Scoring for fleets is too low in GA
As it currently stands, conquering the fleet territory is worth about 30 points less than conquering a squad territory. That means that if you have one squad that your opponent doesn’t beat, you can completely ignore fleets and still win. To me, it seems like fleets in GA are a bit of an afterthought, more like a way to determine a tiebreaker between to people that sweep each other’s defenses than an actual match decider. If that’s the case, why not remove fleets completely? As it stands, anyone who invests in fleets is already handicapped by having several useless toons (looking at you Cassian and Gar) inflating their GP, why further punish them by counting their ship GP as well, when it doesn’t even really decide any match? Either make the fleet territory more valuable than the squad territories, put it in the front, or take it from the game. Right now it’s just a way to punish people who like fleets.
5
Replies
Similarly, if you have one fleet, which your opponent doesn't beat, you can completely ignore squad defense, save each and every strong and mediocre team for offense, let your opponent clear your squads with 64 points each and still win.
In those two scenarios your win or loss is due to who has counter teams and who doesn't. It's not really the scoring system.
The only way you can have a fleet that your opponent can’t beat is if they are either really bad, or played a poor strategy. You only need one good fleet to clear the board. Conversely, you need at least 7 good squads to clear your opponent’s defenses (more if you want to put up defenses yourself), which becomes harder the larger the GP gap. For example, my opponent has 500K more squad GP than I do, whereas his ship GP is about even. That means I’m stuck fighting all squads with 1-2 gear tiers higher than my counters. If I fail to beat even 1 squad, and he fails to beat my ships, he wins based on the extra 30 points you get for clearing a squad territory over a fleet. It just seems like the way GA is set up, it discourages growing your fleet (and lets be honest, since they can’t be used for much else, is it any wonder a lot of players just ignore them?).
400 crystals per day > GA wins
This^
And the ways you can have a squad that your opponent can't beat are.....?
If your opponent fails to beat your fleet you could have increased your chances of winning by applying the strategy, I mentioned earlier. You would have won if only you cleared the board no matter how many tries it took to take down that last squad. If you have nothing that beats that last team then that's the reason you lose.
I don't regret that I grew my fleet to include Negotiator. I would have been in big trouble in GAs if I hadn't.
Annnnnnnd this is why GAC is beyond stupid.... if match is predetermined why should anyone gove a crap....
Set one team screw the guy out of whatever you can then on to the next dumb mAtchup
Screwing somebody out of whatever you can is an interesting take on winning a competition.
I’m not saying matches are predetermined, if you don’t have the counters needed to win or use poor strategy, you earned the loss.
No, setting one team instead of eight.
But Dk was talking about setting only one squad period, thus disabling auto-deploy and leaving his opponent with the win but with no way to work on feats. A spiteful, immature form of protest against the system which does.not actually have any effect on the system, only on his opponent who has no say in the way the system operates.
Dk was talking about screwing your opponent by setting one team.
SV said you have one squad your opponent can't beat, Dk responded to that by saying it makes GAC stupid and that's why he sets just a single team to screw the guy who can set that unbeatable team. And that's the part that Rath said was childish etc.
Meh boooo hoooooo
Devs wont fix it so must be intended
Assuming the matchmaker is adding top 2 capital ship and top 14 fighter GP to top {x} toon GP the fleet battle & zone would be worth around 1/3 - 1/4 the banners/GP of a comparable squad & zone.
Raising the banner value of the fleet / fleet zone fixes that inequality but makes the fleet zone by far the most important on the.map, trading one balance issue for another.
A better way to fix the inequality would be to add up top 2 cap ship & top 14 fighter GP then divide it by 3 or 4 to value the fleet around the same as a comparable squad for matchmaking purposes.
This is my opponent. What an absolute beefcake! Look at those sith! Hot diggity...
Here we are as of this morning. If my opponent has a third offensive fleet and can crack mine, they will still lose. Now let's look at their defenses compared to mine:
I put trash on defense that they easily full-cleared, likely with minimal protection damage and almost certainly with understrength teams meaning they must have gotten 60 points each round (I'm not going to do math, I don't care. You do it.) while I was up against some beefy defense teams that meant I had to use full squads and took more than one attempt at times.
tl;dr: My opponent cleared me effortlessly, I managed to clear them with a lot of difficulty. If they beat my fleet on the third try they would STILL be behind. This'd be the only battle where they didn't have a first round win and they'd still lose.
Fleet value is fine.
I think NicWester's point is that despite OP's contention that fleets are not worth enough, fleets are the reason he was able to win a match against an extremely difficult opponent and thus they are worth at least "enough."
Devoid of context, yes,sure. The ability to win doesn't prove anything other than the win.
However once you introduce context, such as only winning because two fleet losses wiped out all their bonus points from no losses, smaller squads, and lack of damage while also wiping out my own failures--then it means something.