Add option to hide attack phase progress in GAC

LindoFatt

For as long as we've had GAC there has been an advantage to attacking second. So much so that based on data mined on my opponents the majority attack most of the time in the last hour of the 24 hour period. For many players though, this is not an option and so they are put at a disadvantage. Unlike squad arena where CG has given us the option to move our payout to when it is convenient to us, players cannot choose when GAC attack phase ends. With the increasing importance of GAC due to it replacing squad arena as the main source of crystal income, it is important that CG address this imbalance between players who can set aside the final hour to attack and those who can't.

My suggestion is that during the setup phase both players have the option to hide attack phase progress. If either player selects that option, then neither players sees the progress or score of the other player during the attack phase. Only when the phase ends during review can you see the detailed results as we have them today.

I think implementing this now before the next GAC is critical to avoiding a lot of frustration and ill will now that CG has raised the stakes of competing in GAC.

Salatious_Scrum

Considering GAC is about to undergo a big change I doubt this’ll happen. If you look at the GAC update notes, you’ll see that CG will reward the first attacker

DarjeloSalas

Salatious_Scrum wrote: »

Considering GAC is about to undergo a big change I doubt this’ll happen. If you look at the GAC update notes, you’ll see that CG will reward the first attacker

If he looks at the GAC update notes, he might understand them better than you and realise that both players will be given 10 banners for their first attack, rather than one player getting it.

Salatious_Scrum

Ah yes I misread that.

In any case I fail to see how attacking second gives an advantage to that person. Just aim for high banners 🤷🏻‍♂️ If you lose you lose

Winterwolves

Information is power.

DarjeloSalas

Salatious_Scrum wrote: »

Ah yes I misread that.

In any case I fail to see how attacking second gives an advantage to that person. Just aim for high banners 🤷🏻‍♂️ If you lose you lose

There is one particular situation where it cannot be disputed that going second has an advantage, and was a deal breaker in more than one of my matches in the last GAC (finished just outside top 100 in div 1 Kyber).

In most of my matches, both me and opponent set Executor and one other fleet on defence. In most cases, we got to fleets within a few banners of each other.

I am not particularly strong at beating Executor without using my own, but I am pretty reliable at beating it in 2 attempts. Or 3 attempts if the second doesn’t go well. The trouble is, the fleets I use to pull that off can leave me short handed for the other fleet.

So it was of great benefit when my opponent went before me, beat one fleet and then failed to beat my Executor after 3 or 4 attempts. In those matches I knew that all I needed to do was beat their other fleet to go ahead on banners. No need to risk it all by trying to beat their Executor*.

As said above, knowledge is power.
.

Edit: bold mishap amended

Waqui

DarjeloSalas wrote: »

Salatious_Scrum wrote: »

Ah yes I misread that.

In any case I fail to see how attacking second gives an advantage to that person. Just aim for high banners 🤷🏻‍♂️ If you lose you lose

There is one particular situation where it cannot be disputed that going second has an advantage, and was a deal breaker in more than one of my matches in the last GAC (finished just outside top 100 in div 1 Kyber).

In most of my matches, both me and opponent set Executor and one other fleet on defence. In most cases, we got to fleets within a few banners of each other.

I am not particularly strong at beating Executor without using my own, but I am pretty reliable at beating it in 2 attempts. Or 3 attempts if the second doesn’t go well. The trouble is, the fleets I use to pull that off can leave me short handed for the other fleet.

So it was of great benefit when my opponent went before me, beat one fleet and then failed to beat my Executor after 3 or 4 attempts. In those matches I knew that all I needed to do was beat their other fleet to go ahead on banners. No need to risk it all by trying to beat their Executor*.

As said above, knowledge is power.
.

Edit: bold mishap amended

Who would have won if you had tried to maximize your score by making an attempt or two on the Executor fleet but stopped before you became shorthanded for the other fleet?

Winterwolves

There is no way of knowing that. Because the advantage of extra information was put to use to take a certain win, instead of taking a chance for higher banners. That's the whole point. Darjelo might have been able to win without the information, we'll never know. But he certainly did win, by using the information. That is known.

DarjeloSalas

Waqui wrote: »

DarjeloSalas wrote: »

Salatious_Scrum wrote: »

Ah yes I misread that.

In any case I fail to see how attacking second gives an advantage to that person. Just aim for high banners 🤷🏻‍♂️ If you lose you lose

There is one particular situation where it cannot be disputed that going second has an advantage, and was a deal breaker in more than one of my matches in the last GAC (finished just outside top 100 in div 1 Kyber).

In most of my matches, both me and opponent set Executor and one other fleet on defence. In most cases, we got to fleets within a few banners of each other.

I am not particularly strong at beating Executor without using my own, but I am pretty reliable at beating it in 2 attempts. Or 3 attempts if the second doesn’t go well. The trouble is, the fleets I use to pull that off can leave me short handed for the other fleet.

So it was of great benefit when my opponent went before me, beat one fleet and then failed to beat my Executor after 3 or 4 attempts. In those matches I knew that all I needed to do was beat their other fleet to go ahead on banners. No need to risk it all by trying to beat their Executor*.

As said above, knowledge is power.
.

Edit: bold mishap amended

Who would have won if you had tried to maximize your score by making an attempt or two on the Executor fleet but stopped before you became shorthanded for the other fleet?

I don’t know who would have won. Which is the point.

LindoFatt

A common strategy I have faced that relies on going second is to put a hard defense in the front expecting your opponent won't be able to clear all territories. If you wait for the opponent to fully attack by waiting to the last hour (and assuming your opponent doesn't have that luxury) you can see what territories they cleared and how efficiently they did so. While your opponent likely wasted good teams trying to get through some teams that they ended up failing to beat thus taking in weaker teams to clear other defenses less efficiently, you can ignore the hardest defense teams and focus on matching them on territories while getting better banners per battle.

I've also taken advantage of going second where knowing how many points you need to win at the end informs you whether you need to risk an undersized squad or not.