Grand Arena Hitting Last an Advantage?

Replies

  • I went first and i cleared the whole table got 1536 banners or so in total. My rival went after and took 3 tries to beat one of my squads, cleared 2 territories and then failed to beat one of my squads on another territory (the third one) leaving my fourth territory intact. So there you go, that's the advantage of attacking first and the disadvantage of attacking second.

    Make whatever you want of it.
  • 4Lateralus7
    4 posts Member
    edited September 2019
    Let's say you have a coin. You get one point if you place it on the table heads up. You get 2 points if you flip it and get heads, zero points if tails... Your choice to just gain a point or flip. You have 3 turns to accumulate points to beat a number between 2 and 5. Would it help your decision making to know the number to beat? 🤨
  • It's not an advantage.

    Knowing what you need in order to win is going to force you to use more understrength squads to make up the lost points. That's going to lead to riskier and riskier behavior and eventually it'll cost the tardy attacker.

    Conversely, attacking early can be an advantage because if you wipe them out fast enough they're just going to see the large gap and figure it's not worth it to go for the win and instead just go for feats.

    Long story short--Don't worry about it. It's just a game and you should get some fresh air.
    Ceterum censeo Patientia esse meliat.
  • Let's say you have a coin. You get one point if you place it on the table heads up. You get 2 points if you flip it and get heads, zero points if tails... Your choice to just gain a point or flip. You have 3 turns to accumulate points to beat a number between 2 and 5. Would it help your decision making to know the number to beat? 🤨

    Sure, except that this isn't a coin flip at all.

    Someone has nightsisters, then you go with Imperial Troopers. That's not a coin flip. Someone shows Geonosians, then you go with Jawas. That's not a coin flip.

    You know as much as they do at the start of the match. Just because you're going first doesn't mean you have to use 5 for every fight. Use the right counters against the right defenses and go from there.
    Ceterum censeo Patientia esse meliat.
  • NicWester wrote: »
    It's not an advantage.

    Knowing what you need in order to win is going to force you to use more understrength squads to make up the lost points. That's going to lead to riskier and riskier behavior and eventually it'll cost the tardy attacker.

    Conversely, attacking early can be an advantage because if you wipe them out fast enough they're just going to see the large gap and figure it's not worth it to go for the win and instead just go for feats.

    Long story short--Don't worry about it. It's just a game and you should get some fresh air.

    To be honest, people that claim it’s part of their strategy to attack last because it gives them an advantage are not really any different from those that choose to farm in certain numbered batches (like 3 at a time, 2 at a time etc).

    Neither have any impact on the end result, but those that do it are convinced beyond reason that it does!

  • And to be clear, I'm certainly not saying it breaks the game or anything. TBH, I almost always go first because I am a terribly impatient person. 😂. But it is inarguably SOMETHING of an advantage to have more information about what you need to accomplish in order to win than your opponent has, thus the posts about this being a "garbage topic" or people making "excuses" just struck me as, well... strange. But there again, so goes the internet in 2019...
  • Nauros
    4785 posts Member
    NicWester wrote: »
    It's not an advantage.

    Knowing what you need in order to win is going to force you to use more understrength squads to make up the lost points. That's going to lead to riskier and riskier behavior and eventually it'll cost the tardy attacker.

    Conversely, attacking early can be an advantage because if you wipe them out fast enough they're just going to see the large gap and figure it's not worth it to go for the win and instead just go for feats.

    Long story short--Don't worry about it. It's just a game and you should get some fresh air.

    To be honest, people that claim it’s part of their strategy to attack last because it gives them an advantage are not really any different from those that choose to farm in certain numbered batches (like 3 at a time, 2 at a time etc).

    Neither have any impact on the end result, but those that do it are convinced beyond reason that it does!

    To be fair, this does have some merit. Knowing the needed amount of banners might lead to riskier plays which may or may not pay off, whereas not knowing might lead to playing it safe which might not be enough in the end. Of course, this comes into question only in very close matches, most matches are decided by a wider margin than that. Simming in batches is pure superstition.
  • Hiding banners earned by opponent is a good idea actually - no one gets pressure or advantage and both just playing the game as well as they can
  • Do whatever you want and play however you want. At the end of the day it's about having fun. If you are hellbent on thinking going second gets you an advantage, go for it. Whatever works for you.
  • GJO
    170 posts Member
    Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    The game is world wide, there is no time that works for everyone.

    Come on Kyno, read the OP's suggestion which is the topic of discussion. "There is no time that works for everyone" is exactly countered by his/her suggestion of rotating start times.
    You need 62 points in a battle, can you please explain how knowing this makes getting those points easier in battle?
    @EduardoCadav
    I replied to this post >>>
    CordycepsX wrote: »
    How about this.... a player sets an absolute FU defence. Both revans, GG, padme, etc, etc. Their best 8 teams straight onto defence. Then waits. If u full clear, they lose. If u don’t, they know exactly how many banners they need with whatever offence they have left. Their whole strategy revolves around hitting second. I’m not saying it’s an unfair strategy, it’s quite good, actually. The only thing I was asking originally is why not make the starting times fair for everyone?

    There is no staring time that is fair for everyone.

    Rotating doesnt mean its fair for everyone, it means it's good at times and bad at times. Fair would be having it start at the same local time for everyone, because everyone would be subject to the same "rule".

    Agreed. The most fair that it could get is: not showing your opponents score until the end. You will only know your opponent's score and how many teams/territory he got after is over. For both players.

    That would be nice. Then, starting our ending time wouldn't matter.
  • You can't please everyone....
  • CordycepsX wrote: »
    How about this.... a player sets an absolute FU defence. Both revans, GG, padme, etc, etc. Their best 8 teams straight onto defence. Then waits. If u full clear, they lose. If u don’t, they know exactly how many banners they need with whatever offence they have left. Their whole strategy revolves around hitting second. I’m not saying it’s an unfair strategy, it’s quite good, actually. The only thing I was asking originally is why not make the starting times fair for everyone?

    Happened to me today, I like to play offensive, I set up decent defences that are hard to undersize , and 1 defence team. Today I got an FU squad with a faster bast and malak, all up front.. couldn't clear the malak, opponent took multiple attempts on most my teams, but capped the FU strategy by not touching the last back territory because he got the points needed.
    People like that have a special place in Mustafar.
  • Dmitry_M81
    451 posts Member
    edited September 2019
    Neo43 wrote: »
    You can't please everyone....

    Hiding banners CAN please (1) those who can't attack last cuz of timezones, (2) those who feel the pressure attacking first, (3) those who say they don't care and good anyway.
    It won't please those who like to know opponent's banners before attacking, well they gonna lose that advantage and GAC matches gonna be more equal which is not bad at all
  • Kryptic
    109 posts Member
    edited September 2019
    I understand where those people who say “going last is an advantage” are coming from, and I accept the fact that it is a slight advantage in terms of knowing exactly how many banners are needed per battle. But players(who want to win) should be playing to maximize their banners by undersizing and using counters anyway, so it shouldn’t matter who attacks first.

    For me, I always try to attack first and I win about 85-90% of the time. What I do is use counters and undersize squads as much and as often as I feel comfortable doing when attacking. If, for example, I attacked second I would still do the same thing, use counters and undersize my attacks.

    I’m sure there are currently people who attack first that aren’t as effective as they would be if they knew exactly how many banners they needed. I am not saying there aren’t players like this, but it doesn’t make sense to me why they wouldn’t try to maximize banners or be as efficient as they can when they attack first.

    One advantage I can see happening for those who attack second is if battle reports are viewable during the attack phase. If battle reports are viewable in the attack phase, then those who attacked second could see which squads were used for attack and deduce what teams their opponent put on the back defensive line and plan accordingly.

  • I'm not sure whether or not its an advantage. So I usually just clear front row first if I have time. Then clear the rest later. That puts some pressure on them.

    I have had people tell me that they wait until last minute and then forgot to check speeds on some teams and lost.
  • Ultra
    8516 posts Moderator
    Its definitely an advantage when one or both parties are unable to full clear, otherwise, it adds a lot of pressure on the opponent to undersize or use teams that aren't safe just to get those extra banners
  • Dmitry_M81
    451 posts Member
    edited September 2019
    And it's huge advantage when you know opponent's banners, so you can either use undersized squads for extra banners or full squads for guaranteed win.
    If banners (and maybe even squads defeated) are hidden - noone has advantage or disadvantage, fair deal for me.
  • I view inconsistent start times as a big problem. It's easy to get into a routine of making all your actions either in the evening or in the morning, but rotating back and forth is gonna have a lot of people occasionally missing actions.
  • Kyno
    31980 posts Moderator
    Dmitry_M81 wrote: »
    And it's huge advantage when you know opponent's banners, so you can either use undersized squads for extra banners or full squads for guaranteed win.
    If banners (and maybe even squads defeated) are hidden - noone has advantage or disadvantage, fair deal for me.

    Please explain how knowing you need to use an undersized team, makes winning the match easier??
  • Just don't show the opponent's progress until the end of the round. Problem solved.
    If it is an advantage or it isn't an advantage - whoever is arguing which way... if they don't care then there shouldn't be a need to see the opponent's progress anyway.
  • Kyno wrote: »
    Dmitry_M81 wrote: »
    And it's huge advantage when you know opponent's banners, so you can either use undersized squads for extra banners or full squads for guaranteed win.
    If banners (and maybe even squads defeated) are hidden - noone has advantage or disadvantage, fair deal for me.

    Please explain how knowing you need to use an undersized team, makes winning the match easier??

    It doesn't but if you are 45 score behind (excluding territory victory points) and you have 1 battle left... you know you can just send in 5 toons and clear it up instead of sending in an undersized squad to take a gamble to get a higher score.

    This is just common sense.
  • Nauros
    4785 posts Member
    Kyno wrote: »
    Dmitry_M81 wrote: »
    And it's huge advantage when you know opponent's banners, so you can either use undersized squads for extra banners or full squads for guaranteed win.
    If banners (and maybe even squads defeated) are hidden - noone has advantage or disadvantage, fair deal for me.

    Please explain how knowing you need to use an undersized team, makes winning the match easier??

    It doesn't but if you are 45 score behind (excluding territory victory points) and you have 1 battle left... you know you can just send in 5 toons and clear it up instead of sending in an undersized squad to take a gamble to get a higher score.

    This is just common sense.

    Also, if you are 60 points behind, you know you have to take the risk and go undersized even if you wouldn't otherwise.
  • ThisYeezy wrote: »
    Right now I don't see this as an issue, but I would agree it would be an advantage IF the new battle logs that CG are discussing showing on SWGOH.gg are displayed before the attack phase has ended.

    They most certainly should NOT show battle logs before the end of the battle phase. Knowing what squads someone has used in addition to what's on their front line could be a genuinely big advantage to players going second as they'd have a pretty clear idea of the best likely rear sector squads and could then plan their front sector attacks accordingly. I really hope CG are not **** enough to show used squads DURING the attack phase!
  • Nauros wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Dmitry_M81 wrote: »
    And it's huge advantage when you know opponent's banners, so you can either use undersized squads for extra banners or full squads for guaranteed win.
    If banners (and maybe even squads defeated) are hidden - noone has advantage or disadvantage, fair deal for me.

    Please explain how knowing you need to use an undersized team, makes winning the match easier??

    It doesn't but if you are 45 score behind (excluding territory victory points) and you have 1 battle left... you know you can just send in 5 toons and clear it up instead of sending in an undersized squad to take a gamble to get a higher score.

    This is just common sense.

    Also, if you are 60 points behind, you know you have to take the risk and go undersized even if you wouldn't otherwise.

    Exactly. I I don’t understand after being spelled out so many times why ppl still don’t grasp this basic concept. It’s not rocket science, just common sense.
  • It's an advantage period. I used that in fact to win today by 15 banners.
  • Kyno
    31980 posts Moderator
    Stokat wrote: »
    Nauros wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Dmitry_M81 wrote: »
    And it's huge advantage when you know opponent's banners, so you can either use undersized squads for extra banners or full squads for guaranteed win.
    If banners (and maybe even squads defeated) are hidden - noone has advantage or disadvantage, fair deal for me.

    Please explain how knowing you need to use an undersized team, makes winning the match easier??

    It doesn't but if you are 45 score behind (excluding territory victory points) and you have 1 battle left... you know you can just send in 5 toons and clear it up instead of sending in an undersized squad to take a gamble to get a higher score.

    This is just common sense.

    Also, if you are 60 points behind, you know you have to take the risk and go undersized even if you wouldn't otherwise.

    Exactly. I I don’t understand after being spelled out so many times why ppl still don’t grasp this basic concept. It’s not rocket science, just common sense.

    The concept of that is not hard to understand, the problem is that this game mode is not won by knowing a team can be 4 or 5. Nothing about attacking first or second makes playing the game easier. A percieved advantage because a player who is unsure of their own skills doesnt mean they can win the battles they need to because they feel better about it, it also doesnt mean they would lose if they didnt know how to feel about it.

    The same attack strategy can be used both first or second and score the maximum points that a player can reach based on their roster, opponent and skill.
This discussion has been closed.