What changes does everyone want for GAC?

Prev13
I would like to see all Heroes with no ships every now and then.

Maybe more zones?

Other ideas?

Replies

  • Like my uncle Lester always said, if it ain’t broke why try to fix it
  • GA isn't perfect, but I'd rather they don't "fix" anything....ever....
  • SemiGod
    2390 posts Member
    edited November 25
    Better rewards to make GAC omicrons worth while
  • Frankly, limited 3v3. At most 2:1 5s v 3s. Any "in GAC" Omicron ability must be weighed with its 3v3 utility. Just like some squads are useless in 3s (Bad Batch), Omicrons that grant abilities aren't likely to be designed with 3v3 in mind. So, while I like Dash for a future Omicron, it won't be happening until 5s are more frequent. Same logic for TB, but that's for a different thread.
  • Frankly, limited 3v3. At most 2:1 5s v 3s. Any "in GAC" Omicron ability must be weighed with its 3v3 utility. Just like some squads are useless in 3s (Bad Batch), Omicrons that grant abilities aren't likely to be designed with 3v3 in mind. So, while I like Dash for a future Omicron, it won't be happening until 5s are more frequent. Same logic for TB, but that's for a different thread.

    Just curious, what do you think the ratio is now?
  • Based on reading the forums it seems like there's a portion of the community who strictly wants 5v5s, and a portion of the community who loves the change of pace that 3v3s bring. I'd love to see a duel sign up option much like we have for TB (picking between Hoth and Geo). One option would be to sign up for simple, straight up 5v5. The other would be to sign up for a "wildcard mode" that has more variations for CG to experiment with. CG could really play around with things like certain faction bonuses, 2v2, 4v4, 6v6, no leaders, etc.. etc.. The idea would be at the end of the day CG could use it as a way to keep the people who like the plain 5v5 happy while also making the people who love a challenge happy. Obviously there would be 2 different scoreboards and the feats would need to be adjusted to balance them out. But I think it could be a fun way to spice things up.
  • Different map layouts--Nothing wrong with the current 2x2 layout per se, except that it's all we've had for this whole time. Maybe a 3x2 or 2x3 orientation. 2x1x2 with fleets in the middle. All kinds of options exist, but the standard has become stale.

    More reward tiers within each level. As it stands, when I hit Kyber I basically give up and only do feats because unless I'm in the top 200 (or whatever) the prizes are all the same.

    4v4.

    Hmmmmmm....... That's it for now, but I could think of others given more time.
    Ceterum censeo Patientia esse meliat.
  • Xcien
    2245 posts Member
    Based on reading the forums it seems like there's a portion of the community who strictly wants 5v5s, and a portion of the community who loves the change of pace that 3v3s bring. I'd love to see a duel sign up option much like we have for TB (picking between Hoth and Geo). One option would be to sign up for simple, straight up 5v5. The other would be to sign up for a "wildcard mode" that has more variations for CG to experiment with. CG could really play around with things like certain faction bonuses, 2v2, 4v4, 6v6, no leaders, etc.. etc.. The idea would be at the end of the day CG could use it as a way to keep the people who like the plain 5v5 happy while also making the people who love a challenge happy. Obviously there would be 2 different scoreboards and the feats would need to be adjusted to balance them out. But I think it could be a fun way to spice things up.

    Now the option to choose if you wanted to do 5v5 or 3v3 would be nice, and could create more player engagement, which would make CG happy.
    One may learn a great deal about a people by the stories they tell of others.

    Thank you for evaluating. Your feedback has been noted.
  • CCyrilS wrote: »
    Frankly, limited 3v3. At most 2:1 5s v 3s. Any "in GAC" Omicron ability must be weighed with its 3v3 utility. Just like some squads are useless in 3s (Bad Batch), Omicrons that grant abilities aren't likely to be designed with 3v3 in mind. So, while I like Dash for a future Omicron, it won't be happening until 5s are more frequent. Same logic for TB, but that's for a different thread.

    Just curious, what do you think the ratio is now?

    Not a think, It is 1:1. They alternate months. 3s followed by 5s. What do you "think" the ratio is?
  • CCyrilS wrote: »
    Frankly, limited 3v3. At most 2:1 5s v 3s. Any "in GAC" Omicron ability must be weighed with its 3v3 utility. Just like some squads are useless in 3s (Bad Batch), Omicrons that grant abilities aren't likely to be designed with 3v3 in mind. So, while I like Dash for a future Omicron, it won't be happening until 5s are more frequent. Same logic for TB, but that's for a different thread.

    Just curious, what do you think the ratio is now?

    Not a think, It is 1:1. They alternate months. 3s followed by 5s. What do you "think" the ratio is?

    I know they reduced the frequency of 3v3 over a year ago... did they change it back?
  • CCyrilS wrote: »
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    Frankly, limited 3v3. At most 2:1 5s v 3s. Any "in GAC" Omicron ability must be weighed with its 3v3 utility. Just like some squads are useless in 3s (Bad Batch), Omicrons that grant abilities aren't likely to be designed with 3v3 in mind. So, while I like Dash for a future Omicron, it won't be happening until 5s are more frequent. Same logic for TB, but that's for a different thread.

    Just curious, what do you think the ratio is now?

    Not a think, It is 1:1. They alternate months. 3s followed by 5s. What do you "think" the ratio is?

    I know they reduced the frequency of 3v3 over a year ago... did they change it back?
    What game have you been playing?

    GAC has alternated between 5v5 and 3v3 for at least the last year.

    The ratio is 1:1.
  • CCyrilS wrote: »
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    Frankly, limited 3v3. At most 2:1 5s v 3s. Any "in GAC" Omicron ability must be weighed with its 3v3 utility. Just like some squads are useless in 3s (Bad Batch), Omicrons that grant abilities aren't likely to be designed with 3v3 in mind. So, while I like Dash for a future Omicron, it won't be happening until 5s are more frequent. Same logic for TB, but that's for a different thread.

    Just curious, what do you think the ratio is now?

    Not a think, It is 1:1. They alternate months. 3s followed by 5s. What do you "think" the ratio is?

    I know they reduced the frequency of 3v3 over a year ago... did they change it back?
    What game have you been playing?

    GAC has alternated between 5v5 and 3v3 for at least the last year.

    The ratio is 1:1.

    I hadn't noticed. But I actually like 3v3 so that makes sense. I had read where 3v3 was reduced, which was true, but I had forgotten there was a time when we had back to back 3v3.
  • LordDirt wrote: »
    I would like to see it go away

    Good thing that you can ignore it by just not signing up.
    Legend#6873 | YouTube | swgoh.gg
  • If they won’t add a sandbox mode I think adding something similar in GAC would work. Maybe add another UI box in GAC table like in arena table and add it for like inviting friends to play a on the side GAC with no rank systems or rewards.
  • balanced MM based also on GL cause the counters nerf
  • Let's try a pragmatic approach here:

    First and foremost with the daily challenge update the GAC rewards lost a lot of their value. The currency is nice, the crystal is nice, the rest is not really rare, unique, or expensive anymore. So I kinda think the reward system needs a touchup. The CQ rewards are also very underwhelming, but you get an exclusive character, then you get a tempo advantage in arena for example, etc. So it is arguable at the end.

    Changing the shape of the holotable would be something I welcome.

    With the upspiked defense potential of the GL-s I personally would welcome a reduced banner-value of a zone, so you can increase the tactical elements during the planning. Especially if the GL-s are uneven many matches are settled during the defense phase, which is like some sort of meta, so probably many people even like it, and I personally wouldnt care much but it often removes the strategical thinking from the offense phase.

    As Grand Arena was advertised with finding out who is the best player amongst all, here it would actually make some sense (but you need to stay reasonable here) to seek for opportunities to pair up players against each other with similar winning streaks. Like... I have 9 victories, you have 9 victories, we dont get paired up, you get 3 correct opponents, I get an autodefense on round 1... This never really felt fair to me. Give me 3 players with 9 victories, and lets fight. Of course there would be some blatant mismatches if this was the only factor during MM, but this could be one of the many.

    I would personally welcome mixed sectors, like having 1 fleet and 3 squad teams in the very same sector. Or mix it otherwise like 2 5-member squads and 3 more 3 member squads. Knowing how the freshly released contents were coded I have very little hope regarding this. But still could be a 3v3 north zone and a 5v5 south zone that sounds a little more accomplishable.

    I honestly think that the feats do not really suit this gamemode too much. Sure, it's usually a low investment low reward system, so it's fine I guess, but I dont think it ever accomplished the goal of influencing the planning of many players. If that was a goal at all.

    I hope we dont get GAC stims and consumables, that would be horrible.
    And I would also like to see the GAC and the CQ timed better so we minimize their overlapping periods.

    In a nutshell.
  • I’d like to see some better rewards for feats etc for the final round - the logic being that very often I find I’ve made Aurodium but Kyber is arithmetically impossible in round 4 (yeah yeah I know you’ll all say Git Gud but this game is for the middle order batters too) - which makes the last round a dead rubber. No jeopardy no reward. If there were some way you could amplify last round rewards it might make things interesting
  • I liked 3v3 until they got rid of the counters to GLs. I don't mind taking 2 teams to beat one in 5v5 but in 3v3 you could have every non gl team in the bank and still not get through
  • Sewpot
    1787 posts Member
    Why can’t we have personal raids with progressively tougher monsters to fight. You climb as high as your roster takes you then you can tap out at your limit and collect rewards.
  • I know why they added more squads per zone but time wise, it turned me off. It takes a lot of time to battle, I think, 16 times including fleets. Maybe we could battle at x8 speed… I’m not here for the visuals of the characters abilities, heck I still boot up my WIN 2000 laptop and play ages of empire and also still play the 2D version of Ultima Online.
    If the rumors of the delay is because they are adjusting how we earn crystals in arena now and tying them to GAC, I’m probably not to retire. I have already decided I’m not spending on the next conquest for the pass until we know the changes hinted at in the developer comments.
  • Nauros
    4812 posts Member
    Some variety, like cycling through several layouts instead of the same one over and over. Also, some modifiers or special objectives in territories could be interesting, but given the usual amount of testing, players would probably find a way to break something within the first hour. And get rid of 3v3, the game wasn't designed for it and it shows.
  • I want changes that encourage more participation and enhance the competitive aspect of the mode.

    To increase participation...

    Skew tangible rewards more towards participation. Those of us that want to be competitive will do it for the rank and the competition.

    Punish lack of participation. Change auto set to bottom of roster and block them from attacking and from rewards.

    To increase competitive aspect...

    Remove the current scoring system. It's based too much on your opponent's strategy and rewards one strategy on offense too heavily. There are many better replacements from other competitive games: ELO, MMR, ladder, etc.

    Assuming a better scoring/ranking system is devised, perform MM based on rank to increase the chance of highly competitive rounds.
  • Sewpot wrote: »
    Why can’t we have personal raids with progressively tougher monsters to fight. You climb as high as your roster takes you then you can tap out at your limit and collect rewards.

    That doesn't sound much different from Conquest...
Sign In or Register to comment.