GC feats 2/22

Prev1
Itsa_me_Malario
305 posts Member
edited February 22
h5dltga6t9qo.jpgI'm speechless CG, thanks
Post edited by Kyno on

Replies

  • h5dltga6t9qo.jpgI'm speechless CG, thanks

    Let me guess, four Mandalorians and SLKR?
  • Antario wrote: »
    h5dltga6t9qo.jpgI'm speechless CG, thanks

    Let me guess, four Mandalorians and SLKR?

    Yup
  • Yes this was surprisingly easy. Now to figure out how to do it the intended way :)
  • 4 G12 or lower mandos + Rey for me.
    Wouldn't surprise me at all if Malak or JKL was also able to "solo" it with armorer buff, potentially GAS as well. (though he's probably iffier)

    VERY good odds that all 4 GLs can duo it with armorer with RNG though, just gotta kill the guys piett marks fast enough so he doesn't end up with GL-killing stats.
  • Artumas wrote: »
    4 G12 or lower mandos + Rey for me.
    Wouldn't surprise me at all if Malak or JKL was also able to "solo" it with armorer buff, potentially GAS as well. (though he's probably iffier)

    VERY good odds that all 4 GLs can duo it with armorer with RNG though, just gotta kill the guys piett marks fast enough so he doesn't end up with GL-killing stats.

    Didn't use armorer on my slkr
  • SEE doesn't need armorer
  • Yeah the mandalorians didn’t even get one turn before it was Kylo vs the Brady bunch
  • Malak can literally solo it. The feats were easy this time, the event is still very poorly designed.
  • I am happy to have the final crate but the feat is ridiculous. What is the point of putting 4 low mandalorians that die first round ? The GL solo it. They should just made the feat : Solo the team. It would have been more accurate. This doesnt make any sense. Very poor and lame game design again
  • SerWulfgar wrote: »
    Malak can literally solo it. The feats were easy this time, the event is still very poorly designed.

    my malak cant solo it without the armorer buff, and on t7 for me thats impossible to get currently :/
  • On one hand, getting the top box is nice. On the other hand, just putting 4 weak mandos with a GL is a bit boring. Just looking at a battle that can't be won with your weak mandos wouldn't be any less boring, though.
    Revive the stores, the game needs it.
  • flux_rono wrote: »
    SerWulfgar wrote: »
    Malak can literally solo it. The feats were easy this time, the event is still very poorly designed.

    my malak cant solo it without the armorer buff, and on t7 for me thats impossible to get currently :/

    Force Piett to skip the AOE at the start by countless restarts. Move some decent mods to the armorer, opposing team is not pericularly fast. If Piett starts with the ally-mark you will get the tech out and you can hit full auto.

  • TVF
    27500 posts Member
    Wait I thought GC was a cash grab
    The CGDF is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • Nauros
    4063 posts Member
    TVF wrote: »
    Wait I thought GC was a cash grab

    You could have at least gone for the "CG never listens to feedback" angle, this is pretty low hanging fruit...
    Revive the stores, the game needs it.
  • So there is a feat that says win a battle using four mandalorians. It was a piece of cake using slkr and four mandalorians but is there a team to use without a GL character? Like four mandalorians and who? Lol trying to help my guild mates
  • I've heard Malak works.
  • WookieWookie
    521 posts Member
    edited February 22
    Rey and 4 mandos (3* Armorer) got it for me, and Jango was even still standing at the end!

    Undermanned and no losses were both first try with JML JKL GAS HYoda

    This was a far cry in terms of difficulty from last week's and the BH+DoTs GCs. I mean thanks, but maybe have the difficulty needle more stable somewhere between 'All R5+ required with good RNG' and 'Single GL can solo it on auto?'
  • I tried him a couple of times my relic 7 they pick em apart
  • SerWulfgar wrote: »
    Malak can literally solo it. The feats were easy this time, the event is still very poorly designed.

    What would you consider GOOD design, then? Be specific.
    Ceterum censeo Patientia esse meliat.
  • TVF
    27500 posts Member
    Nauros wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    Wait I thought GC was a cash grab

    You could have at least gone for the "CG never listens to feedback" angle, this is pretty low hanging fruit...

    The whole forum is low hanging fruit.
    The CGDF is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • Nauros
    4063 posts Member
    RyuMac_81 wrote: »
    I tried him a couple of times my relic 7 they pick em apart

    I just tried with R7 Malak and it worked without even giving him beskar armor. It may need a few more tries, though.
    Revive the stores, the game needs it.
  • NicWester wrote: »
    SerWulfgar wrote: »
    Malak can literally solo it. The feats were easy this time, the event is still very poorly designed.

    What would you consider GOOD design, then? Be specific.

    Does it matter at all?

    1) Tieing the universal modifier to planets is pointless. The planet itself doesnt contribute anything at all to the fight, there was no need to introduce the planets as platforms. The universal modification could be a given parameter, walking the extra miles to say we are on a certain planet is just so the artteam can work on the thumbnails.

    2) Remove the universal modifiers, or offer a pool of 3 and offer the player the choice to select one. (This whole thing could have been a touchup to the Galactic War with less random enemies, 12 different modifiers becoming indeed rewarding for a well developed roster...)

    3) Smooth the derivative curve of the difficulty. T7 is arguably fine, t1 is arguably fine, the difference between t4 and t5 is not fine.

    4) Dont involve FOMO in a content, or at least dont make it the main element of it. I offer to immediatly withdrawn this argument the moment i see a data-driven point about how much time/how many attempts do players spend in the GC after they reached the score that would be the final score for them in the given round.

    5) Introduce feats that cannot be completed with the same team to increase the replayability of the event.

    6) Rework the Rebel modifier. Rephrase the Mando modifier. Rework the nonexistant animation of the DeathStar ability.

    7) Introduce new teams in the rotation, like phoenix or jawa or tusken

    8) Always submit the ability description to each and every GC. Revan's TM swap cannot be evaded in the GC. The original kit does not grant immunity against the foresight.

    9) Change the scores so t6 team feats + t7 all feats dont sum up to 109/110. That's just a low move. Okay, say it doesnt deserve the best crate, i am all good with that, but 109/110 feels like an insult. If I dont have the requested faction i usually stop at t3-t4 so I am at 86-90/110 rather than 109.

    10) Remove the timer, what purpose does it serve at all??? I mean apart from the endless loop of the IT-s Vs Nest

    11) Endless (15 minutes) loop should NEVER happen, do test them a little more.

    12) Introduce trackers for the feats.

    13) To my knowledge this is the only PVE content that can be cleared in less than 10 minutes (with the proper roster, and this applies to most of the GC-s, maybe not all of them) YET it lasts for 3 days. Similar contents last for 1 day only.

    14) Feats should be never more specific than a group of characters (same goes for GAC actually, with the only difference, that feats in GAC arent driven by FOMO as you can easily get to Kyber while ignoring them completely).

    +1 One could make a relatively strong argument against single encounter-battles as the vast majority of the played PVE content has multiple encounters.


    I think this list above nicely summarizes why I think this format is lazy as it is and on the other hand it contains a fair amount of constructive suggestions as well.
  • I personally love GCs where I can clear with 2-3 battles and spend less than 10 minutes total on. This is a mobile game! We already have so much existing content eating up daylight hours, quick events is exactly what we need more of. 👍
  • Yeah but if you do the average, it means 20-30 minutes / 7 days = 4.5 minutes a day. That's not a content, that's a spam. That is more or less a single PVP battle every day....
  • TVF
    27500 posts Member
    If you want a challenge, don't use the optimal team lol. Do some theorycrafting.
    The CGDF is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • SerWulfgar wrote: »
    Yeah but if you do the average, it means 20-30 minutes / 7 days = 4.5 minutes a day. That's not a content, that's a spam. That is more or less a single PVP battle every day....

    I don’t see a problem with this at all. 😁
  • SerWulfgar wrote: »
    Yeah but if you do the average, it means 20-30 minutes / 7 days = 4.5 minutes a day. That's not a content, that's a spam. That is more or less a single PVP battle every day....

    I don’t see a problem with this at all. 😁

    I do, because this is the (first part? was never confirmed) content we got instead of a new raid bc they thought they could do better than a raid. This is (partially???) where the resources were re-allocated.

    But then again, I speak up against the design in general. Not the "challenge" part, not the required time (yeah, I indeed made two points on that one but still quite a marginal topic) part, but the design of the whole. Which I still think is quite horrible.
  • Kyno
    28358 posts Moderator
    SerWulfgar wrote: »
    NicWester wrote: »
    SerWulfgar wrote: »
    Malak can literally solo it. The feats were easy this time, the event is still very poorly designed.

    What would you consider GOOD design, then? Be specific.

    Does it matter at all?

    1) Tieing the universal modifier to planets is pointless. The planet itself doesnt contribute anything at all to the fight, there was no need to introduce the planets as platforms. The universal modification could be a given parameter, walking the extra miles to say we are on a certain planet is just so the artteam can work on the thumbnails.

    2) Remove the universal modifiers, or offer a pool of 3 and offer the player the choice to select one. (This whole thing could have been a touchup to the Galactic War with less random enemies, 12 different modifiers becoming indeed rewarding for a well developed roster...)

    3) Smooth the derivative curve of the difficulty. T7 is arguably fine, t1 is arguably fine, the difference between t4 and t5 is not fine.

    4) Dont involve FOMO in a content, or at least dont make it the main element of it. I offer to immediatly withdrawn this argument the moment i see a data-driven point about how much time/how many attempts do players spend in the GC after they reached the score that would be the final score for them in the given round.

    5) Introduce feats that cannot be completed with the same team to increase the replayability of the event.

    6) Rework the Rebel modifier. Rephrase the Mando modifier. Rework the nonexistant animation of the DeathStar ability.

    7) Introduce new teams in the rotation, like phoenix or jawa or tusken

    8) Always submit the ability description to each and every GC. Revan's TM swap cannot be evaded in the GC. The original kit does not grant immunity against the foresight.

    9) Change the scores so t6 team feats + t7 all feats dont sum up to 109/110. That's just a low move. Okay, say it doesnt deserve the best crate, i am all good with that, but 109/110 feels like an insult. If I dont have the requested faction i usually stop at t3-t4 so I am at 86-90/110 rather than 109.

    10) Remove the timer, what purpose does it serve at all??? I mean apart from the endless loop of the IT-s Vs Nest

    11) Endless (15 minutes) loop should NEVER happen, do test them a little more.

    12) Introduce trackers for the feats.

    13) To my knowledge this is the only PVE content that can be cleared in less than 10 minutes (with the proper roster, and this applies to most of the GC-s, maybe not all of them) YET it lasts for 3 days. Similar contents last for 1 day only.

    14) Feats should be never more specific than a group of characters (same goes for GAC actually, with the only difference, that feats in GAC arent driven by FOMO as you can easily get to Kyber while ignoring them completely).

    +1 One could make a relatively strong argument against single encounter-battles as the vast majority of the played PVE content has multiple encounters.


    I think this list above nicely summarizes why I think this format is lazy as it is and on the other hand it contains a fair amount of constructive suggestions as well.

    1 and 2 - are not examples of good or bad design. You may not like them but they add another element of strategy that can be used or at least effect what how the player plays the match.

    3) this is a little misunderstood, as the rewards not not directly tied to the tier you complete, its about the number of cards you can achieve. There doesn't need to be a smooth curve, its not required, and may open up the number of cards a player can get with a lower end roster. The difficulty here is to push development, as with much of the game.

    4) I'm sorry you do not want them to reward players who invest early into factions and other elements of the game, but this will not be removed. while you may not understand this, it is good for the game, as this is at least in part elements that keep the game free and "alive"

    5) GCs, have unlimited replay ability, play with whatever teams you want, they do not need to make any changes for you to want to or be able to do this. if you dont want to do it because there is no rewards attached to it, then you can see why a sandbox mode has been stated to not be a priority element in the games design.

    7) i'm sure we will see more, this is also the base for Conquest which will likely have more elements as it is a larger/longer event.

    8)not sure what you mean, can you clarify, he doesn't have a TM swap, he grants TM, which can be prevented.

    9)certain combinations of T6/T7 equal the best crate, others do not. if you feel insulted by numbers, please be aware, Math doesn't care.

    10) it serves a few purposes, one makes certain strategies not work (i.e. - KRU in assaults battle tactic) and another one is related to an exploit fixed in other ways on other content. so its here to stay.

    12) they are aware

    13) as you said with conditions, and not everyone meets those conditions, hence a few days. They did the "study" this was their finding, it may change, it may not, but its based on play style of the player base, not who can get it done the first day and in how long.

    14) again, not sure this is good or bad design, this is just something you dont like. with the rotation they have they change often enough and are looking to reward or push development of factions using "themes" and while they do have more flexibility in this game mode, this is the current style they want to use in this game mode.

    + yes one could, but considering you can play this as many times as you want, multi encounter setup in this type of game mode would be much harder to balance and could open up "unwanted strategies" (i.e. - KRU in assault battle tactic) along with other build and hold strategies that would just make it too easy to beat the "last encounter"
Sign In or Register to comment.