GAC - Hiding Score

Prev13
Justokay
94 posts Member
edited February 16
Would love to have the option of hiding my score. I’m in the PT time zone so GAC always ends at 2 pm for me in the middle of my work day. I simply do not have the ability to wait to attack so I’m always, without fail, the first to attack. This is somewhat, or mostly, an advantage created/incentivized by time zones rather than patience or strategy. Just seems like an easy fix by hiding scores. And if there are folks that like going first, give them an option to show score.
Post edited by crzydroid on

Replies

  • Justokay
    94 posts Member
    edited February 12
    That doesn’t seem like much of a reason for a competitive game mode. Let’s keep an imbalance so it’s easier to ignore?
  • Also the people that get good scores will show you if they have the option. So you can continue to go about not playing the game you dislike.
  • Waste of time. No thank you.
  • Care to elaborate? Maybe you have good point. But hard to see through the snark.
  • I'm siding with tvf and starson here, no thanks.
  • Same point as TVF I believe, when you can see your opponents score you can now when to cut your loss and move on with your life if going second.

    Round end is 11pm for me, so I mostly attack nearer the end, but not at the very end of the phase and it's lovely when you can see your high scoring opponents banners and can do the toughest battles first to see if there's a point to keep going or not.
  • Justokay wrote: »
    That doesn’t seem like much of a reason for a competitive game mode. Let’s keep an imbalance so it’s easier to ignore?

    For many, it is not a competitive game mode but rather a means to earn resources. I'd wager a lot of people are burned out on or never cared for the competitive aspect of GAC. Changing the mode in a way that would require more effort for the same rewards will not be popular with that crowd.

    That said, if competitive balance for GAC was the primary concern, I think your suggestion absolutely makes sense.
  • Wed_Santa wrote: »
    Any aspect of the game can be a tactical opportunity- it’s up to you to have a bit of fun with it or to make it a frustration.

    It sounds like OP's schedule does not allow him to utilize the tactical opportunity of his choosing. If I had more fun or felt better going 1st/2nd but my schedule didn't allow it, that would be frustrating. And I might saunter over to the forums and make a post about my preferences and see if it gains any traction... and then lose faith in humanity ;)
  • Justokay wrote: »
    Would love to have the option of hiding my score. I’m in the PT time zone so GAC always ends at 2 pm for me in the middle of my work day. I simply do not have the ability to wait to attack so I’m always, without fail, the first to attack. This is somewhat, or mostly, an advantage created/incentivized by time zones rather than patience or strategy. Just seems like an easy fix by hiding scores. And if there are folks that like going first, give them an option to show score.

    This is a you problem, not a game mode problem. Its working just fine. I share the same time zone as you and have no problem winning most of the matches where I attack first. Attacking at the deadline offers as much advantage as attacking 1st. I do not have an overpowered, efficient roster either.

    IMO GAC is won or lost for the most part on the things you do prior to the 24 attack phase.

    As they say in project management, success is 80% planning and 20% execution.







  • rickertron wrote: »
    Justokay wrote: »
    Would love to have the option of hiding my score. I’m in the PT time zone so GAC always ends at 2 pm for me in the middle of my work day. I simply do not have the ability to wait to attack so I’m always, without fail, the first to attack. This is somewhat, or mostly, an advantage created/incentivized by time zones rather than patience or strategy. Just seems like an easy fix by hiding scores. And if there are folks that like going first, give them an option to show score.

    This is a you problem, not a game mode problem. Its working just fine. I share the same time zone as you and have no problem winning most of the matches where I attack first. Attacking at the deadline offers as much advantage as attacking 1st. I do not have an overpowered, efficient roster either.

    IMO GAC is won or lost for the most part on the things you do prior to the 24 attack phase.

    As they say in project management, success is 80% planning and 20% execution.

    In all fairness it is not just fine for op, and he/she is offering a suggest for a fix for the problem. Others may or may not agree with the problem and/or solution.
  • They do this in MSF and I think it works great. Adds a layer of mystery. I also see TVF’s point as well, so I could go either way on this one.
  • Profit wrote: »
    rickertron wrote: »
    Justokay wrote: »
    Would love to have the option of hiding my score. I’m in the PT time zone so GAC always ends at 2 pm for me in the middle of my work day. I simply do not have the ability to wait to attack so I’m always, without fail, the first to attack. This is somewhat, or mostly, an advantage created/incentivized by time zones rather than patience or strategy. Just seems like an easy fix by hiding scores. And if there are folks that like going first, give them an option to show score.

    This is a you problem, not a game mode problem. Its working just fine. I share the same time zone as you and have no problem winning most of the matches where I attack first. Attacking at the deadline offers as much advantage as attacking 1st. I do not have an overpowered, efficient roster either.

    IMO GAC is won or lost for the most part on the things you do prior to the 24 attack phase.

    As they say in project management, success is 80% planning and 20% execution.

    In all fairness it is not just fine for op, and he/she is offering a suggest for a fix for the problem. Others may or may not agree with the problem and/or solution.

    Its not agreed that it is a problem with the game, Its a problem for the the OP, Where the suggested fix is not their own approach to the game, but a suggestion to modify the game and impact everyone else's game play.

    The problem with this thread and many like it, is that the so called problems described are issues said player experiences as a result of their own choices and how they play game. The suggested solution is never to adjust their own game play, but rather have the game changed or modified to suit them. which is guaranteed to get some fiery responses in return.

  • nottenst
    672 posts Member
    edited February 12
    Wed_Santa wrote: »
    I’m a no vote for this - but for slightly different reasons. I feel that showing the score in GAC opens up in some cases the opportunity for a bit of interaction, jeopardy and a bit of mental fencing with your opponent. You can leave them guessing whether you have any attacks left or you can feel a bit of a buzz as their score clicks closer to yours - will that last defence hold out just long enough…. Take away the scores and it’s just another sad solitary activity that you choose to do in the bathroom or wherever.

    Any aspect of the game can be a tactical opportunity- it’s up to you to have a bit of fun with it or to make it a frustration.

    I agree. My favorite GAC rounds have been where with no verbal interaction between us, but we have taken turns. We each do an opening salvo to get points on the board. A little later one of us clears a territory then the other does and it just proceeds over the timespan until the end, trading attacks and seeing which one has the edge.
  • I will give a little to OP's suggestion. If the game mode were to be changed, the option to hide scores, should be for each individual player in that, if my opponent doesn't want to see the score, great they can choose that option for themselves, but their opponent can choose to the see the score for themselves as it unfolds. Neither player would get to see the option their opponent chose.
  • rickertron wrote: »
    Profit wrote: »
    rickertron wrote: »
    Justokay wrote: »
    Would love to have the option of hiding my score. I’m in the PT time zone so GAC always ends at 2 pm for me in the middle of my work day. I simply do not have the ability to wait to attack so I’m always, without fail, the first to attack. This is somewhat, or mostly, an advantage created/incentivized by time zones rather than patience or strategy. Just seems like an easy fix by hiding scores. And if there are folks that like going first, give them an option to show score.

    This is a you problem, not a game mode problem. Its working just fine. I share the same time zone as you and have no problem winning most of the matches where I attack first. Attacking at the deadline offers as much advantage as attacking 1st. I do not have an overpowered, efficient roster either.

    IMO GAC is won or lost for the most part on the things you do prior to the 24 attack phase.

    As they say in project management, success is 80% planning and 20% execution.

    In all fairness it is not just fine for op, and he/she is offering a suggest for a fix for the problem. Others may or may not agree with the problem and/or solution.

    Its not agreed that it is a problem with the game, Its a problem for the the OP, Where the suggested fix is not their own approach to the game, but a suggestion to modify the game and impact everyone else's game play.

    The problem with this thread and many like it, is that the so called problems described are issues said player experiences as a result of their own choices and how they play game. The suggested solution is never to adjust their own game play, but rather have the game changed or modified to suit them. which is guaranteed to get some fiery responses in return.

    There are no objective problems regarding game design outside of bugs. There doesn't need to be an agreed on, by all, definition of a problem for a player to raise it or to offer a solution. I don't agree with op but I don't think he/she should be told off for voicing concerns or suggesting game improvements.
  • The OP didn't suggest a game improvement, IMO. which is an opinion that seems to be shared by others. If one is going to suggest modifications that impact others game play as a result of how they play the game, they will be met with fiery responses from those that enjoy the game as is.
  • Ragnarok_COTF
    1738 posts Member
    edited February 12
    So how does one gather evidence that they have popular support for their idea before bringing it to the forums?

    Most dissenters here had zero issue expressing why they disliked OP's idea without being "fiery".
  • I just though it was a bit rough on the op, it was a suggestion not a demand
  • Hiding scores will not meaningfully change the outcome of matches. It’s just not as big of an advantage going second as people think. I’d say I choose to go first about 85-95 percent of the time. I honestly doubt I’ve lost more matches because I put up a bad score than the matches I’ve won because I put up a good score.
  • TVF
    36418 posts Member
    lol we've pivoted back to the old "first or second" debate again
    I need a new message here. https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • @Justokay

    I cannot win this round of the GAC. There is nothing I can do.
    Sure, I can increase my score a little but whether I have 65 points of 1632 points, I will lose and the loser prize is 100% the same.

    0lquh7nnxwor.png

    Please explain how spending additional time and get a higher losing score will help me get a better prize this round.

    All that said, if you want a "fog of war" and both parties are interested in having it, I have zero issues with that.
    If you give me the choice, i will never accept the handicap as I am not interested in wasting my time.
  • Wed_Santa wrote: »
    Any aspect of the game can be a tactical opportunity- it’s up to you to have a bit of fun with it or to make it a frustration.

    It sounds like OP's schedule does not allow him to utilize the tactical opportunity of his choosing. If I had more fun or felt better going 1st/2nd but my schedule didn't allow it, that would be frustrating. And I might saunter over to the forums and make a post about my preferences and see if it gains any traction... and then lose faith in humanity ;)

    But isn’t that the point? You don’t choose tactical opportunities- you choose strategies. Tactical opportunities are what the objective conditions offer you.

    Of course the OP has every right to vent when the conditions don’t suit their chosen strategy but the point I was trying to make is that, rather than asking for a change to reduce the impact of the conditions faced as an individual on their personal strategy by removing sight of scores for all of us, they might be better looking for ways to find tactical opportunities instead. It’s the categorical imperative really.
  • I see no issue with the suggestion, if there is any advantage then it would be the fairest approach.

    I have not agreed with the advantage in the past but it has been repeatedly claimed, with what must be a solid subscription to this logic as since I reached K3 ‘all’ my opponents are attacking second and most waiting for the last hour and their attack history shows they do this every battle. (Not sure where the players who have previously attacked them first are 😂).

    For me real life comes first, I can not guarantee I am free at the same time so I now attack first most of the time but I do wonder why someone with a much larger roster needs to exploit a time advantage too...

    As an international game to respect all timezones the best thing is to hide the score or rotate the start/finish time.
  • Rotating the start time by the same prime number hours every time is a better option for fairness.

    Personally, I prefer waiting as long as possible before deciding if I have to do GAC at all, so I wouldn't want the scores hidden.

    Only spent 10 minutes on my last win, and that's just great.
  • Iy4oy4s wrote: »
    They do this in MSF and I think it works great. Adds a layer of mystery. I also see TVF’s point as well, so I could go either way on this one.

    I think MSF only did it because like 80% of matches are decided by 1-shot wins alone. If you drop and your opponent didnt then you lose no matter what. So hiding scores deincentivises people from doing more risky plays that leave you bearly alive but still. 1-shotting for the guarenteed win.

    Swgoh however you can lose 2-3 more matches then your opponent and still win from banner efficency, not often and harder with more losses, but its possible.
  • Wed_Santa wrote: »
    Wed_Santa wrote: »
    Any aspect of the game can be a tactical opportunity- it’s up to you to have a bit of fun with it or to make it a frustration.

    It sounds like OP's schedule does not allow him to utilize the tactical opportunity of his choosing. If I had more fun or felt better going 1st/2nd but my schedule didn't allow it, that would be frustrating. And I might saunter over to the forums and make a post about my preferences and see if it gains any traction... and then lose faith in humanity ;)

    But isn’t that the point? You don’t choose tactical opportunities- you choose strategies. Tactical opportunities are what the objective conditions offer you.

    Of course the OP has every right to vent when the conditions don’t suit their chosen strategy but the point I was trying to make is that, rather than asking for a change to reduce the impact of the conditions faced as an individual on their personal strategy by removing sight of scores for all of us, they might be better looking for ways to find tactical opportunities instead. It’s the categorical imperative really.

    It sounds like I misunderstood your first post I replied to. I agree with your sentiment, but depending on how seriously one takes GAC and how one gets enjoyment from it, the meta can put heavy pressure on which strategies are viable.

    Veering slightly off topic, I think the broader issue is that there is no consensus sentiment towards GAC. Some see it purely as a source of revenue. Others see it as competitive. But, because it is a significant source of revenue, one can't realistically opt out completely, which means the try-hards are lumped in with the coasters.
Sign In or Register to comment.