Please filter the potential grand arena opponents

I feel, for the health of grand arena, that your opponents should be filtered by characters as well as galactic power.
With Anakin coming to the game soon, he will pose a threat greater than malak to the health of the game. If you happen to go against an opponent who has this character and you don't, you cannot beat them. This makes the best mode in the game irrelevant and unfun.

I propose that on top of your ga matching based on gp, it should also match based on if you have certain characters.

Obviously the new Anakin is one and I believe malak should be another.

This should prevent F2P players from giving up on grand arena.

Please just concider it.

Regards,
HappySideOfFear777

Replies

  • Newsflash: Players encounter squads they cannot defeat every single GA.
  • Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    Newsflash: Players encounter squads they cannot defeat every single GA.

    And it's fine if they get out played, aka they make a mistake and load tm or misuse their teams and used their counters too early.
    But if the match is over before any attacks take place then what's the point in playing anymore?
  • hsof777 wrote: »
    I propose that on top of your ga matching based on gp, it should also match based on if you have certain characters.
    Disagree. One of the advantages of being prepared for the new meta (again, whether you hoard or pay) is that you get an edge in GAC. People don't just invest in the new metas to have a somewhat easier climb in squad arena and a character to platoon in TB.
  • No, terrible idea.
    Think through the precedent that this would set.
  • Lysandrax wrote: »
    No, terrible idea.
    Think through the precedent that this would set.

    The same, I think, that a 95% meta of one character sets.
  • hsof777 wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    Newsflash: Players encounter squads they cannot defeat every single GA.

    And it's fine if they get out played, aka they make a mistake and load tm or misuse their teams and used their counters too early.
    But if the match is over before any attacks take place then what's the point in playing anymore?
    You do realise that those who were winning every match with more or less ease had a functional counter geared up against the current meta so that they can place their meta team on defense.

    It's obviously an instant loss if, after missing the event, you can't be bothered to work on the counter either. But, as every time before, there will probably be a counter.
  • hsof777 wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    Newsflash: Players encounter squads they cannot defeat every single GA.

    And it's fine if they get out played, aka they make a mistake and load tm or misuse their teams and used their counters too early.
    But if the match is over before any attacks take place then what's the point in playing anymore?
    No, players across the Divisions face opponents who have squads for which they have no viable counter. It is a common occurrence.
  • hsof777 wrote: »
    Lysandrax wrote: »
    No, terrible idea.
    Think through the precedent that this would set.

    The same, I think, that a 95% meta of one character sets.

    That doesn't make any sense, but sure.
  • CCyrilS
    6732 posts Member
    GAC isn't just about playing better. It also has measures to account for who has a "better" roster.

    You can argue what better roster means, but not the fact that it's taken into consideration.
  • The only thing what we need for GAC is better divisions and matchmaking with the same points.
    It'll balance itself over the duration of GAC.
  • Waqui
    8802 posts Member
    edited October 2019
    hsof777 wrote: »
    I feel, for the health of grand arena, that your opponents should be filtered by characters as well as galactic power.
    With Anakin coming to the game soon, he will pose a threat greater than malak to the health of the game. If you happen to go against an opponent who has this character and you don't, you cannot beat them. This makes the best mode in the game irrelevant and unfun.

    Players, who unlock GAS will have an advantage, yes, and it is all good. If they farmed an geared to meet the requirements they earned that advantage.
    This should prevent F2P players from giving up on grand arena.

    F2P players can still do well - probably just as well after the introduction of GAS as before. If you don't meet the requirements for the event, you most probably already are at a disadvantage compared to players who meet the requirements.

  • Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    hsof777 wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    Newsflash: Players encounter squads they cannot defeat every single GA.

    And it's fine if they get out played, aka they make a mistake and load tm or misuse their teams and used their counters too early.
    But if the match is over before any attacks take place then what's the point in playing anymore?
    No, players across the Divisions face opponents who have squads for which they have no viable counter. It is a common occurrence.

    I'd say that the issue comes down to the difference between the following:
    1) "Not currently having one of the counters for one of your opponenent's squads" - It happens, deal with it
    2) "There not being a viable counter to one one of your opponent's squads" - Wrecks the game mode, removes any fun from the game, causes people to quit the game.

    So, it all comes down to whether or not there is actually any viable counter squad to 'Ganakin + 501st' when he starts appearing in GAC and Arena from next week? If there is, then fine, he seems really over-powered but if there's a viable counter then that's OK. If there is not a viable counter then it's ridiculous to pit people with that squad against people without it for the next 6-months.
    CG said quite clearly a while back that their intention was for a 'rock, paper, scissors' style meta, and they themselves have commented on how stale and unhealthy for the game the 95%+ Ackbar+Falcon meta was for the Fleets, so it would seem utterly ridiculous for them to bring out a squad meta that couldn't be countered unless they deliberately want to demoralize the majority of the player base.
    I guess we'll see pretty soon...and of course if a viable counter is identified we'll have to wait and see if CG does their classic move of doing a post-release nerf/buff to kill off that counter!!
  • Nauros
    5429 posts Member
    hsof777 wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    Newsflash: Players encounter squads they cannot defeat every single GA.

    And it's fine if they get out played, aka they make a mistake and load tm or misuse their teams and used their counters too early.
    But if the match is over before any attacks take place then what's the point in playing anymore?
    You do realise that those who were winning every match with more or less ease had a functional counter geared up against the current meta so that they can place their meta team on defense.

    It's obviously an instant loss if, after missing the event, you can't be bothered to work on the counter either. But, as every time before, there will probably be a counter.

    Any ideas what could be the counter? "Hide the Nihilus" was the only plausible idea I have seen so far, and I don't really think that one is viable with Rex and his instakill.
  • Lysandrax wrote: »
    hsof777 wrote: »
    Lysandrax wrote: »
    No, terrible idea.
    Think through the precedent that this would set.

    The same, I think, that a 95% meta of one character sets.

    That doesn't make any sense, but sure.

    I was referencing the fact that Darth revan with malak was 95% of the arena meta for a while. Which is horribly unhealthy for the longevity of the game.
  • leef
    13458 posts Member
    hsof777 wrote: »
    Lysandrax wrote: »
    hsof777 wrote: »
    Lysandrax wrote: »
    No, terrible idea.
    Think through the precedent that this would set.

    The same, I think, that a 95% meta of one character sets.

    That doesn't make any sense, but sure.

    I was referencing the fact that Darth revan with malak was 95% of the arena meta for a while. Which is horribly unhealthy for the longevity of the game.

    Aah, the good ol' longevity of the game.
    I'm curious though, what are your thoughts on Arena right now?
    Save water, drink champagne!
  • hsof777
    97 posts Member
    edited October 2019
    leef wrote: »
    hsof777 wrote: »
    Lysandrax wrote: »
    hsof777 wrote: »
    Lysandrax wrote: »
    No, terrible idea.
    Think through the precedent that this would set.

    The same, I think, that a 95% meta of one character sets.

    That doesn't make any sense, but sure.

    I was referencing the fact that Darth revan with malak was 95% of the arena meta for a while. Which is horribly unhealthy for the longevity of the game.

    Aah, the good ol' longevity of the game.
    I'm curious though, what are your thoughts on Arena right now?

    I think it's bad. I think any meta that's over 50% is no good. I'd prefer to not have anything over 30%. Maybe 40% if the leader can have some good variation under them.
  • hsof777 wrote: »
    leef wrote: »
    hsof777 wrote: »
    Lysandrax wrote: »
    hsof777 wrote: »
    Lysandrax wrote: »
    No, terrible idea.
    Think through the precedent that this would set.

    The same, I think, that a 95% meta of one character sets.

    That doesn't make any sense, but sure.

    I was referencing the fact that Darth revan with malak was 95% of the arena meta for a while. Which is horribly unhealthy for the longevity of the game.

    Aah, the good ol' longevity of the game.
    I'm curious though, what are your thoughts on Arena right now?

    I think it's bad. I think any meta that's over 50% is no good. I'd prefer to not have anything over 30%. Maybe 40% if the leader can have some good variation under them.

    I dont think you know what Meta means...
  • Lysandrax wrote: »
    hsof777 wrote: »
    leef wrote: »
    hsof777 wrote: »
    Lysandrax wrote: »
    hsof777 wrote: »
    Lysandrax wrote: »
    No, terrible idea.
    Think through the precedent that this would set.

    The same, I think, that a 95% meta of one character sets.

    That doesn't make any sense, but sure.

    I was referencing the fact that Darth revan with malak was 95% of the arena meta for a while. Which is horribly unhealthy for the longevity of the game.

    Aah, the good ol' longevity of the game.
    I'm curious though, what are your thoughts on Arena right now?

    I think it's bad. I think any meta that's over 50% is no good. I'd prefer to not have anything over 30%. Maybe 40% if the leader can have some good variation under them.

    I dont think you know what Meta means...

    Well correct me if I'm wrong but isnt it the distribution of teams? Aka the current meta is 75% Darth revan. 7% IG-88, 6% Padme, ECT
  • No_Try
    4051 posts Member
    Last Q/A: they are not considering doing this in near future while they entertained the idea. End of story.
  • hsof777 wrote: »
    I feel, for the health of grand arena, that your opponents should be filtered by characters as well as galactic power.
    With Anakin coming to the game soon, he will pose a threat greater than malak to the health of the game. If you happen to go against an opponent who has this character and you don't, you cannot beat them. This makes the best mode in the game irrelevant and unfun.

    I propose that on top of your ga matching based on gp, it should also match based on if you have certain characters.

    Obviously the new Anakin is one and I believe malak should be another.

    This should prevent F2P players from giving up on grand arena.

    Please just concider it.

    Regards,
    HappySideOfFear777

    Yeah so CG finna penalize their "investors" by giving them harder GAC matches?

    That's such a awful business idea from their point of view.
  • Beeblebrox wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    hsof777 wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    Newsflash: Players encounter squads they cannot defeat every single GA.

    And it's fine if they get out played, aka they make a mistake and load tm or misuse their teams and used their counters too early.
    But if the match is over before any attacks take place then what's the point in playing anymore?
    No, players across the Divisions face opponents who have squads for which they have no viable counter. It is a common occurrence.

    I'd say that the issue comes down to the difference between the following:
    1) "Not currently having one of the counters for one of your opponenent's squads" - It happens, deal with it
    2) "There not being a viable counter to one one of your opponent's squads" - Wrecks the game mode, removes any fun from the game, causes people to quit the game.
    It amounts to the same thing: your opponent can set a defensive squad that you are unable you defeat. Players deal with that scenario every single GA and have done since GA started over 9 months ago.
Sign In or Register to comment.