that should be dealt with)
GUUMMIIIEE my Defense ppl ": "CG do you realize I have not mocked anyone in a month what's the point of getting first place rewards when I can't mock anyone or feel good aboot muyself
hahaha, what? You think anyone who beats you is "mocking you?" Are you seriously that insecure? Who hurt you?
Aw man, I love when one guy calls someone’s whole side negative, and then some guy from his side is really negative so that I can say that his whole side is negative, but nah man. Humans were born negativity.
Yes i think the people voluntarily not setting defenses while still attacking are selfish and negative people. Nowhere has it been said they were the only negative people in the world, nowhere has it been said that not setting defense while attacking was the only problem of the human race. It would be nice if people stopped bringing unrelated stuff for... what reason exactly? What was the point ? « Some people are insulting others when they win so let’s not make it so you can’t attack if you don’t set defenses. » Is that a real point ? Or are people just throwing anything to fight here.
Until they “fix” GA, I will continue not setting defense. Why? Because it’s a legal game move. Is it moral? Doesn’t matter. Most business is immoral. This is what I will do to protest GA and get out of it what I can. It’s poorly designed.
Honestly good for you they cry about you taking away their choice while trying to take away yours....and winning the best rewards while doing it..... it's hilarious
We are asking for a change in the game that would secure our ability to actually play, to have fun, which is why most of us downloaded the game in the first place. You did nothing here except moking, belittling and trolling. So of course negative people such as you will be fine ruining other’s experiences just because. We know selfish, unfun people exist (we can see quite a few on this very thread), we’re meeting them in ga already. Personally i’m not interested in hearing poor justifications, i’m here to ask for their negative impact to be removed from the game.
Nihion summed it all up. Negative people will spread their negativity as long as they have the possibility to do so, because they can and that’s what they do. So we are asking for a change so that they won’t be able to do so anymore. It’s simple and really, as VonZant said, does not warrant any kind of argument.
Except it does as its your selfish point of view. Because those ppl who set no D also have an issue with how this event is set up. But only your opinion matters right? If they punished ppl for not setting Defense based on fair play or what not , theyd have to eliminate shards. You know for fair play so ppl cant be kept from rewards they earned. So since thatll never happen, neither will this
It’s selfish of me to want to actually play the game ? Sure, you can say what you want for the sake of being argumentative, i don’t mind.
The issue they have with the game mode (mostly balance issue) has nothing to do with this thread. Their opponents have nothing to do with the matchmaking, they are not responsible for the issues they have and they can’t do anything to change it. They are just people like them, trying to have fun in a game they like.
You talk about punishment, i don’t see any punishment anywhere. So i don’t understand what you mean here. No one asked for punishments.
You keep bringing shard chats, i don’t know why since again it’s 100% unrelated to this thread and the fact that people in ga right now are deprived of actual gameplay by others, and we are asking for that to not be possible anymore, so that all can have fun playing the game.
I haven’t said anywhere that only my opinion matters. Some people here just seem to be out looking for fights and arguments just for the sake of it. I admit i don’t understand that.
Because thats how i feel ,exactly , about the arena lol. But the shard chats keeps me out and stops me from enjoying my game. AND negatively affects my rewards. On a much higher level than not setting a D in GA. They have refused to fix that , why should this be any different.
If people want to not set D to use their toons on offense to maximize what they will get, they should be allowed to do it.
Or are you saying they should have to set a defense so they cant get their credits for winning on offense, and certainly wont win the match, thereby getting nothing, so you can have fun ?
Or should they have to set something, lets say 1 toon or a group of 5 lvl 1 toons, does that create fun? No only gets you 600k credits. So is it the credits? Cause thats an easy fix for cg to give the credits for no defense set.
Your fun doesnt override someone elses gameplay.
I feel exactly the same as you about shard chat, i think arena ranking is absolute garbage and collusion is disgusting and unfun. But really it has nothing to do with what we’re discussing there, and there are enough threads about it already^^
I absolutely don’t care about the credits, even though it’s an easy way to show why it shouldn’t work the way it does now. We are playing a game mode where if someone doesn’t set defense and still attack, they A-get to play while you don’t and B-get to earn rewards you won’t have access to. It’s not about winning or losing. It’s about fairness and gameplay.
I don’t want to override their gameplay what’s up with that ? I want to play. I want to play. What’s so hard to understand ? I want to play. They get to play and i don’t. Can people understand ? I’m not taking away their choice. If they want to not set defenses and forfeit the round they can. They just wont be able to attack, same as me. What’s the problem ? You all keep telling me that it doesn’t matter anyway apparently. At least everyone is in the same boat. Either both players don’t play or both do. I can’t understand how that’s a problem for anyone. If it’s not a problem currently that i don’t get to play, it shouldn’t be a problem for them either. So it wouldn’t change anything for them, but at least if my opponent play i’ll be able to play too.
No.
I will continue to not set defense. Call me negative and rude if you want, but I’m literally giving my opponent free stuff.
My argument was 100% related to what you said: You claimed that I represented all the negativity of people who don’t set defense. And then someone on your side spread negativity by claiming that people who don’t set defense don’t have lives. So I’m not the source of negativity.
Look, I understand you’re frustrated because your opponent didn’t set defense so you couldn’t progress your quests or whatever, but I should be able to make LEGAL MOVES without being called rude. I can’t stress enough that until it’s fixed, I have a right to do this.
Why should you be able to make « legal moves » without being called rude ? What you are doing is rude and selfish. And you keep repeating again and again that you know it’s upsetting people, but you will keep doing it because you can. You want me to congratulate you on your stand out behavior ? Say that you’re a pleasure to play with ?
I said you are a negative person. The fact that some other people are negative too doesn’t change that.
Honestly i don’t understand you. You already said on this very thread that you were doing this on purpose. You know you are robbing people of their fun. You do it because that’s what you playing is your way of protesting the game mode because you don’t like it.
So reactions like mine should be exactly what you wanted by doing this. And now you come here and shoot us down ? I have no clue.
@leef There is an obvious and very simple solution : if you don’t have defenses, you forfeited and therefore the round is not played.
If cg wants to set up an auto deploy feature they can. If you are asking what i would personally do, an opt-in auto feature setting prepared teams would be nice. So you only need to set up defensive teams in some kind of squad selection page, and check the box if you want the feature. This way, if you don’t touch anything it will deploy the defense you prepared in advance.
Regarding the credits, they could award a smaller sum than now but based on the defenses you set. Or better even, give credit rewards for successful defenses on top of successful offenses.
The problem is not that gameplay is ruined because your opponent didn’t set defense. This is inevitable unless you create a systematic feature forcing defenses, which i really don’t like. The problem is that right now people can ruin your gameplay while having fun themselves in the same time. Which is completely unfair. The same people have access to rewards you don’t have access to, which is completely unfair. They are like the kids in kindergarten sharing a toy, suddenly one of them take the toy and turn then back to play alone with it.
Fine. I’m a horrible person who does this on purpose. But I won’t stop because that is how I play. If they create a fix, fine, but until then I will protest GA and very possibly upset people along the way. I’m sorry that what I do doesn’t fit in your standards of morality, but honestly I don’t care. Good day sir.
How exactly is what you are doing "protesting GA"?....... If you truly wanted to protest it, you wouldn't join..... Joining, not setting defence and accepting whatever rewards you get isn't a protest.....
I am exploiting a weakness in the design for my benefit. That’s protesting.
Well I dont have time to look up the quote but they said GA was supposed to be their ultimate competitive game mode, or something similar.
So, in order to encourage that spirit:
FIRST: Put a message on the signup page with a confirmation popup that says something like:
THIS IS A COMPETITIVE GAME MODE. YOU CAN WIN OR LOSE. IT WILL BE DIFFICULT AND YOU ARE EXPECTED TO PARTICIPATE. IF YOU DO NOT YOUR REWARDS WILL BE SEVERYLY LIMITED.
Well, if you don't set a def you'll loose by default. What more can you expect in a "competative game mode"? The rewards for the losers are worse aswell.
i mean .. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
And your argument for willingly preventing others from playing the game is what? Spell it out for me? Justify it?
I can't win, so i won't try. Simple as that.
What you want people to do? Place a def so that their opponent gets to enjoy the game mode while they themselves can't enjoy it because they're severely outmatched?
You got to realize the more you point the finger at the other guy, the more it becomes clear you only care about your own enjoyment of the game.
This.
As I pointed out earlier, it is a rational choice to attempt to maximize your rewards in the game. For some, the way to do this is to consolidate all of their resources into attacking. If it is not possible to win the match then the next best choice is to attempt to win battles on offense. Spitting your forces by deploying a moderate defense and moderate offense against a superior opponent is a losing proposition that will result in no rewards. This is the least rational choice available.
The logical choice in that situation would be to put a bunch of low level junk on defence and collect the points for it and then use all your best on attacks hoping to clear his board.....
It is only the logical choice if you are absolutely assured of clearing all of your opponent's territories in one try. Otherwise, it is contributing to your opponent's victory. Points from defense don't matter if you underperform on offense. A variation on this would be to place junk in most places with a single strong defense squad in one territory. But this is only a winning strategy if this is done without weakening offense.
Looking at it from this standpoint, in order reduces the attractiveness of the empty defense strategy, there needs to be greater incentive to fill them out. Right now, incentives are heavily weighted towards offense: earning credits, match points and quest fulfillment. Defense only yields match points.
I think you need to check your math.. .. The moment you don't set defence, assuming your opponent has, you have already assured your opponents victory..... This is not a "strategy"....
You play to win the game. That's the whole point in a pvp game mode.
You don't see the Browns just walk off the field or not even show up to a football game just because they are playing the far superior Patriots.
Well I dont have time to look up the quote but they said GA was supposed to be their ultimate competitive game mode, or something similar.
So, in order to encourage that spirit:
FIRST: Put a message on the signup page with a confirmation popup that says something like:
THIS IS A COMPETITIVE GAME MODE. YOU CAN WIN OR LOSE. IT WILL BE DIFFICULT AND YOU ARE EXPECTED TO PARTICIPATE. IF YOU DO NOT YOUR REWARDS WILL BE SEVERYLY LIMITED.
Well, if you don't set a def you'll loose by default. What more can you expect in a "competative game mode"? The rewards for the losers are worse aswell.
i mean .. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
And your argument for willingly preventing others from playing the game is what? Spell it out for me? Justify it?
I can't win, so i won't try. Simple as that.
What you want people to do? Place a def so that their opponent gets to enjoy the game mode while they themselves can't enjoy it because they're severely outmatched?
You got to realize the more you point the finger at the other guy, the more it becomes clear you only care about your own enjoyment of the game.
And why can't you win?
Because of choices you made in building your roster? Or did someone force those decisions upon you?
You know what, yeah, I think matchmaking can be improved. But take some **** responsibility. I've beaten a guy with Revan before I had him.
There are very few impossible matchups if you put some effort in. All matchups are impossible if you can't be bothered to take responsibility for your own actions. Essentially YOU haven't prepared for a PvP mode, YOU can't seem to take responsibility for that and therefore YOU think it's within your right to deny someone else the opportunity to enjoy the game. To punish someone for preparing better than you.
I can win, i always set a def.
However, i've faced a guy who had no chance to beat me. I can only assume that's why he didn't set a def. I can't really blame him for that. A little compassion goes a long way. I could also have gone on a rant saying he's a subhuman for not setting a def because it would have been more fun for me if i could have absolutely decimated him in that GA round, but that's not the kind of person i am.
Well I dont have time to look up the quote but they said GA was supposed to be their ultimate competitive game mode, or something similar.
So, in order to encourage that spirit:
FIRST: Put a message on the signup page with a confirmation popup that says something like:
THIS IS A COMPETITIVE GAME MODE. YOU CAN WIN OR LOSE. IT WILL BE DIFFICULT AND YOU ARE EXPECTED TO PARTICIPATE. IF YOU DO NOT YOUR REWARDS WILL BE SEVERYLY LIMITED.
Well, if you don't set a def you'll loose by default. What more can you expect in a "competative game mode"? The rewards for the losers are worse aswell.
i mean .. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
And your argument for willingly preventing others from playing the game is what? Spell it out for me? Justify it?
I can't win, so i won't try. Simple as that.
What you want people to do? Place a def so that their opponent gets to enjoy the game mode while they themselves can't enjoy it because they're severely outmatched?
You got to realize the more you point the finger at the other guy, the more it becomes clear you only care about your own enjoyment of the game.
This.
As I pointed out earlier, it is a rational choice to attempt to maximize your rewards in the game. For some, the way to do this is to consolidate all of their resources into attacking. If it is not possible to win the match then the next best choice is to attempt to win battles on offense. Spitting your forces by deploying a moderate defense and moderate offense against a superior opponent is a losing proposition that will result in no rewards. This is the least rational choice available.
The logical choice in that situation would be to put a bunch of low level junk on defence and collect the points for it and then use all your best on attacks hoping to clear his board.....
It is only the logical choice if you are absolutely assured of clearing all of your opponent's territories in one try. Otherwise, it is contributing to your opponent's victory. Points from defense don't matter if you underperform on offense. A variation on this would be to place junk in most places with a single strong defense squad in one territory. But this is only a winning strategy if this is done without weakening offense.
Looking at it from this standpoint, in order reduces the attractiveness of the empty defense strategy, there needs to be greater incentive to fill them out. Right now, incentives are heavily weighted towards offense: earning credits, match points and quest fulfillment. Defense only yields match points.
I think you need to check your math.. .. The moment you don't set defence, assuming your opponent has, you have already assured your opponents victory..... This is not a "strategy"....
Yes. Not setting defense assures your opponent victory in the match but if the objective is to win offensive battles and earn credits then no-defense set is a valid strategy. Which is what I said.
Why should we set defenses if only to give the other player more credits? We are not buddies or friends, we are enemies, and I see the reasoning behind some of the people here defending their choices of not wanting to help their opponent. They already get a free win, why should they get more?
They shouldn't definitely get more, they should have the possibility to get more..... You want to dictate what the other player gets then man up, set some defence and fight him for credits and rewards..... If you don't like GA, then don't sign up...... Period....
Not letting others dictate how you play =/= wanting to dictate what the other player gets
No.... It's not the same, it's not the same at all..... Like it or not, GA is designed as a competitive gameplay mode.... If you don't want to compete, then don't join.....
Denying rewards to your competitors by not setting defence is poor sportsmanship at best....
Competitive mode would suggest that there is some sort of lvl playing field here. This mode every time without fail matches me with 4 players with both raven and traya teams I have nether nor do the other 3 players getting shafted by this stupid matching system. You say it destroys your fun when players don't set defence and your correct it's about as much fun as being out matched by half the lignup and only ever fighting for 5th or worse or matching against someone you stand zero chance against. In short it's being destroyed for both sides and it's CG that make the game complain to them not other players.
And yes when I get matched against the players with raven and traya I set no defence in the full knowledge it denies them resources why should I help them grow even stronger?
And if matched against one of the others I can fight I do set defence
Why should we set defenses if only to give the other player more credits? We are not buddies or friends, we are enemies, and I see the reasoning behind some of the people here defending their choices of not wanting to help their opponent. They already get a free win, why should they get more?
They shouldn't definitely get more, they should have the possibility to get more..... You want to dictate what the other player gets then man up, set some defence and fight him for credits and rewards..... If you don't like GA, then don't sign up...... Period....
Not letting others dictate how you play =/= wanting to dictate what the other player gets
No.... It's not the same, it's not the same at all..... Like it or not, GA is designed as a competitive gameplay mode.... If you don't want to compete, then don't join.....
Denying rewards to your competitors by not setting defence is poor sportsmanship at best....
Competitive mode would suggest that there is some sort of lvl playing field here. This mode every time without fail matches me with 4 players with both raven and traya teams I have nether nor do the other 3 players getting shafted by this stupid matching system. You say it destroys your fun when players don't set defence and your correct it's about as much fun as being out matched by half the lignup and only ever fighting for 5th or worse or matching against someone you stand zero chance against. In short it's being destroyed for both sides and it's CG that make the game complain to them not other players.
And yes when I get matched against the players with raven and traya I set no defence in the full knowledge it denies them resources why should I help them grow even stronger?
And if matched against one of the others I can fight I do set defence
The whole purpose of the game is to build a strong roster and use it in battle..... The playing field is completely level.... Just because you made choices that didn't lead you to getting Revan doesnt mean the game pay by field isn't or wasn't level.....
Why should we set defenses if only to give the other player more credits? We are not buddies or friends, we are enemies, and I see the reasoning behind some of the people here defending their choices of not wanting to help their opponent. They already get a free win, why should they get more?
They shouldn't definitely get more, they should have the possibility to get more..... You want to dictate what the other player gets then man up, set some defence and fight him for credits and rewards..... If you don't like GA, then don't sign up...... Period....
Not letting others dictate how you play =/= wanting to dictate what the other player gets
No.... It's not the same, it's not the same at all..... Like it or not, GA is designed as a competitive gameplay mode.... If you don't want to compete, then don't join.....
Denying rewards to your competitors by not setting defence is poor sportsmanship at best....
Competitive mode would suggest that there is some sort of lvl playing field here. This mode every time without fail matches me with 4 players with both raven and traya teams I have nether nor do the other 3 players getting shafted by this stupid matching system. You say it destroys your fun when players don't set defence and your correct it's about as much fun as being out matched by half the lignup and only ever fighting for 5th or worse or matching against someone you stand zero chance against. In short it's being destroyed for both sides and it's CG that make the game complain to them not other players.
And yes when I get matched against the players with raven and traya I set no defence in the full knowledge it denies them resources why should I help them grow even stronger?
And if matched against one of the others I can fight I do set defence
The whole purpose of the game is to build a strong roster and use it in battle..... The playing field is completely level.... Just because you made choices that didn't lead you to getting Revan doesnt mean the game pay by field isn't or wasn't level.....
By this reasoning, GA is a completely level playing field that is unaffected by the choices people make. Just because someone chooses not to deploy defensive squads doesn't mean the field isn't level and you should be happy with it.
Why should we set defenses if only to give the other player more credits? We are not buddies or friends, we are enemies, and I see the reasoning behind some of the people here defending their choices of not wanting to help their opponent. They already get a free win, why should they get more?
They shouldn't definitely get more, they should have the possibility to get more..... You want to dictate what the other player gets then man up, set some defence and fight him for credits and rewards..... If you don't like GA, then don't sign up...... Period....
Not letting others dictate how you play =/= wanting to dictate what the other player gets
No.... It's not the same, it's not the same at all..... Like it or not, GA is designed as a competitive gameplay mode.... If you don't want to compete, then don't join.....
Denying rewards to your competitors by not setting defence is poor sportsmanship at best....
Competitive mode would suggest that there is some sort of lvl playing field here. This mode every time without fail matches me with 4 players with both raven and traya teams I have nether nor do the other 3 players getting shafted by this stupid matching system. You say it destroys your fun when players don't set defence and your correct it's about as much fun as being out matched by half the lignup and only ever fighting for 5th or worse or matching against someone you stand zero chance against. In short it's being destroyed for both sides and it's CG that make the game complain to them not other players.
And yes when I get matched against the players with raven and traya I set no defence in the full knowledge it denies them resources why should I help them grow even stronger?
And if matched against one of the others I can fight I do set defence
The whole purpose of the game is to build a strong roster and use it in battle..... The playing field is completely level.... Just because you made choices that didn't lead you to getting Revan doesnt mean the game pay by field isn't or wasn't level.....
By this reasoning, GA is a completely level playing field that is unaffected by the choices people make. Just because someone chooses not to deploy defensive squads doesn't mean the field isn't level and you should be happy with it.
Two completely different things..... Poor farming choices affect the person that made them.... Unsportsmanlike gameplay affects their opponent...
Why should we set defenses if only to give the other player more credits? We are not buddies or friends, we are enemies, and I see the reasoning behind some of the people here defending their choices of not wanting to help their opponent. They already get a free win, why should they get more?
They shouldn't definitely get more, they should have the possibility to get more..... You want to dictate what the other player gets then man up, set some defence and fight him for credits and rewards..... If you don't like GA, then don't sign up...... Period....
Not letting others dictate how you play =/= wanting to dictate what the other player gets
No.... It's not the same, it's not the same at all..... Like it or not, GA is designed as a competitive gameplay mode.... If you don't want to compete, then don't join.....
Denying rewards to your competitors by not setting defence is poor sportsmanship at best....
Competitive mode would suggest that there is some sort of lvl playing field here. This mode every time without fail matches me with 4 players with both raven and traya teams I have nether nor do the other 3 players getting shafted by this stupid matching system. You say it destroys your fun when players don't set defence and your correct it's about as much fun as being out matched by half the lignup and only ever fighting for 5th or worse or matching against someone you stand zero chance against. In short it's being destroyed for both sides and it's CG that make the game complain to them not other players.
And yes when I get matched against the players with raven and traya I set no defence in the full knowledge it denies them resources why should I help them grow even stronger?
And if matched against one of the others I can fight I do set defence
The whole purpose of the game is to build a strong roster and use it in battle..... The playing field is completely level.... Just because you made choices that didn't lead you to getting Revan doesnt mean the game pay by field isn't or wasn't level.....
No the fact the game matches me against them makes it unlevel there is no need for the game to do that is the point that you just can't see from that highhorse your on. Doesn't the fact they had to change the matching for TW not show you they can and have gotten it wrong before?
Why should we set defenses if only to give the other player more credits? We are not buddies or friends, we are enemies, and I see the reasoning behind some of the people here defending their choices of not wanting to help their opponent. They already get a free win, why should they get more?
They shouldn't definitely get more, they should have the possibility to get more..... You want to dictate what the other player gets then man up, set some defence and fight him for credits and rewards..... If you don't like GA, then don't sign up...... Period....
Not letting others dictate how you play =/= wanting to dictate what the other player gets
No.... It's not the same, it's not the same at all..... Like it or not, GA is designed as a competitive gameplay mode.... If you don't want to compete, then don't join.....
Denying rewards to your competitors by not setting defence is poor sportsmanship at best....
Competitive mode would suggest that there is some sort of lvl playing field here. This mode every time without fail matches me with 4 players with both raven and traya teams I have nether nor do the other 3 players getting shafted by this stupid matching system. You say it destroys your fun when players don't set defence and your correct it's about as much fun as being out matched by half the lignup and only ever fighting for 5th or worse or matching against someone you stand zero chance against. In short it's being destroyed for both sides and it's CG that make the game complain to them not other players.
And yes when I get matched against the players with raven and traya I set no defence in the full knowledge it denies them resources why should I help them grow even stronger?
And if matched against one of the others I can fight I do set defence
The whole purpose of the game is to build a strong roster and use it in battle..... The playing field is completely level.... Just because you made choices that didn't lead you to getting Revan doesnt mean the game pay by field isn't or wasn't level.....
By this reasoning, GA is a completely level playing field that is unaffected by the choices people make. Just because someone chooses not to deploy defensive squads doesn't mean the field isn't level and you should be happy with it.
Two completely different things..... Poor farming choices affect the person that made them.... Unsportsmanlike gameplay affects their opponent...
No. It is still a choice that they make. They are choosing to play in a way that they enjoy and will reward them. You are predisposing that everyone has the same goal in the game as you do "to build a strong roster and use it in battle". Again, if you are trying to determine how others should play and enjoy the game. If your concern is opponents not fielding defensive teams in GA, perhaps you should focus on arena where you know there is always someone to battle. Let others play as they want. No one is obliged to provide a punching bag for you to beat on.
Why should we set defenses if only to give the other player more credits? We are not buddies or friends, we are enemies, and I see the reasoning behind some of the people here defending their choices of not wanting to help their opponent. They already get a free win, why should they get more?
They shouldn't definitely get more, they should have the possibility to get more..... You want to dictate what the other player gets then man up, set some defence and fight him for credits and rewards..... If you don't like GA, then don't sign up...... Period....
Not letting others dictate how you play =/= wanting to dictate what the other player gets
No.... It's not the same, it's not the same at all..... Like it or not, GA is designed as a competitive gameplay mode.... If you don't want to compete, then don't join.....
Denying rewards to your competitors by not setting defence is poor sportsmanship at best....
Competitive mode would suggest that there is some sort of lvl playing field here. This mode every time without fail matches me with 4 players with both raven and traya teams I have nether nor do the other 3 players getting shafted by this stupid matching system. You say it destroys your fun when players don't set defence and your correct it's about as much fun as being out matched by half the lignup and only ever fighting for 5th or worse or matching against someone you stand zero chance against. In short it's being destroyed for both sides and it's CG that make the game complain to them not other players.
And yes when I get matched against the players with raven and traya I set no defence in the full knowledge it denies them resources why should I help them grow even stronger?
And if matched against one of the others I can fight I do set defence
The whole purpose of the game is to build a strong roster and use it in battle..... The playing field is completely level.... Just because you made choices that didn't lead you to getting Revan doesnt mean the game pay by field isn't or wasn't level.....
No the fact the game matches me against them makes it unlevel there is no need for the game to do that is the point that you just can't see from that highhorse your on. Doesn't the fact they had to change the matching for TW not show you they can and have gotten it wrong before?
TW mismatches saw guilds miles apart pitted against eachother..... Completely different t situation....
Anyways, matchmaking is not the topic of this thread...... There are dozens of other ones dedicated to that purpose ....
Anyways, matchmaking is not the topic of this thread...... There are dozens of other ones dedicated to that purpose ....
but that's exactly the problem, it's how the problem started, if the matchmaking was ok, people would set defense and enjoy this part of the game
i think you are permanently taking advantage of this matchmaking by only GP, so you can't understand how it feels when you are constantly opposed to people with 10 times more G12 and zetas toons
and so you only see your point because it's more comfortable for you to do so
i understand people are upset by a miserable matchmaking, and if the only way for them to be heared is to making you scream loud ont the forums i fully support them
and one again forcing auto deploy is a bad idea, everybody has the right to choose how they want to play
it's called freedom.
Replies
So, in order to encourage that spirit:
FIRST: Put a message on the signup page with a confirmation popup that says something like:
THIS IS A COMPETITIVE GAME MODE. YOU CAN WIN OR LOSE. IT WILL BE DIFFICULT AND YOU ARE EXPECTED TO PARTICIPATE. IF YOU DO NOT YOUR REWARDS WILL BE SEVERYLY LIMITED.
On the D, There are lots of possible solutions, examples below can be done alone or in combination depending on how many carrots and sticks you want to use:
1. The game auto sets D by randomly choosing 5 characters somehow. Probably best is to choose 5 random toons from 5 different factions, alternating to just GP once the faction condition can no longer be satisfied. This would wreck their ability for O while giving the other player something to attack. Their ability for O needs to be ruined so they wont do what people are doing here just use their whole roster to obtain offensive rewards.
2. If Auto Set D happens, the player gets a DNF tag (Did Not Finish, or Did not Fight) and does not get credit awards for attacking that round and cannot win that round.
3. If a player gets 2 DNF tags during a full 3 game bracket, they get a 5th prize tier of DNF. It awards something like 100k credits and 100 Mark 1 Medpack Salvage and 5 green ability mats.
I understand the issues of matchmaking from both the Dev and Player side, and understand that it can never be perfect. I also understand that they will never give us the full matchmaking algorithim. They may already do this, But spitballing I would say something like:
Assign a flag for X# of hero's journey, legendaries, and raid reward characters. Probably Revan and Traya (and future similar) should have their own Flags as they are literal Trump cards against people that dont have them.
Assign a flag for X# of Heroic Raids Completed of each raid (3 flags).
Then sort and match from flags + GP and then when flag matches run out just sort GP.
Ships makes it more difficult but I think they should be fully included in GP everytime to encourage people to work on them.
It wont be perfect, but might help reduce the amount of "I'm going to be crushed why play?" Feelings.
Finally, make winning mean something to give people a reason to want to win. A title. Or 3 zeta mats. Or a full carbanti or stun gun. That should get people motivated.
Its a hard problem with soultions that will never make everyone happy. But a message at the start that it is a game mode that is intented to be competitive and challenging and there will be winners and loser will help. A little. Maybe.
Sorry for typos and spellings but I'm on my phone. Good luck.
Good luck.
Edited to remove possible exploit. ~Rtas
This still wouldn't solve the problems people have with ruined gameplay. You could easily chose to not set a def if you don't plan on attacking anyway, taking away your opponent's ability to enjoy the game in the process.
How exactly is what you are doing "protesting GA"?....... If you truly wanted to protest it, you wouldn't join..... Joining, not setting defence and accepting whatever rewards you get isn't a protest.....
Well, if you don't set a def you'll loose by default. What more can you expect in a "competative game mode"? The rewards for the losers are worse aswell.
i mean .. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
And your argument for willingly preventing others from playing the game is what? Spell it out for me? Justify it?
I can't win, so i won't try. Simple as that.
What you want people to do? Place a def so that their opponent gets to enjoy the game mode while they themselves can't enjoy it because they're severely outmatched?
You got to realize the more you point the finger at the other guy, the more it becomes clear you only care about your own enjoyment of the game.
Then just dont join a competitive game mode.
You could say that about your statement too though. "I can't have fun, so I'm gonna make sure he can't have fun either". That's also pretty selfish.
Why not? It's not a given that i'll be outmatched, or that i won't have a chance to win in any of the other 2 rounds. Which makes your suggestion rather silly...
You could say that, but what purpose would that serve?
You don't see the Browns just walk off the field or not even show up to a football game just because they are playing the far superior Patriots.
This.
As I pointed out earlier, it is a rational choice to attempt to maximize your rewards in the game. For some, the way to do this is to consolidate all of their resources into attacking. If it is not possible to win the match then the next best choice is to attempt to win battles on offense. Spitting your forces by deploying a moderate defense and moderate offense against a superior opponent is a losing proposition that will result in no rewards. This is the least rational choice available.
And why can't you win?
Because of choices you made in building your roster? Or did someone force those decisions upon you?
You know what, yeah, I think matchmaking can be improved. But take some **** responsibility. I've beaten a guy with Revan before I had him.
There are very few impossible matchups if you put some effort in. All matchups are impossible if you can't be bothered to take responsibility for your own actions. Essentially YOU haven't prepared for a PvP mode, YOU can't seem to take responsibility for that and therefore YOU think it's within your right to deny someone else the opportunity to enjoy the game. To punish someone for preparing better than you.
The logical choice in that situation would be to put a bunch of low level junk on defence and collect the points for it and then use all your best on attacks hoping to clear his board.....
Looking at it from this standpoint, in order reduces the attractiveness of the empty defense strategy, there needs to be greater incentive to fill them out. Right now, incentives are heavily weighted towards offense: earning credits, match points and quest fulfillment. Defense only yields match points.
I am exploiting a weakness in the design for my benefit. That’s protesting.
Rational. But not a protest.
I think you need to check your math.. .. The moment you don't set defence, assuming your opponent has, you have already assured your opponents victory..... This is not a "strategy"....
They get paid by the people watching...
I can win, i always set a def.
However, i've faced a guy who had no chance to beat me. I can only assume that's why he didn't set a def. I can't really blame him for that. A little compassion goes a long way. I could also have gone on a rant saying he's a subhuman for not setting a def because it would have been more fun for me if i could have absolutely decimated him in that GA round, but that's not the kind of person i am.
Yes. Not setting defense assures your opponent victory in the match but if the objective is to win offensive battles and earn credits then no-defense set is a valid strategy. Which is what I said.
Competitive mode would suggest that there is some sort of lvl playing field here. This mode every time without fail matches me with 4 players with both raven and traya teams I have nether nor do the other 3 players getting shafted by this stupid matching system. You say it destroys your fun when players don't set defence and your correct it's about as much fun as being out matched by half the lignup and only ever fighting for 5th or worse or matching against someone you stand zero chance against. In short it's being destroyed for both sides and it's CG that make the game complain to them not other players.
And yes when I get matched against the players with raven and traya I set no defence in the full knowledge it denies them resources why should I help them grow even stronger?
And if matched against one of the others I can fight I do set defence
The whole purpose of the game is to build a strong roster and use it in battle..... The playing field is completely level.... Just because you made choices that didn't lead you to getting Revan doesnt mean the game pay by field isn't or wasn't level.....
By this reasoning, GA is a completely level playing field that is unaffected by the choices people make. Just because someone chooses not to deploy defensive squads doesn't mean the field isn't level and you should be happy with it.
Two completely different things..... Poor farming choices affect the person that made them.... Unsportsmanlike gameplay affects their opponent...
No the fact the game matches me against them makes it unlevel there is no need for the game to do that is the point that you just can't see from that highhorse your on. Doesn't the fact they had to change the matching for TW not show you they can and have gotten it wrong before?
No. It is still a choice that they make. They are choosing to play in a way that they enjoy and will reward them. You are predisposing that everyone has the same goal in the game as you do "to build a strong roster and use it in battle". Again, if you are trying to determine how others should play and enjoy the game. If your concern is opponents not fielding defensive teams in GA, perhaps you should focus on arena where you know there is always someone to battle. Let others play as they want. No one is obliged to provide a punching bag for you to beat on.
TW mismatches saw guilds miles apart pitted against eachother..... Completely different t situation....
Anyways, matchmaking is not the topic of this thread...... There are dozens of other ones dedicated to that purpose ....
but that's exactly the problem, it's how the problem started, if the matchmaking was ok, people would set defense and enjoy this part of the game
i think you are permanently taking advantage of this matchmaking by only GP, so you can't understand how it feels when you are constantly opposed to people with 10 times more G12 and zetas toons
and so you only see your point because it's more comfortable for you to do so
i understand people are upset by a miserable matchmaking, and if the only way for them to be heared is to making you scream loud ont the forums i fully support them
and one again forcing auto deploy is a bad idea, everybody has the right to choose how they want to play
it's called freedom.