[MEGA] Upcoming Grand Arena Championship Division Changes

Replies

  • Stop complaining about 14 stun guns per months...gods
    Hope it will be reason for new players to grow up faster

    Thanks @CG_SBCrumb , now it’s time to make changes in TW

    So we should take a decrease in gear income, regardless of how minuscule, with a grain of salt and be thankful for it? Also, you expect people to grow faster with less gear Income? Lol k.
  • Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    nabokovfan wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »

    From what they are saying the chart for method 2 looks correct.

    Everything about the divisions stays the same, just the entry GP changes. Pre-change teams needed doesnt change due to this change.

    This doesn't make any sense from the words in their post.
    To address the diverse range of GPs at the highest levels of GAC, we will be redistributing the number of players in GAC divisions to closely reflect the ratio of players that were originally in those divisions at the time of GAC’s launch. After the first and second divisions, players will be evenly divided among divisions 3 through 11.
    The top divisions will require more character squads (ships will remain unchanged) to address the growth and expansion rosters have undergone since the original launch of GAC.

    So anyone in division 1 and 2 should be requiring "more squads" and "ships will remain unchanged"

    This is the exact opposite of what you are saying. I'm saying, we need something official from them that says what is required in each division after the change. Not just fleet, characters as well. There's two very different interpretations and it changes how I plan for all of this.
    The top divisions will require more character squads (ships will remain unchanged) to address the growth and expansion rosters have undergone since the original launch of GAC.

    This is exactly what I am saying. The top 4 divisions require more character squads, and nothing is changing about ships (2 placements in div 1 and 2, and no increase in number needed).

    Kyno please be clear:
    - 2 ship placements for people in “current” div1&2, irrespective of which “new” division they will be in
    - 2 ship placements for people in “new” div1&2 only

    Which is it?

    Because if it’s the second option, you cannot say “nothing is changing about ships”.

    It was 2 placements in div 1 and 2. It is still going to be 2 placements in div 1 and 2. Nothing about how ships were placed is changing.
    This is a disappointing response.

    “Nothing is changing about ships” has now become “nothing about how ships were placed is changing”.

    But it is changing Kyno. Some people who used to set 2 fleets, including some who have done that from the very first GAC where 2 fleet spots became a thing, will now be setting 1 fleet. This will be many thousands of players. Players who will have geared and levelled up capital ships and pilots exclusively for GAC that will now sit idle until the player reaches 6.8M GP.

    We can dance around semantics all you like, but I don’t see how you can defend this by stating “nothing is changing”. This is clearly an oversight and I just hope the devs have the bravery to admit they got this wrong and change it, rather than cower behind a wording technicality.
  • Hortus
    615 posts Member
    Long-awaited change but done in usual CG way. So, now at 5.4M I will move from div1 to div4, needing more squads (thus forcing to use complete trash) and only two fleets (thus killing any strategy in the fleet zone). Aren't people in CG aware how many fleets people with 5M+ GP usually have? Or it's again some sort of miscommunication?
  • UdalCuain
    4996 posts Member
    edited April 2021
    Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    nabokovfan wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »

    From what they are saying the chart for method 2 looks correct.

    Everything about the divisions stays the same, just the entry GP changes. Pre-change teams needed doesnt change due to this change.

    This doesn't make any sense from the words in their post.
    To address the diverse range of GPs at the highest levels of GAC, we will be redistributing the number of players in GAC divisions to closely reflect the ratio of players that were originally in those divisions at the time of GAC’s launch. After the first and second divisions, players will be evenly divided among divisions 3 through 11.
    The top divisions will require more character squads (ships will remain unchanged) to address the growth and expansion rosters have undergone since the original launch of GAC.

    So anyone in division 1 and 2 should be requiring "more squads" and "ships will remain unchanged"

    This is the exact opposite of what you are saying. I'm saying, we need something official from them that says what is required in each division after the change. Not just fleet, characters as well. There's two very different interpretations and it changes how I plan for all of this.
    The top divisions will require more character squads (ships will remain unchanged) to address the growth and expansion rosters have undergone since the original launch of GAC.

    This is exactly what I am saying. The top 4 divisions require more character squads, and nothing is changing about ships (2 placements in div 1 and 2, and no increase in number needed).

    Kyno please be clear:
    - 2 ship placements for people in “current” div1&2, irrespective of which “new” division they will be in
    - 2 ship placements for people in “new” div1&2 only

    Which is it?

    Because if it’s the second option, you cannot say “nothing is changing about ships”.

    It was 2 placements in div 1 and 2. It is still going to be 2 placements in div 1 and 2. Nothing about how ships were placed is changing.
    This is a disappointing response.

    “Nothing is changing about ships” has now become “nothing about how ships were placed is changing”.

    But it is changing Kyno. Some people who used to set 2 fleets, including some who have done that from the very first GAC where 2 fleet spots became a thing, will now be setting 1 fleet. This will be many thousands of players. Players who will have geared and levelled up capital ships and pilots exclusively for GAC that will now sit idle until the player reaches 6.8M GP.

    We can dance around semantics all you like, but I don’t see how you can defend this by stating “nothing is changing”. This is clearly an oversight and I just hope the devs have the bravery to admit they got this wrong and change it, rather than cower behind a wording technicality.

    Agreed. Something has to change somewhere.

    Current system: All players 3.8m+ set two Fleets (present Division One and Two)
    New System: Only Players 6.65m+ set two Fleets.

    Those in the 3.8m-6.64m range (which must be a phenomenal number of players) lose a defence fleet under the changes if only players in the "new" Division One and Two set two Fleets.

    To go back to something TVF said earlier, more tables would be handy, generated by CG rather than the player-base, showing us what we will be expected to set and providing a rationale for the reduced number of Fleets for the players within that 3m GP range.

    To be clear, this doesn't affect me, I'm in the new Division Two, but it seems unfair to nullify the work players between 3.8m-6.65m put in to be able to set two Fleets under the old system. Furthermore, as has already been pointed out, it's just going to become a stale "Negotiator vs Malevolence" territory for many players now.
  • Wow, this feedback... didn't seem to matter what Div you are in or moving to, no one seems happy.

    Div 1-3 after changes: waaa too many fights to have to do!

    Div 5+ after changes: waaa I don't get to do enough fights!

    Div 3+ after changes: waaa all my fleet investment for nothing!

    Personally I'd be fine with extra fights, because that means opponents having to reach further into their rosters to maybe see something interesting. But I think I'm going to be div 3 or 4 so: waaa not enough change for me! Oh and waaa my fleets sit in dry dock!

    Way to design a change that sits everyone in the same boat: unhappy mc unhappyboatface.
  • Wow, this feedback... didn't seem to matter what Div you are in or moving to, no one seems happy.

    Div 1-3 after changes: waaa too many fights to have to do!

    Div 5+ after changes: waaa I don't get to do enough fights!

    Div 3+ after changes: waaa all my fleet investment for nothing!

    Personally I'd be fine with extra fights, because that means opponents having to reach further into their rosters to maybe see something interesting. But I think I'm going to be div 3 or 4 so: waaa not enough change for me! Oh and waaa my fleets sit in dry dock!

    Way to design a change that sits everyone in the same boat: unhappy mc unhappyboatface.
    This is pretty much how I feel about it (I’m new division 2 at 7.25M GP).

    They’ve used a sledgehammer to crack a nut. Something needed fixed, but they’ve made other things worse in doing so.
  • No changes to number of fleets?

    That just seems wrong... at my GP (4.8M) players should all have 2 arena fleets for attack and 2 decent fleets for defense... and if they don't it's their bad for not farming them!
  • ObiWanEdi
    3 posts Member
    edited April 2021
    4 more squads in devision 1 needs 40-50% more time for clearing the gac. But the rewards remain the same. That‘s a pain for all p2p player. It would be better to increase the quality of the game. Especially about the issues with lost button and unlikely restarts.
    Post edited by Kyno on
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    nabokovfan wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »

    From what they are saying the chart for method 2 looks correct.

    Everything about the divisions stays the same, just the entry GP changes. Pre-change teams needed doesnt change due to this change.

    This doesn't make any sense from the words in their post.
    To address the diverse range of GPs at the highest levels of GAC, we will be redistributing the number of players in GAC divisions to closely reflect the ratio of players that were originally in those divisions at the time of GAC’s launch. After the first and second divisions, players will be evenly divided among divisions 3 through 11.
    The top divisions will require more character squads (ships will remain unchanged) to address the growth and expansion rosters have undergone since the original launch of GAC.

    So anyone in division 1 and 2 should be requiring "more squads" and "ships will remain unchanged"

    This is the exact opposite of what you are saying. I'm saying, we need something official from them that says what is required in each division after the change. Not just fleet, characters as well. There's two very different interpretations and it changes how I plan for all of this.
    The top divisions will require more character squads (ships will remain unchanged) to address the growth and expansion rosters have undergone since the original launch of GAC.

    This is exactly what I am saying. The top 4 divisions require more character squads, and nothing is changing about ships (2 placements in div 1 and 2, and no increase in number needed).

    Kyno please be clear:
    - 2 ship placements for people in “current” div1&2, irrespective of which “new” division they will be in
    - 2 ship placements for people in “new” div1&2 only

    Which is it?

    Because if it’s the second option, you cannot say “nothing is changing about ships”.

    It was 2 placements in div 1 and 2. It is still going to be 2 placements in div 1 and 2. Nothing about how ships were placed is changing.
    This is a disappointing response.

    “Nothing is changing about ships” has now become “nothing about how ships were placed is changing”.

    But it is changing Kyno. Some people who used to set 2 fleets, including some who have done that from the very first GAC where 2 fleet spots became a thing, will now be setting 1 fleet. This will be many thousands of players. Players who will have geared and levelled up capital ships and pilots exclusively for GAC that will now sit idle until the player reaches 6.8M GP.

    We can dance around semantics all you like, but I don’t see how you can defend this by stating “nothing is changing”. This is clearly an oversight and I just hope the devs have the bravery to admit they got this wrong and change it, rather than cower behind a wording technicality.

    I am not defending anything. I am stating what was stated.
    Also, sorry about the other remark, I see my mistake about some players using less teams.
  • Arva
    80 posts Member
    I rly hope CG does revisit this change, and does rethink the teams needed on the lower half of the divisions, and does extend the 2 fleets needed to at least division 5.
    Right now this change would make GAC in the lower brackets so much more boring and stale, couse you have to think so much less, about how you structure your defense and offense with only 3 teams up to 3.1 m GP, whereas previously you started setting more teams at 1,3m gp, and even earlier in 3v3 seasons.
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    Arva wrote: »
    I rly hope CG does revisit this change, and does rethink the teams needed on the lower half of the divisions, and does extend the 2 fleets needed to at least division 5.
    Right now this change would make GAC in the lower brackets so much more boring and stale, couse you have to think so much less, about how you structure your defense and offense with only 3 teams up to 3.1 m GP, whereas previously you started setting more teams at 1,3m gp, and even earlier in 3v3 seasons.

    From their statements, it does seem like there is time and they are listening. We will have to wait and see if things will change.
  • Can we take this time to rethink auto set defense as well. Really annoying having to fight the top of someone roster. Maybe reverse it pull from the bottom or at least exclude GLs. Discouraging when I can't clear a zone because I like GAC and set an actual defense. This is especially true for 3s.
  • Kiloran wrote: »
    Can we take this time to rethink auto set defense as well. Really annoying having to fight the top of someone roster. Maybe reverse it pull from the bottom or at least exclude GLs. Discouraging when I can't clear a zone because I like GAC and set an actual defense. This is especially true for 3s.

    This almost never happens to me, but I 100% agree. Auto-set should be changed to place a player's toons starting from the BOTTOM end of their roster, not the top. Players that actually want to play this mode shouldn't be punished by players that don't care about the mode. Full-clearing an auto-defense is often hard to do, and usually prevents one from doing any "side" feats. Like, how is one supposed to win a fight with Farmboy Luke, Stormtrooper Han and Chewbacca for the feat when your enemy has 4 GLs, GAS, JKL, DR autoset in the front walls? CG should really look into changing this...
  • Jenoke76
    35 posts Member
    edited April 2021
    I think this would be a more reasonable number of defenders

    m9jnpprlvtwd.jpg
  • Steelen
    6 posts Member
    edited April 2021
    Здравствуйте.
    Сделайте пожалуйста так, что бы игроки во время фазы атаки не видели как воюет оппонент. А результаты атак врага были видны только в момент окончания фазы атаки или в случае, если игрок завоевал все секторы во время своей атаки.
    Hello.
    Please make that the players during the attack phase do not see how the opponent is fighting. And the results of enemy attacks were visible only at the end of the attack phase or if the player conquered all sectors during his attack.
  • Nikoms565
    14242 posts Member
    edited April 2021
    Wow, this feedback... didn't seem to matter what Div you are in or moving to, no one seems happy.

    Div 1-3 after changes: waaa too many fights to have to do!

    Div 5+ after changes: waaa I don't get to do enough fights!

    Div 3+ after changes: waaa all my fleet investment for nothing!

    Personally I'd be fine with extra fights, because that means opponents having to reach further into their rosters to maybe see something interesting. But I think I'm going to be div 3 or 4 so: waaa not enough change for me! Oh and waaa my fleets sit in dry dock!

    Way to design a change that sits everyone in the same boat: unhappy mc unhappyboatface.
    This is pretty much how I feel about it (I’m new division 2 at 7.25M GP).

    They’ve used a sledgehammer to crack a nut. Something needed fixed, but they’ve made other things worse in doing so.

    So much this. Instead of reworking all of the divisions and changing virtually everyone's requirements, then having to rebalance rewards, they simply should have broken up current Division 1 into an appropriate number of smaller Divisions then increased the required teams and tweaked the rewards for those new "top-end" divisions. Then in the future, they could simply keep adding and subdividing the top divisions as the players grew into them.

    But, instead, their current solution is not only overly-complicated, but suggests that every time the game outgrows the current Division system, they are going to redo the entire thing. How does a game like this have so little foresight? Unreal.
    In game name: Lucas Gregory FORMER PLAYER - - - -"Whale blah grump poooop." - Ouchie

    In game guild: TNR Uprising
    I beat the REAL T7 Yoda (not the nerfed one) and did so before mods were there to help
    *This space left intentionally blank*
  • Legend91
    2441 posts Member
    Kiloran wrote: »
    Can we take this time to rethink auto set defense as well. Really annoying having to fight the top of someone roster. Maybe reverse it pull from the bottom or at least exclude GLs. Discouraging when I can't clear a zone because I like GAC and set an actual defense. This is especially true for 3s.

    This almost never happens to me, but I 100% agree. Auto-set should be changed to place a player's toons starting from the BOTTOM end of their roster, not the top. Players that actually want to play this mode shouldn't be punished by players that don't care about the mode. Full-clearing an auto-defense is often hard to do, and usually prevents one from doing any "side" feats. Like, how is one supposed to win a fight with Farmboy Luke, Stormtrooper Han and Chewbacca for the feat when your enemy has 4 GLs, GAS, JKL, DR autoset in the front walls? CG should really look into changing this...

    By intentionally letting a battle time out when there's only 1 enemy left with red HP and then sending in the feat team. The downside is that you lose 20 points which is gonna hurt for reaching the top 10.
    The problem with the game setting the lower part or even the middle part of someones roster would be that that person could then use their top end for offense and potentially win (very unlikely but possible) whereas taking away all the top chars is pretty much a 100% loss for the autodeploy person as he has no chance of clearing.
    Legend#6873 | YouTube | swgoh.gg
  • Personally i like the change. D1 was just too big. I have a pretty focused roster at 4.8M and kept being matched against people with 6.3M+. And yes i understand match making, but not my fault people have 50 G12 characters and bloat their roster. Where it hurt was bottom teams on D or O. Obviously a short term issue for me as i continue improving my roster but was a disadvantage for focused rosters before this announced change.
  • Are the GP brackets based on your total GP or just the amount of GP for your top 85(?) characters used for matchmaking?
  • Nikoms565 wrote: »
    Wow, this feedback... didn't seem to matter what Div you are in or moving to, no one seems happy.

    Div 1-3 after changes: waaa too many fights to have to do!

    Div 5+ after changes: waaa I don't get to do enough fights!

    Div 3+ after changes: waaa all my fleet investment for nothing!

    Personally I'd be fine with extra fights, because that means opponents having to reach further into their rosters to maybe see something interesting. But I think I'm going to be div 3 or 4 so: waaa not enough change for me! Oh and waaa my fleets sit in dry dock!

    Way to design a change that sits everyone in the same boat: unhappy mc unhappyboatface.
    This is pretty much how I feel about it (I’m new division 2 at 7.25M GP).

    They’ve used a sledgehammer to crack a nut. Something needed fixed, but they’ve made other things worse in doing so.

    So much this. Instead of reworking all of the divisions and changing virtually everyone's requirements, then having to rebalance rewards, they simply should have broken up current Division 1 into an appropriate number of smaller Divisions then increased the required teams and tweaked the rewards for those new "top-end" divisions. Then in the future, they could simply keep adding and subdividing the top divisions as the players grew into them.

    But, instead, their current solution is not only overly-complicated, but suggests that every time the game outgrows the current Division system, they are going to redo the entire thing. How does a game like this have so little foresight? Unreal.

    Totally this. What CG should have done:

    b8ivf840hw7c.png

    Then as Nikoms said they can add more divisions on top in the future as rosters grow.
  • I am thrilled at this.
    More battles does kinda suck. Auto-defense attack battles that do RNG battles based off of known statistics and character squad mod compositions would have been nice.
    I just went from div 1 to 5, maybe now I will face better matched opponents.

    Rewards are a perk. GAC is the funniest pvp in the game for many. I play for that
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    Nikoms565 wrote: »
    Wow, this feedback... didn't seem to matter what Div you are in or moving to, no one seems happy.

    Div 1-3 after changes: waaa too many fights to have to do!

    Div 5+ after changes: waaa I don't get to do enough fights!

    Div 3+ after changes: waaa all my fleet investment for nothing!

    Personally I'd be fine with extra fights, because that means opponents having to reach further into their rosters to maybe see something interesting. But I think I'm going to be div 3 or 4 so: waaa not enough change for me! Oh and waaa my fleets sit in dry dock!

    Way to design a change that sits everyone in the same boat: unhappy mc unhappyboatface.
    This is pretty much how I feel about it (I’m new division 2 at 7.25M GP).

    They’ve used a sledgehammer to crack a nut. Something needed fixed, but they’ve made other things worse in doing so.

    So much this. Instead of reworking all of the divisions and changing virtually everyone's requirements, then having to rebalance rewards, they simply should have broken up current Division 1 into an appropriate number of smaller Divisions then increased the required teams and tweaked the rewards for those new "top-end" divisions. Then in the future, they could simply keep adding and subdividing the top divisions as the players grew into them.

    But, instead, their current solution is not only overly-complicated, but suggests that every time the game outgrows the current Division system, they are going to redo the entire thing. How does a game like this have so little foresight? Unreal.

    Totally this. What CG should have done:

    b8ivf840hw7c.png

    Then as Nikoms said they can add more divisions on top in the future as rosters grow.

    We dont really have enough actual fleets to require 6, but I agree the reshuffle vs just expanding is an odd choice.
  • Many have adressed the fleets issue, and I'd like to join their cause. Adressing the divisions should not mean decreased number of fleets for anyone.
  • Kyno wrote: »
    Arva wrote: »
    I rly hope CG does revisit this change, and does rethink the teams needed on the lower half of the divisions, and does extend the 2 fleets needed to at least division 5.
    Right now this change would make GAC in the lower brackets so much more boring and stale, couse you have to think so much less, about how you structure your defense and offense with only 3 teams up to 3.1 m GP, whereas previously you started setting more teams at 1,3m gp, and even earlier in 3v3 seasons.

    From their statements, it does seem like there is time and they are listening. We will have to wait and see if things will change.

    Yes because CG has a great history of listening to the player base.
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    Recurve wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Arva wrote: »
    I rly hope CG does revisit this change, and does rethink the teams needed on the lower half of the divisions, and does extend the 2 fleets needed to at least division 5.
    Right now this change would make GAC in the lower brackets so much more boring and stale, couse you have to think so much less, about how you structure your defense and offense with only 3 teams up to 3.1 m GP, whereas previously you started setting more teams at 1,3m gp, and even earlier in 3v3 seasons.

    From their statements, it does seem like there is time and they are listening. We will have to wait and see if things will change.

    Yes because CG has a great history of listening to the player base.

    I'm glad we can agree.
  • Hortus
    615 posts Member
    Kyno wrote: »
    We dont really have enough actual fleets to require 6, but I agree the reshuffle vs just expanding is an odd choice.

    We surely have on the top end. Separatists, GR, Rebels, FO, Resistance, Empire. Yes, using all at once will force to use suboptimal configs for some fleets (especially in reinforcements) but that's where strategy and tactics should come into the play, right?
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    Hortus wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    We dont really have enough actual fleets to require 6, but I agree the reshuffle vs just expanding is an odd choice.

    We surely have on the top end. Separatists, GR, Rebels, FO, Resistance, Empire. Yes, using all at once will force to use suboptimal configs for some fleets (especially in reinforcements) but that's where strategy and tactics should come into the play, right?

    That is why I said actual fleets. Being forced to use sub optimal fleets because you have not developed your fleets is one thing, but being forced because you have no options is another. I would consider the latter a bad situation, and a bad way to add "strategy". IMO.

    I would also imagine that the way that would play out is junk goes on D, and your solid 3 stay for O, and everyone gets bored and max points. But maybe I'm wrong.

    They could sure up fleets and add another spot, that would be great. (Its on the 5 year plan I'm sure)
  • Hortus wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    We dont really have enough actual fleets to require 6, but I agree the reshuffle vs just expanding is an odd choice.

    We surely have on the top end. Separatists, GR, Rebels, FO, Resistance, Empire. Yes, using all at once will force to use suboptimal configs for some fleets (especially in reinforcements) but that's where strategy and tactics should come into the play, right?

    3 Fleet battles would require you to first of all have all 6 fleets farmed but most of all it would mean that if you botch a fight for any reason (game crash?) you wouldn't be able to full clear anymore.
  • Kyno wrote: »
    Nikoms565 wrote: »
    Wow, this feedback... didn't seem to matter what Div you are in or moving to, no one seems happy.

    Div 1-3 after changes: waaa too many fights to have to do!

    Div 5+ after changes: waaa I don't get to do enough fights!

    Div 3+ after changes: waaa all my fleet investment for nothing!

    Personally I'd be fine with extra fights, because that means opponents having to reach further into their rosters to maybe see something interesting. But I think I'm going to be div 3 or 4 so: waaa not enough change for me! Oh and waaa my fleets sit in dry dock!

    Way to design a change that sits everyone in the same boat: unhappy mc unhappyboatface.
    This is pretty much how I feel about it (I’m new division 2 at 7.25M GP).

    They’ve used a sledgehammer to crack a nut. Something needed fixed, but they’ve made other things worse in doing so.

    So much this. Instead of reworking all of the divisions and changing virtually everyone's requirements, then having to rebalance rewards, they simply should have broken up current Division 1 into an appropriate number of smaller Divisions then increased the required teams and tweaked the rewards for those new "top-end" divisions. Then in the future, they could simply keep adding and subdividing the top divisions as the players grew into them.

    But, instead, their current solution is not only overly-complicated, but suggests that every time the game outgrows the current Division system, they are going to redo the entire thing. How does a game like this have so little foresight? Unreal.

    Totally this. What CG should have done:

    b8ivf840hw7c.png

    Then as Nikoms said they can add more divisions on top in the future as rosters grow.

    We dont really have enough actual fleets to require 6, but I agree the reshuffle vs just expanding is an odd choice.
    Actually, there are enough fleets. Even at my range (5,8 mio gp) I regularly meet opponents in GAC who have all (capital) ships that are available in the game. I would not want fleet numbers to increase to 3 at my current gp range, but add a million more and I'd probably be okay with it.
  • There are 8 capitals in the game, and 44 ships currently. That is enough for 6 full fleets plus 2 extra ships, and 2 extra capitols. How many competitive players actually use 4 reinforcements when attacking? So it is not unreasonable to think that a top end player could have 8 usable fleets. Imo.

    I'm currently at 3.4mil and I've been preparing for 4 fleets for a while now. I couldn't imagine that people with 6mil rosters don't have all the capitols and most all the ships in reserve.

    And the argument that you'd have to out junk teams doesn't make sense either. I have to put junk squads every gac at my gp level.
Sign In or Register to comment.