More defensive slots on GAC!

2Next

Replies

  • MaruMaru
    3338 posts Member
    Kyno wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    We are seeing them add more ships and round out other fleets. I see this as the preamble to adding more fleet stuff or defensive slots in TW and/or GAC.

    GAC and TW are not really meant to be a test of your full roster, but more of your skill to build the toolbox to beat your opponent and the strategy of who goes where. I dont really see a need to expand this but understand the desire. People have been asking for more divisions at the top end, so maybe this could be incorporated into a change like that.

    There is a difference between a strategic battle vs an endurance battle. I feel that an expansion of the teams needed would just lead to more fluff being put down vs making it more strategic.

    Not sure what you are basing your opinion what GAC is not meant to be. It used to be exactly "that" in the ga times and at the beginning of gac and still is for lower divisions. The reason it became a more restricted band of banner chasing is merely because cg waited too long to expand it.

    Since divisions are a static thing and there's a limit to the amount of teams that can feasibly fit within a gp threshold, the solution is evidently adding more. It's not "oh let's bind these two demands together", they are natively bound to eachother...with the exception of fleets. Fleets just matured enough to expand the number of slots towards lower divisions (the gp thresholds of where div 1-2 currently is besides adding more divisions)

    Matchmaking is based on the number of toons "you should use". that is what i'm basing this on. I know its more fun to blame CG for a perceived issue, but that doesnt make it true. This is why I said its based on the tool box you make. A player with "the perfect top X(number of toons)" can be the best and it doesnt matter what the rest of their roster looks like.

    This is a game mode that has specific rules and limitation, someone can check all the boxes and doesnt' need to have every toon or even the best toons if they know the tools they have and can make it work. It is and has always been about banner chasing, thats why they have all the different ways you can earn points and also have feats.

    What relation does matchmaking or amounts of toons you should use have to do with it? Just like lower divisions matchmaking is adapted to number of slots. I'm asking for more divisions=slots like many people are. This is not a blame war like you claim, it's a request to gain their attention. Hopefully people stop sabotaging the effort as if more divisions are a bad thing. It should better happen sooner than later.

    I don't take your "know your tools" rant seriously. I hit kyber everytime, so does the opponents I face in later weeks.

    I have never said more divisions are a bad thing, I actually proposed that in my initial post as a way to add more defensive positions. Its not a blame war, which is why i found it odd that you immediately blamed them for this "situation" like its a problem.

    the tools refer to the toons you build up to make your O/D in a GAC match. completing feats is just an added ability that some can do considering some of them use "lower tier" characters or require traditionally defensive placed characters to be used on offence, which can require a "different strategy"

    my points about a roster being built for GAC is not a rant, its how players that love that game mode are designing their rosters now, and newer players have been for some time. making kyber is not the only part of it, there is also a ranking there. some players like to have bragging rights.

    Both my and my opponents rosters are built for gac, this is natively the case in later weeks. There are players who don't enjoy gac at 6m+ gp, but they also have all the roster ingredients built for it (+much more). You are presenting it as if this is a complaint about why a player loses in gac and wants something changed. More slots is about making it more variant, thus enjoyable. Ofc it's a cg issue, since they are the ones that have do it. The game has outpaced how the mode launched. Simple as that.

    More divisions mean more rewards handed out in total. Rings any bells why they might be dragging their feet?
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    We are seeing them add more ships and round out other fleets. I see this as the preamble to adding more fleet stuff or defensive slots in TW and/or GAC.

    GAC and TW are not really meant to be a test of your full roster, but more of your skill to build the toolbox to beat your opponent and the strategy of who goes where. I dont really see a need to expand this but understand the desire. People have been asking for more divisions at the top end, so maybe this could be incorporated into a change like that.

    There is a difference between a strategic battle vs an endurance battle. I feel that an expansion of the teams needed would just lead to more fluff being put down vs making it more strategic.

    Not sure what you are basing your opinion what GAC is not meant to be. It used to be exactly "that" in the ga times and at the beginning of gac and still is for lower divisions. The reason it became a more restricted band of banner chasing is merely because cg waited too long to expand it.

    Since divisions are a static thing and there's a limit to the amount of teams that can feasibly fit within a gp threshold, the solution is evidently adding more. It's not "oh let's bind these two demands together", they are natively bound to eachother...with the exception of fleets. Fleets just matured enough to expand the number of slots towards lower divisions (the gp thresholds of where div 1-2 currently is besides adding more divisions)

    Matchmaking is based on the number of toons "you should use". that is what i'm basing this on. I know its more fun to blame CG for a perceived issue, but that doesnt make it true. This is why I said its based on the tool box you make. A player with "the perfect top X(number of toons)" can be the best and it doesnt matter what the rest of their roster looks like.

    This is a game mode that has specific rules and limitation, someone can check all the boxes and doesnt' need to have every toon or even the best toons if they know the tools they have and can make it work. It is and has always been about banner chasing, thats why they have all the different ways you can earn points and also have feats.

    What relation does matchmaking or amounts of toons you should use have to do with it? Just like lower divisions matchmaking is adapted to number of slots. I'm asking for more divisions=slots like many people are. This is not a blame war like you claim, it's a request to gain their attention. Hopefully people stop sabotaging the effort as if more divisions are a bad thing. It should better happen sooner than later.

    I don't take your "know your tools" rant seriously. I hit kyber everytime, so does the opponents I face in later weeks.

    I have never said more divisions are a bad thing, I actually proposed that in my initial post as a way to add more defensive positions. Its not a blame war, which is why i found it odd that you immediately blamed them for this "situation" like its a problem.

    the tools refer to the toons you build up to make your O/D in a GAC match. completing feats is just an added ability that some can do considering some of them use "lower tier" characters or require traditionally defensive placed characters to be used on offence, which can require a "different strategy"

    my points about a roster being built for GAC is not a rant, its how players that love that game mode are designing their rosters now, and newer players have been for some time. making kyber is not the only part of it, there is also a ranking there. some players like to have bragging rights.

    Both my and my opponents rosters are built for gac, this is natively the case in later weeks. There are players who don't enjoy gac at 6m+ gp, but they also have all the roster ingredients built for it (+much more). You are presenting it as if this is a complaint about why a player loses in gac and wants something changed. More slots is about making it more variant, thus enjoyable. Ofc it's a cg issue, since they are the ones that have do it. The game has outpaced how the mode launched. Simple as that.

    More divisions mean more rewards handed out in total. Rings any bells why they might be dragging their feet?

    so we are going back to blaming them, got it.

    I have said nothing about winning or losing, so i'm not sure where that is coming from. I am saying that the system is built to allow players to make very specific choices that will allow them to be better at this game mode. Those choices bring in the strategy and allows them to play the mode how they want. More zones doesnt' necessarily improve that, as people are not as likely to invest into a C and D tier team just to fill in spaces. Adding fluff doesnt' necessarily add enjoyment. Some actually like building up teams they want to use or can use to have a different strategy. more spaces to full would actually limit that as now teams are needed vs being chosen.

    thats the thing, its not out pacing we are just growing into it. we were no where near the number of top tier teams to play the game mode back when it released as we can now. There is more than just making the division, its about getting higher up in that division. you may not see that as a goal, but others do, and to get there there is more to it than just having the GP, or having a few key toons and a little strategy.
  • MaruMaru
    3338 posts Member
    Kyno wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    We are seeing them add more ships and round out other fleets. I see this as the preamble to adding more fleet stuff or defensive slots in TW and/or GAC.

    GAC and TW are not really meant to be a test of your full roster, but more of your skill to build the toolbox to beat your opponent and the strategy of who goes where. I dont really see a need to expand this but understand the desire. People have been asking for more divisions at the top end, so maybe this could be incorporated into a change like that.

    There is a difference between a strategic battle vs an endurance battle. I feel that an expansion of the teams needed would just lead to more fluff being put down vs making it more strategic.

    Not sure what you are basing your opinion what GAC is not meant to be. It used to be exactly "that" in the ga times and at the beginning of gac and still is for lower divisions. The reason it became a more restricted band of banner chasing is merely because cg waited too long to expand it.

    Since divisions are a static thing and there's a limit to the amount of teams that can feasibly fit within a gp threshold, the solution is evidently adding more. It's not "oh let's bind these two demands together", they are natively bound to eachother...with the exception of fleets. Fleets just matured enough to expand the number of slots towards lower divisions (the gp thresholds of where div 1-2 currently is besides adding more divisions)

    Matchmaking is based on the number of toons "you should use". that is what i'm basing this on. I know its more fun to blame CG for a perceived issue, but that doesnt make it true. This is why I said its based on the tool box you make. A player with "the perfect top X(number of toons)" can be the best and it doesnt matter what the rest of their roster looks like.

    This is a game mode that has specific rules and limitation, someone can check all the boxes and doesnt' need to have every toon or even the best toons if they know the tools they have and can make it work. It is and has always been about banner chasing, thats why they have all the different ways you can earn points and also have feats.

    What relation does matchmaking or amounts of toons you should use have to do with it? Just like lower divisions matchmaking is adapted to number of slots. I'm asking for more divisions=slots like many people are. This is not a blame war like you claim, it's a request to gain their attention. Hopefully people stop sabotaging the effort as if more divisions are a bad thing. It should better happen sooner than later.

    I don't take your "know your tools" rant seriously. I hit kyber everytime, so does the opponents I face in later weeks.

    I have never said more divisions are a bad thing, I actually proposed that in my initial post as a way to add more defensive positions. Its not a blame war, which is why i found it odd that you immediately blamed them for this "situation" like its a problem.

    the tools refer to the toons you build up to make your O/D in a GAC match. completing feats is just an added ability that some can do considering some of them use "lower tier" characters or require traditionally defensive placed characters to be used on offence, which can require a "different strategy"

    my points about a roster being built for GAC is not a rant, its how players that love that game mode are designing their rosters now, and newer players have been for some time. making kyber is not the only part of it, there is also a ranking there. some players like to have bragging rights.

    Both my and my opponents rosters are built for gac, this is natively the case in later weeks. There are players who don't enjoy gac at 6m+ gp, but they also have all the roster ingredients built for it (+much more). You are presenting it as if this is a complaint about why a player loses in gac and wants something changed. More slots is about making it more variant, thus enjoyable. Ofc it's a cg issue, since they are the ones that have do it. The game has outpaced how the mode launched. Simple as that.

    More divisions mean more rewards handed out in total. Rings any bells why they might be dragging their feet?

    so we are going back to blaming them, got it.

    I have said nothing about winning or losing, so i'm not sure where that is coming from. I am saying that the system is built to allow players to make very specific choices that will allow them to be better at this game mode. Those choices bring in the strategy and allows them to play the mode how they want. More zones doesnt' necessarily improve that, as people are not as likely to invest into a C and D tier team just to fill in spaces. Adding fluff doesnt' necessarily add enjoyment. Some actually like building up teams they want to use or can use to have a different strategy. more spaces to full would actually limit that as now teams are needed vs being chosen.

    thats the thing, its not out pacing we are just growing into it. we were no where near the number of top tier teams to play the game mode back when it released as we can now. There is more than just making the division, its about getting higher up in that division. you may not see that as a goal, but others do, and to get there there is more to it than just having the GP, or having a few key toons and a little strategy.

    Let me know when you are the one capable of making changes to the game, so I can blame you instead. Even they know they have to do it sooner or later.

    Only thing in the rest of your "all is ok" philosophy that's relevant to the discussion is the C/D teams claim where you are blowing it out of proportion. At 6m+ gp numerous B teams simply can't be used. Cuz all it takes if one is competetive is 80 of them...at most.
  • Kyno wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    We are seeing them add more ships and round out other fleets. I see this as the preamble to adding more fleet stuff or defensive slots in TW and/or GAC.

    GAC and TW are not really meant to be a test of your full roster, but more of your skill to build the toolbox to beat your opponent and the strategy of who goes where. I dont really see a need to expand this but understand the desire. People have been asking for more divisions at the top end, so maybe this could be incorporated into a change like that.

    There is a difference between a strategic battle vs an endurance battle. I feel that an expansion of the teams needed would just lead to more fluff being put down vs making it more strategic.

    Not sure what you are basing your opinion what GAC is not meant to be. It used to be exactly "that" in the ga times and at the beginning of gac and still is for lower divisions. The reason it became a more restricted band of banner chasing is merely because cg waited too long to expand it.

    Since divisions are a static thing and there's a limit to the amount of teams that can feasibly fit within a gp threshold, the solution is evidently adding more. It's not "oh let's bind these two demands together", they are natively bound to eachother...with the exception of fleets. Fleets just matured enough to expand the number of slots towards lower divisions (the gp thresholds of where div 1-2 currently is besides adding more divisions)

    Matchmaking is based on the number of toons "you should use". that is what i'm basing this on. I know its more fun to blame CG for a perceived issue, but that doesnt make it true. This is why I said its based on the tool box you make. A player with "the perfect top X(number of toons)" can be the best and it doesnt matter what the rest of their roster looks like.

    This is a game mode that has specific rules and limitation, someone can check all the boxes and doesnt' need to have every toon or even the best toons if they know the tools they have and can make it work. It is and has always been about banner chasing, thats why they have all the different ways you can earn points and also have feats.
    I'd like to put my 2 cents here, to be fair: at the beginning when GA was new, it was advertised as a test of our full roster and who can make the best of it. What you describe is only how it was changed after the matchmaking was not about the total gp anymore, but top 80 characters only. Imho the best solution would be a more strict combination of both. I'm in division 1 and don't find it fun to battle opponents with up to 1 mio gp more than I have. It gives them many more opportunities for variation and unexpected defensive teams (I always check GAC history on swgohgg) , therefore a strategical advantage.
Sign In or Register to comment.