Grand Arena Megathread

Replies

  • TVF
    24382 posts Member
    edited January 2019
    Dk_rek wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    Dk_rek wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    Yeah, that too. Wasn’t it active for at least one of the seasons?

    I think it was active for one of the events but there were bugs so they deactivated it. Not positive on that though.

    oz2ekxh97i63.png

    The struggle is real

    If you could stop posting obvious photoshopped images that are also completely unrelated to my posts that would be great, thank you.

    Its not photoshopped there you go being wrong again.... oh well

    Someone bothered to send one or two toon squads to battle your Vader team 99 times in GA.

    Sure.
    TVF's guild is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • TVF
    24382 posts Member
    JohnAran wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    Kithryn wrote: »
    Even in TW it's been about streamlining yourselves and not leveling anything except what you intend to use. It too punished you for GP bloat, it was just less noticeable as you were had 49 other players to possibly offset the way you inflated your GP by being more hyper focused on only viable squads.

    It's not really a new punishment, it's just more visible now.

    That's exactly the point tho, it balanced out with the other 49. And since most guilds had fluff, especially higher tier guilds, it wasn't ever even an issue, and wasn't really punishing.
    It's only in a one on one scenario that it really appears.

    Sandbagging was never even an issue in tw ?
    ?...? ??
    ?

    People claim that high end guilds make some of their members sit out so they will be matched up against lower GP guilds.
    TVF's guild is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • TVF wrote: »
    JohnAran wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    Kithryn wrote: »
    Even in TW it's been about streamlining yourselves and not leveling anything except what you intend to use. It too punished you for GP bloat, it was just less noticeable as you were had 49 other players to possibly offset the way you inflated your GP by being more hyper focused on only viable squads.

    It's not really a new punishment, it's just more visible now.

    That's exactly the point tho, it balanced out with the other 49. And since most guilds had fluff, especially higher tier guilds, it wasn't ever even an issue, and wasn't really punishing.
    It's only in a one on one scenario that it really appears.

    Sandbagging was never even an issue in tw ?
    ?...? ??
    ?

    People claim that high end guilds make some of their members sit out so they will be matched up against lower GP guilds.

    I thought that was a well known cheese tactic? People are also removing mods, etc. for easier matchmaking in Grand Arena. Again, proof that GP is an exploitable and poor matchmaking system. If a Discord bot can compare players’ stats down to speed mods, I’m sure CG can utilize all that Revan cash to improve matchmaking.
    Member of ‘Thugs in White Armor’
  • JohnAran
    312 posts Member
    edited January 2019
    TVF wrote: »
    JohnAran wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    Kithryn wrote: »
    Even in TW it's been about streamlining yourselves and not leveling anything except what you intend to use. It too punished you for GP bloat, it was just less noticeable as you were had 49 other players to possibly offset the way you inflated your GP by being more hyper focused on only viable squads.

    It's not really a new punishment, it's just more visible now.

    That's exactly the point tho, it balanced out with the other 49. And since most guilds had fluff, especially higher tier guilds, it wasn't ever even an issue, and wasn't really punishing.
    It's only in a one on one scenario that it really appears.

    Sandbagging was never even an issue in tw ?
    ?...? ??
    ?

    People claim that high end guilds make some of their members sit out so they will be matched up against lower GP guilds.

    I know, hence my very surprised reaction to the sentence i quoted. It’s not just a claim though, and it doesn’t even need to be on purpose.
  • No_Try
    4051 posts Member
    Kithryn wrote: »
    Even in TW it's been about streamlining yourselves and not leveling anything except what you intend to use. It too punished you for GP bloat, it was just less noticeable as you were had 49 other players to possibly offset the way you inflated your GP by being more hyper focused on only viable squads.

    It's not really a new punishment, it's just more visible now.

    TW puzzle is more complex than the straightforward sandbagging encouragement GA causes. In TW prizes scale with total guild GP. A guild will obviously strive to build more GP. We started getting same amount of zetas for losing what we got for winning a tier ago. You know how it rolls in TB. So now we have three modes where one encourages something, the other the reverse and one in between. One like Kyno will suggest it leads to richness, I beg to differ, it leads to inconsistency in basic game design principles.
  • Gannon
    1476 posts Member
    JohnAran wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    Kithryn wrote: »
    Even in TW it's been about streamlining yourselves and not leveling anything except what you intend to use. It too punished you for GP bloat, it was just less noticeable as you were had 49 other players to possibly offset the way you inflated your GP by being more hyper focused on only viable squads.

    It's not really a new punishment, it's just more visible now.

    That's exactly the point tho, it balanced out with the other 49. And since most guilds had fluff, especially higher tier guilds, it wasn't ever even an issue, and wasn't really punishing.
    It's only in a one on one scenario that it really appears.

    Sandbagging was never even an issue in tw ?
    ?...? ??
    ?

    "Sandbagging" was totally different when it came to tw. Having up to ten ppl sit out to match with lower gp opponents was the cheese there. Fluff toons v lean rosters was almost irrelevant. You'll notice I didn't say sandbagging want an issue, I said fluff wasn't.
  • Gannon
    1476 posts Member
    Geez, I already lost two members today.. Guess it's back to recruiting for me
    😟
  • Kithryn
    82 posts Member
    edited January 2019
    No_Try wrote: »
    Kithryn wrote: »
    Even in TW it's been about streamlining yourselves and not leveling anything except what you intend to use. It too punished you for GP bloat, it was just less noticeable as you were had 49 other players to possibly offset the way you inflated your GP by being more hyper focused on only viable squads.

    It's not really a new punishment, it's just more visible now.

    TW puzzle is more complex than the straightforward sandbagging encouragement GA causes. In TW prizes scale with total guild GP. A guild will obviously strive to build more GP. We started getting same amount of zetas for losing what we got for winning a tier ago. You know how it rolls in TB. So now we have three modes where one encourages something, the other the reverse and one in between. One like Kyno will suggest it leads to richness, I beg to differ, it leads to inconsistency in basic game design principles.

    No doubt TW was more complex due to the fact you where bringing other rosters with you and because rewards were set out in GP brackets. However, it still existed. A leaner meta focused Roster was always more desirable in TW, guilds rebalanced around those GP brackets and people could get sat out because of it.

    Really, I feel this is the driving force behind "Community TW" and GA changing it's victory goals every time by swapping boards and even to comps we couldn't practice anywhere else. A goal of making lesser valuable characters more useful at the cost of demolishing any sense of competitiveness these modes may have had. After all, if you can't plan or practice for a mode... it's really just luck of the draw on who happens to have what's needed to win.
  • Gannon
    1476 posts Member
    Kithryn wrote: »
    No_Try wrote: »
    Kithryn wrote: »
    Even in TW it's been about streamlining yourselves and not leveling anything except what you intend to use. It too punished you for GP bloat, it was just less noticeable as you were had 49 other players to possibly offset the way you inflated your GP by being more hyper focused on only viable squads.

    It's not really a new punishment, it's just more visible now.

    TW puzzle is more complex than the straightforward sandbagging encouragement GA causes. In TW prizes scale with total guild GP. A guild will obviously strive to build more GP. We started getting same amount of zetas for losing what we got for winning a tier ago. You know how it rolls in TB. So now we have three modes where one encourages something, the other the reverse and one in between. One like Kyno will suggest it leads to richness, I beg to differ, it leads to inconsistency in basic game design principles.

    No doubt TW was more complex due to the fact you where bringing other rosters with you and because rewards were set out in GP brackets. However, it still existed. A leaner meta focused Roster was always more desirable in TW, guilds rebalanced around those GP brackets and people could get sat out because of it.

    Really, I feel this is the driving force behind "Community TW" and GA changing it's victory goals every time by swapping boards and even to comps we couldn't practice anywhere else. A goal of making lesser valuable characters more useful at the cost of demolishing any sense of competitiveness these modes may have had. After all, if you can't plan or practice for a mode... it's really just luck of the draw on who happens to have what's needed to win.

    Yes, but in TW, even fluffy rosters could be viable. In GA it's always against you.
    I've had tws where one guy, with all his fluff, could take down over an entire sector alone, usually the middle zones with weaker teams or a Phoenix based zone but still.
    Plus theres exploits to matching, so lean rosters weren't as important as coordination and skill for TW.
  • Gannon wrote: »
    JohnAran wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    Kithryn wrote: »
    Even in TW it's been about streamlining yourselves and not leveling anything except what you intend to use. It too punished you for GP bloat, it was just less noticeable as you were had 49 other players to possibly offset the way you inflated your GP by being more hyper focused on only viable squads.

    It's not really a new punishment, it's just more visible now.

    That's exactly the point tho, it balanced out with the other 49. And since most guilds had fluff, especially higher tier guilds, it wasn't ever even an issue, and wasn't really punishing.
    It's only in a one on one scenario that it really appears.

    Sandbagging was never even an issue in tw ?
    ?...? ??
    ?

    "Sandbagging" was totally different when it came to tw. Having up to ten ppl sit out to match with lower gp opponents was the cheese there. Fluff toons v lean rosters was almost irrelevant. You'll notice I didn't say sandbagging want an issue, I said fluff wasn't.

    But it works exactly the same way, just with multiple rosters instead of one. Having ten people sit out doesn’t match you with a lower gp opponent, it matches you with a guild that has the same active gp as you. What it does is matching you with rosters weaker in average but stronger in numbers, exactly the same way a fluff heavy roster has more teams but weaker than a leaner roster.
  • Gannon
    1476 posts Member
    edited January 2019
    JohnAran wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    JohnAran wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    Kithryn wrote: »
    Even in TW it's been about streamlining yourselves and not leveling anything except what you intend to use. It too punished you for GP bloat, it was just less noticeable as you were had 49 other players to possibly offset the way you inflated your GP by being more hyper focused on only viable squads.

    It's not really a new punishment, it's just more visible now.

    That's exactly the point tho, it balanced out with the other 49. And since most guilds had fluff, especially higher tier guilds, it wasn't ever even an issue, and wasn't really punishing.
    It's only in a one on one scenario that it really appears.

    Sandbagging was never even an issue in tw ?
    ?...? ??
    ?

    "Sandbagging" was totally different when it came to tw. Having up to ten ppl sit out to match with lower gp opponents was the cheese there. Fluff toons v lean rosters was almost irrelevant. You'll notice I didn't say sandbagging want an issue, I said fluff wasn't.

    But it works exactly the same way, just with multiple rosters instead of one. Having ten people sit out doesn’t match you with a lower gp opponent, it matches you with a guild that has the same active gp as you. What it does is matching you with rosters weaker in average but stronger in numbers, exactly the same way a fluff heavy roster has more teams but weaker than a leaner roster.

    At 140m gp, we go in with 121m active. Our last dozen opponents were all between 85m-110m active. Most of those were all in.
    So yes, it matches you against lower gp.

    Edit: on paper that's how it was expected to work, which is cheesy enough. but in actuality the system matches you below that expected amount when you drop enough members.
  • TVF
    24382 posts Member
    Gannon wrote: »
    JohnAran wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    JohnAran wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    Kithryn wrote: »
    Even in TW it's been about streamlining yourselves and not leveling anything except what you intend to use. It too punished you for GP bloat, it was just less noticeable as you were had 49 other players to possibly offset the way you inflated your GP by being more hyper focused on only viable squads.

    It's not really a new punishment, it's just more visible now.

    That's exactly the point tho, it balanced out with the other 49. And since most guilds had fluff, especially higher tier guilds, it wasn't ever even an issue, and wasn't really punishing.
    It's only in a one on one scenario that it really appears.

    Sandbagging was never even an issue in tw ?
    ?...? ??
    ?

    "Sandbagging" was totally different when it came to tw. Having up to ten ppl sit out to match with lower gp opponents was the cheese there. Fluff toons v lean rosters was almost irrelevant. You'll notice I didn't say sandbagging want an issue, I said fluff wasn't.

    But it works exactly the same way, just with multiple rosters instead of one. Having ten people sit out doesn’t match you with a lower gp opponent, it matches you with a guild that has the same active gp as you. What it does is matching you with rosters weaker in average but stronger in numbers, exactly the same way a fluff heavy roster has more teams but weaker than a leaner roster.

    At 140m gp, we go in with 121m active.

    Why?
    TVF's guild is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • Gannon wrote: »
    JohnAran wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    JohnAran wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    Kithryn wrote: »
    Even in TW it's been about streamlining yourselves and not leveling anything except what you intend to use. It too punished you for GP bloat, it was just less noticeable as you were had 49 other players to possibly offset the way you inflated your GP by being more hyper focused on only viable squads.

    It's not really a new punishment, it's just more visible now.

    That's exactly the point tho, it balanced out with the other 49. And since most guilds had fluff, especially higher tier guilds, it wasn't ever even an issue, and wasn't really punishing.
    It's only in a one on one scenario that it really appears.

    Sandbagging was never even an issue in tw ?
    ?...? ??
    ?

    "Sandbagging" was totally different when it came to tw. Having up to ten ppl sit out to match with lower gp opponents was the cheese there. Fluff toons v lean rosters was almost irrelevant. You'll notice I didn't say sandbagging want an issue, I said fluff wasn't.

    But it works exactly the same way, just with multiple rosters instead of one. Having ten people sit out doesn’t match you with a lower gp opponent, it matches you with a guild that has the same active gp as you. What it does is matching you with rosters weaker in average but stronger in numbers, exactly the same way a fluff heavy roster has more teams but weaker than a leaner roster.

    At 140m gp, we go in with 121m active. Our last dozen opponents were all between 85m-110m active. Most of those were all in.
    So yes, it matches you against lower gp.

    Edit: on paper that's how it was expected to work, which is cheesy enough. but in actuality the system matches you below that expected amount when you drop enough members.

    I answered but it got lost when i edited (great feature^^) so i’ll sum it up quickly :
    I haven’t heard of that before but it doesn’t change the point, which is sandbagging works the same way in tw and ga, only on a global scale in tw. This just shows that tw matchmaking is worse than i thought^^
  • Gannon
    1476 posts Member
    TVF wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    JohnAran wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    JohnAran wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    Kithryn wrote: »
    Even in TW it's been about streamlining yourselves and not leveling anything except what you intend to use. It too punished you for GP bloat, it was just less noticeable as you were had 49 other players to possibly offset the way you inflated your GP by being more hyper focused on only viable squads.

    It's not really a new punishment, it's just more visible now.

    That's exactly the point tho, it balanced out with the other 49. And since most guilds had fluff, especially higher tier guilds, it wasn't ever even an issue, and wasn't really punishing.
    It's only in a one on one scenario that it really appears.

    Sandbagging was never even an issue in tw ?
    ?...? ??
    ?

    "Sandbagging" was totally different when it came to tw. Having up to ten ppl sit out to match with lower gp opponents was the cheese there. Fluff toons v lean rosters was almost irrelevant. You'll notice I didn't say sandbagging want an issue, I said fluff wasn't.

    But it works exactly the same way, just with multiple rosters instead of one. Having ten people sit out doesn’t match you with a lower gp opponent, it matches you with a guild that has the same active gp as you. What it does is matching you with rosters weaker in average but stronger in numbers, exactly the same way a fluff heavy roster has more teams but weaker than a leaner roster.

    At 140m gp, we go in with 121m active.

    Why?

    Cuz it's easy and almost guaranteed win, and those who don't play the war can sit out and not be fussed at for it.
    JohnAran wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    JohnAran wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    JohnAran wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    Kithryn wrote: »
    Even in TW it's been about streamlining yourselves and not leveling anything except what you intend to use. It too punished you for GP bloat, it was just less noticeable as you were had 49 other players to possibly offset the way you inflated your GP by being more hyper focused on only viable squads.

    It's not really a new punishment, it's just more visible now.

    That's exactly the point tho, it balanced out with the other 49. And since most guilds had fluff, especially higher tier guilds, it wasn't ever even an issue, and wasn't really punishing.
    It's only in a one on one scenario that it really appears.

    Sandbagging was never even an issue in tw ?
    ?...? ??
    ?

    "Sandbagging" was totally different when it came to tw. Having up to ten ppl sit out to match with lower gp opponents was the cheese there. Fluff toons v lean rosters was almost irrelevant. You'll notice I didn't say sandbagging want an issue, I said fluff wasn't.

    But it works exactly the same way, just with multiple rosters instead of one. Having ten people sit out doesn’t match you with a lower gp opponent, it matches you with a guild that has the same active gp as you. What it does is matching you with rosters weaker in average but stronger in numbers, exactly the same way a fluff heavy roster has more teams but weaker than a leaner roster.

    At 140m gp, we go in with 121m active. Our last dozen opponents were all between 85m-110m active. Most of those were all in.
    So yes, it matches you against lower gp.

    Edit: on paper that's how it was expected to work, which is cheesy enough. but in actuality the system matches you below that expected amount when you drop enough members.

    I answered but it got lost when i edited (great feature^^) so i’ll sum it up quickly :
    I haven’t heard of that before but it doesn’t change the point, which is sandbagging works the same way in tw and ga, only on a global scale in tw. This just shows that tw matchmaking is worse than i thought^^

    Yea it's really bad, which is even funnier that they're not fixing it.. But my point was that it's not so much "lean rosters" as exploiting the way it prioritizes matches. Nobody (except maybe one) in my guild has lean rosters, we're all long term players and our main focus is tb.. So everyone has everything at 7* g7 and max level for the most part
  • When people set no defense we should get both the full clear and +64 points for each squad not set as we cleared them with minimal effort.
  • Aluxtu wrote: »
    When people set no defense we should get both the full clear and +64 points for each squad not set as we cleared them with minimal effort.

    Agreed. But we should also get credit toward the quest. I saved Bastila ad Hoda, Maul and NS for offense this time to finish the quest (3rd round) and my opponent didnt set any defense. I want my 5 Zetas.

    The sad thing is I just posted a few hours ago that I hadn't run into this before. Oops. All that strategizing figuring out what I needed to set on defense to win and...
  • Aluxtu wrote: »
    When people set no defense we should get both the full clear and +64 points for each squad not set as we cleared them with minimal effort.

    Interesting you brought this up. I came here to post something on this but a different concern. My opponent only set 4 of 6 defenses. I set all 6. I wiped all of his defenses easily 59-60 points each and the ship as well. However if he does the same to me, he will win despite not setting 2 defenses. Has anyone brought this up? I'm new to this board.
  • Liath
    5140 posts Member
    RhysSolo wrote: »
    Aluxtu wrote: »
    When people set no defense we should get both the full clear and +64 points for each squad not set as we cleared them with minimal effort.

    Interesting you brought this up. I came here to post something on this but a different concern. My opponent only set 4 of 6 defenses. I set all 6. I wiped all of his defenses easily 59-60 points each and the ship as well. However if he does the same to me, he will win despite not setting 2 defenses. Has anyone brought this up? I'm new to this board.

    You have a minimum 26 point advantage for each team that you set and he didn't. If you wiped all his defenses easily there shouldn't be any way for him to make that up.
  • Don't they give extra points for using less than a full squad? An "underdog " battle?
  • Gannon
    1476 posts Member
    Don't they give extra points for using less than a full squad? An "underdog " battle?

    In my tier defense= 90, offense= 16-64
    Wouldn't work here
  • 8fs4uo53fyni.jpeg

    🤪

    📄🧟‍♀️
    Member of ‘Thugs in White Armor’
  • Gannon
    1476 posts Member
    8fs4uo53fyni.jpeg

    🤪

    📄🧟‍♀️

    Where is that guy? I may recruit him just for that
    😁
  • Bubblechomp
    784 posts Member
    edited January 2019
    I just love all the delusional fools who argue that this isn’t a thing.
    Member of ‘Thugs in White Armor’
  • TVF
    24382 posts Member
    Of course it's a thing people are doing. That doesn't make it a thing worth doing.
    TVF's guild is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • Dk_rek
    3299 posts Member
    edited January 2019
    7yaj7bqnt58s.png
    Another thirty two G12 difference matchup

    Look at this guys defense
  • Dk_rek
    3299 posts Member
    edited January 2019
    .
  • TVF
    24382 posts Member
    Dk_rek wrote: »
    7yaj7bqnt58s.png
    Another thirty two G12 difference matchup

    Look at this guys defense

    Nice job sandbagging yourself. You aren't proving anything though.
    TVF's guild is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • Dk_rek
    3299 posts Member
    TVF wrote: »
    Dk_rek wrote: »
    7yaj7bqnt58s.png
    Another thirty two G12 difference matchup

    Look at this guys defense

    Nice job sandbagging yourself. You aren't proving anything though.

    Nothing to prove to NPC’s such as thou
  • TVF
    24382 posts Member
    That makes no sense as usual. Good day.
    TVF's guild is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
Sign In or Register to comment.