If you don't want to put any effort into GA to get rewards, I suggest option 5- don't join....
Sorry, you don't get to dictate how I play.
Seems fair, right?
So why should you get to dictate how your opponnent can play when you refuse to set a D?
Don't join or have random toons autoset on D. But you should not be allowed to do EXACTLY what you say is unfair.
I'm not choosing how they play. They have all of the same options that I have.
No they dont. If you set no D, they dont have the choice to attack. You are taking their choice away. And as you said in your example, they would probably beat you anyway and you are depriving them of the choice to attack and credits. Should be patched. Really there is no logical or reasonable argument that this should be allowed.
As I said previously: only if I've chosen option 4 and they haven't.
If they have deployed defenses, and they have a superior GP, I would maximize my chance at taking a territory, and thereby earning credits, by committing everything to offense. My opponent is already assured of superior rewards by my loss even without the opportunity to attach. The best I can do to salvage something from the match is to try to earn credits. For me, and I suspect for many others, the reason to join GA is to earn some type of reward. Allocating all of my resources to offense is a way to obtain those rewards. This is a perfectly rational approach.
Its the rational choice for you under the current rules. Clearly the credits are important to you. But you are denying them the right to make that exact same choice and earn them and have fun attacking.
It is not the rational choice for a competitive game mode.
The rules need to be changed so people like you can't deprive others of the choice to play or earn rewards. No sense arguing further. You have proved the point by saying you want the choice to attack and earn credits. Everyone should have that choice. Under the current rules, they don't. Simple.
(Oh, good we're entering game theory territory)
I will submit that this is exactly a rational choice for a competitive game. GA has multiple reward currencies. One of which is credits. Personally, I would prefer the other items but if the choice is credits or nothing then the rational choice is credits. If a person prefers credits over the other items then the rational choice would be to work within the rules to obtain the rewards they desire.
What is not rational is to pursue a strategy that maximizes my opponent's rewards while minimizing my own. The caveat to this being that if I help my opponent benefit that I would earn "good will" or some other nebulous long-term benefit. Since there is a large pool of player it is unlikely that I will ever again encounter the same opponent in GA. (Note this is a different situation from Arena where the population is fixed). Therefore the rational focus is on short-term gain either credits or the other rewards.
You are assuming that I have adopted this strategy. It is irrelevant if I have. What is relevant is that this strategy is not adopted out of a wish deprive an opponent of reward or fun but to maximize personal rewards. That is the core of rational decision making. Ideally, the rules would allow every player rational choices.
If you don't want to put any effort into GA to get rewards, I suggest option 5- don't join....
Sorry, you don't get to dictate how I play.
Seems fair, right?
So why should you get to dictate how your opponnent can play when you refuse to set a D?
Don't join or have random toons autoset on D. But you should not be allowed to do EXACTLY what you say is unfair.
I'm not choosing how they play. They have all of the same options that I have.
No they dont. If you set no D, they dont have the choice to attack. You are taking their choice away. And as you said in your example, they would probably beat you anyway and you are depriving them of the choice to attack and credits. Should be patched. Really there is no logical or reasonable argument that this should be allowed.
As I said previously: only if I've chosen option 4 and they haven't.
If they have deployed defenses, and they have a superior GP, I would maximize my chance at taking a territory, and thereby earning credits, by committing everything to offense. My opponent is already assured of superior rewards by my loss even without the opportunity to attach. The best I can do to salvage something from the match is to try to earn credits. For me, and I suspect for many others, the reason to join GA is to earn some type of reward. Allocating all of my resources to offense is a way to obtain those rewards. This is a perfectly rational approach.
Its the rational choice for you under the current rules. Clearly the credits are important to you. But you are denying them the right to make that exact same choice and earn them and have fun attacking.
It is not the rational choice for a competitive game mode.
The rules need to be changed so people like you can't deprive others of the choice to play or earn rewards. No sense arguing further. You have proved the point by saying you want the choice to attack and earn credits. Everyone should have that choice. Under the current rules, they don't. Simple.
(Oh, good we're entering game theory territory)
I will submit that this is exactly a rational choice for a competitive game. GA has multiple reward currencies. One of which is credits. Personally, I would prefer the other items but if the choice is credits or nothing then the rational choice is credits. If a person prefers credits over the other items then the rational choice would be to work within the rules to obtain the rewards they desire.
What is not rational is to pursue a strategy that maximizes my opponent's rewards while minimizing my own. The caveat to this being that if I help my opponent benefit that I would earn "good will" or some other nebulous long-term benefit. Since there is a large pool of player it is unlikely that I will ever again encounter the same opponent in GA. (Note this is a different situation from Arena where the population is fixed). Therefore the rational focus is on short-term gain either credits or the other rewards.
You are assuming that I have adopted this strategy. It is irrelevant if I have. What is relevant is that this strategy is not adopted out of a wish deprive an opponent of reward or fun but to maximize personal rewards. That is the core of rational decision making. Ideally, the rules would allow every player rational choices.
This isnt a zero sum game. Again, you have proved the point. By not setting D you dont allow every player the same rational choice to attack. Exactly. The. Point. Thanks.
Have a nice day with your contined rationalizations.
the original comment was the fact they were allowed to attack in the first place when they set no defense ..that's the issue i have and the only issue i have ...if you don't set a defense you should be locked out of Attacking period and not get an opportunity for any type of kill awards when the other player who did set a defense is not going to be allowed to get those awards because they cant attack. Either they need to make it were they cant attack at all , or make it were even if you fight someone with no defense you get the awards IE credits as if you did defeat them.
That’s all you want is 600k credits?
and your reply shows you are missing the entire point , i don't care about the awards , i care about a system that awards players by letting them attack when they didn't bother to set a defense..not setting a defense gives the player who is actually playing the game zero chance at those low credits. The point is if they don't set a defense for you to attack then they shouldn't be allowed to attack you. not doing that gives them access to awards you as the one actually bothering to play have no access to the credits and the kills going towards achievements. Whats so hard about that? If shows that GA is broken and needs some fixes rather it be auto defense if you dont select or just flat out removing the player from the pool for that round and not awarding even a small award for not trying at all.
Well this confirms that you only care about the 600k credits
If you don't want to put any effort into GA to get rewards, I suggest option 5- don't join....
Sorry, you don't get to dictate how I play.
Seems fair, right?
So why should you get to dictate how your opponnent can play when you refuse to set a D?
Don't join or have random toons autoset on D. But you should not be allowed to do EXACTLY what you say is unfair.
I'm not choosing how they play. They have all of the same options that I have.
No they dont. If you set no D, they dont have the choice to attack. You are taking their choice away. And as you said in your example, they would probably beat you anyway and you are depriving them of the choice to attack and credits. Should be patched. Really there is no logical or reasonable argument that this should be allowed.
As I said previously: only if I've chosen option 4 and they haven't.
If they have deployed defenses, and they have a superior GP, I would maximize my chance at taking a territory, and thereby earning credits, by committing everything to offense. My opponent is already assured of superior rewards by my loss even without the opportunity to attach. The best I can do to salvage something from the match is to try to earn credits. For me, and I suspect for many others, the reason to join GA is to earn some type of reward. Allocating all of my resources to offense is a way to obtain those rewards. This is a perfectly rational approach.
Its the rational choice for you under the current rules. Clearly the credits are important to you. But you are denying them the right to make that exact same choice and earn them and have fun attacking.
It is not the rational choice for a competitive game mode.
The rules need to be changed so people like you can't deprive others of the choice to play or earn rewards. No sense arguing further. You have proved the point by saying you want the choice to attack and earn credits. Everyone should have that choice. Under the current rules, they don't. Simple.
(Oh, good we're entering game theory territory)
I will submit that this is exactly a rational choice for a competitive game. GA has multiple reward currencies. One of which is credits. Personally, I would prefer the other items but if the choice is credits or nothing then the rational choice is credits. If a person prefers credits over the other items then the rational choice would be to work within the rules to obtain the rewards they desire.
What is not rational is to pursue a strategy that maximizes my opponent's rewards while minimizing my own. The caveat to this being that if I help my opponent benefit that I would earn "good will" or some other nebulous long-term benefit. Since there is a large pool of player it is unlikely that I will ever again encounter the same opponent in GA. (Note this is a different situation from Arena where the population is fixed). Therefore the rational focus is on short-term gain either credits or the other rewards.
You are assuming that I have adopted this strategy. It is irrelevant if I have. What is relevant is that this strategy is not adopted out of a wish deprive an opponent of reward or fun but to maximize personal rewards. That is the core of rational decision making. Ideally, the rules would allow every player rational choices.
This isnt a zero sum game. Again, you have proved the point. By not setting D you dont allow every player the same rational choice to attack. Exactly. The. Point. Thanks.
Have a nice day with your contined rationalizations.
Actually GA is zero sum. A person's choice to deploy defenses or not has a direct impact on how much or little an opponent can benefit. If it was treated as such by the developers then the rules would reflect that.
then the crys of , how did a auto defense beat me , the player had no input! no they need to flat out remove no defense and make it where when you sign up you set your defense right then and there to complete the sign up phase , once set up then you have 24 hours to make changes between each phase that way you always play against player inputted defenses and not AI generated
If you lose to an auto set defense , you deserve to lose , pretty simple. The AI in no way shape or form is better than an actual person lol.
and you fail to see the point a auto defense has no player input in selecting the squads a player may have taken his best teams and kept them on offense while the AI might select a sith Team you cant beat on def. Again no Player input means the player shouldnt be in the event period to get the awards. Maybe not a problem for those with 3m power and a whole arsenal of characters to choose from , but for those of us with 900k to 1.2m with limited number of squads available it becomes a problem.
The auto set defenses are just teams of 5 made from the roster of the player starting at the highest power and going down. it doesn't select "teams" just places 5 toons and then moves to the next 5. this may end up with 1 or 2 actual teams as things line up but it is unlikely.
Don't know, wouldn't it be more fun if it picked starting from the bottom going up?
Er u do realise that leaves all the best teams for offense still? And in fact that might help the guy who didnt want to defend at all, win.
Er u do realise that leaves you the ability to take one high level toon in to each team and beat the snot out of them, getting extra points for 6, 8, 10, etc., teams while your opponent with all his highest level toons has to try the same thing against your "balanced" defense to win?
Until they “fix” GA, I will continue not setting defense. Why? Because it’s a legal game move. Is it moral? Doesn’t matter. Most business is immoral. This is what I will do to protest GA and get out of it what I can. It’s poorly designed.
If you don't want to put any effort into GA to get rewards, I suggest option 5- don't join....
Sorry, you don't get to dictate how I play.
Seems fair, right?
So why should you get to dictate how your opponnent can play when you refuse to set a D?
Don't join or have random toons autoset on D. But you should not be allowed to do EXACTLY what you say is unfair.
I'm not choosing how they play. They have all of the same options that I have.
No they dont. If you set no D, they dont have the choice to attack. You are taking their choice away. And as you said in your example, they would probably beat you anyway and you are depriving them of the choice to attack and credits. Should be patched. Really there is no logical or reasonable argument that this should be allowed.
As I said previously: only if I've chosen option 4 and they haven't.
If they have deployed defenses, and they have a superior GP, I would maximize my chance at taking a territory, and thereby earning credits, by committing everything to offense. My opponent is already assured of superior rewards by my loss even without the opportunity to attach. The best I can do to salvage something from the match is to try to earn credits. For me, and I suspect for many others, the reason to join GA is to earn some type of reward. Allocating all of my resources to offense is a way to obtain those rewards. This is a perfectly rational approach.
Its the rational choice for you under the current rules. Clearly the credits are important to you. But you are denying them the right to make that exact same choice and earn them and have fun attacking.
It is not the rational choice for a competitive game mode.
The rules need to be changed so people like you can't deprive others of the choice to play or earn rewards. No sense arguing further. You have proved the point by saying you want the choice to attack and earn credits. Everyone should have that choice. Under the current rules, they don't. Simple.
(Oh, good we're entering game theory territory)
What is not rational is to pursue a strategy that maximizes my opponent's rewards while minimizing my own. The caveat to this being that if I help my opponent benefit that I would earn "good will" or some other nebulous long-term benefit.
This...that guy could be in your arena shard or in a guildies arena shard...I don't want or need anyones good will if the guy saying "but it's competitive".....well then like this guy said....it's the +EV strategy choice..
Like he said...I don't do it...but fully endorse anyone who does when they cannot win
As to that good will when they send you 200 messages after you set your D and get crushed rubbing it in like a jerkface...yeah good will right.......that's glorious...
I dont care about credits, i just like destroying my opponents teams, last GA i aced all my opponents and didnt lose any teams on defense and so far i am on the path to do the same this GA, when my opponents dont place teams it is boring because then they nvr atk ether so its just a wasted 2 days for us both
With that said i think last place in GA should get no rewards, if people cant join and afk and still get pay outs then less will do it
the original comment was the fact they were allowed to attack in the first place when they set no defense ..that's the issue i have and the only issue i have ...if you don't set a defense you should be locked out of Attacking period and not get an opportunity for any type of kill awards when the other player who did set a defense is not going to be allowed to get those awards because they cant attack. Either they need to make it were they cant attack at all , or make it were even if you fight someone with no defense you get the awards IE credits as if you did defeat them.
That’s all you want is 600k credits?
1.8M over the course of a GA if it happens 3 times. Its happened to some of my guildmates twice in one bracket before.
But no, its not just the credit loss. It also allows the slacker to earn more credits because he set no D and can use his whole roster to beat teams. And more importantly, as you said attacking is fun, and you deprive the other player of that.
Look, there are only 3 answers to why people dont set Defense:
1. To deprive the other player of credits;
2. To, as you said, "have fun" attacking with their whole roster, and as a result deprives the other player of the same fun of attacking; or
3. They dont care and just want last place rewards for doing absolutely nothing, while at the same time depriving 3 other players they face in their bracket of the fun of attacking.
All 3 of those answers hurt the other player, no matter what your selfish reasons for doing it are.
No matter the intent the result is griefing the other player in some fashion, and the other player can do absolutely nothing about it.
You want to mail it in? Fine. I'll take the win. Wish my current opponent would set crap teams. But the other player should not be harmed by it and you should not be rewarded for it.
Should be patched.
You left out an option: They forgot.
I’d be fine with a patch. But until then, I will use this opportunity.
You don’t want to deprive other people of rewards? By that logic, you better stop competing in arena, or competing at all for that matter. Is my decision “immoral?” Maybe. But that’s how you win. Most businesses make tons of immoral decisions for their well-being, it’s not irregular.
So I will continue to set no D, reap “1.8m” credits from it, and allow my opponents to win and achieve free zetas and good gear. Because GA was already poorly designed. I’m sorry that you can’t restrict my ability to play fair.
If you don't want to put any effort into GA to get rewards, I suggest option 5- don't join....
Sorry, you don't get to dictate how I play.
Seems fair, right?
So why should you get to dictate how your opponnent can play when you refuse to set a D?
Don't join or have random toons autoset on D. But you should not be allowed to do EXACTLY what you say is unfair.
I'm not choosing how they play. They have all of the same options that I have.
No they dont. If you set no D, they dont have the choice to attack. You are taking their choice away. And as you said in your example, they would probably beat you anyway and you are depriving them of the choice to attack and credits. Should be patched. Really there is no logical or reasonable argument that this should be allowed.
As I said previously: only if I've chosen option 4 and they haven't.
If they have deployed defenses, and they have a superior GP, I would maximize my chance at taking a territory, and thereby earning credits, by committing everything to offense. My opponent is already assured of superior rewards by my loss even without the opportunity to attach. The best I can do to salvage something from the match is to try to earn credits. For me, and I suspect for many others, the reason to join GA is to earn some type of reward. Allocating all of my resources to offense is a way to obtain those rewards. This is a perfectly rational approach.
Its the rational choice for you under the current rules. Clearly the credits are important to you. But you are denying them the right to make that exact same choice and earn them and have fun attacking.
It is not the rational choice for a competitive game mode.
The rules need to be changed so people like you can't deprive others of the choice to play or earn rewards. No sense arguing further. You have proved the point by saying you want the choice to attack and earn credits. Everyone should have that choice. Under the current rules, they don't. Simple.
(Oh, good we're entering game theory territory)
I will submit that this is exactly a rational choice for a competitive game. GA has multiple reward currencies. One of which is credits. Personally, I would prefer the other items but if the choice is credits or nothing then the rational choice is credits. If a person prefers credits over the other items then the rational choice would be to work within the rules to obtain the rewards they desire.
What is not rational is to pursue a strategy that maximizes my opponent's rewards while minimizing my own. The caveat to this being that if I help my opponent benefit that I would earn "good will" or some other nebulous long-term benefit. Since there is a large pool of player it is unlikely that I will ever again encounter the same opponent in GA. (Note this is a different situation from Arena where the population is fixed). Therefore the rational focus is on short-term gain either credits or the other rewards.
You are assuming that I have adopted this strategy. It is irrelevant if I have. What is relevant is that this strategy is not adopted out of a wish deprive an opponent of reward or fun but to maximize personal rewards. That is the core of rational decision making. Ideally, the rules would allow every player rational choices.
This isnt a zero sum game. Again, you have proved the point. By not setting D you dont allow every player the same rational choice to attack. Exactly. The. Point. Thanks.
Have a nice day with your contined rationalizations.
lol I'm pretty sure saying "you won the argument" cause you said so doesn't mean what you think it means....
I'm not even sure what we are arguing about...CG caved to the incessant whining way back and are working on a fix.... your "logic" did not win any argument..the fact CG said they were going to make sure you get your Saaatteeeesssfaaaccctioon but were working on it kinda won the argument.
GUUUMMIIIE my Defense ppl : "CG this is not fair.... I wanted to embarass my opponent and then mock him over text relentlessly (something that should be dealt with)
CG: We are working on a fix
GUUMMIIIEE my Defense ppl ": "CG do you realize I have not mocked anyone in a month what's the point of getting first place rewards when I can't mock anyone or feel good aboot muyself
CG : We are working on a fix it will take time as we have other thinks like Finn and such we are working on, stuff
GUUMMIIIEEE my Defense ppl : "But i want my entitlement check now, NOW NOW NOW gimmie gimmie"
CG : We are working on a fix please be patient
Me : Can we get some ship content instead of worrying about people whining about non issues
I dont care about credits, i just like destroying my opponents teams, last GA i aced all my opponents and didnt lose any teams on defense and so far i am on the path to do the same this GA, when my opponents dont place teams it is boring because then they nvr atk ether so its just a wasted 2 days for us both
With that said i think last place in GA should get no rewards, if people cant join and afk and still get pay outs then less will do it
What if the last place person tried to win? “Oh I’m sorry, you tried the best you could and failed, so you get nothing! How was that grand waste of time?”
Until they “fix” GA, I will continue not setting defense. Why? Because it’s a legal game move. Is it moral? Doesn’t matter. Most business is immoral. This is what I will do to protest GA and get out of it what I can. It’s poorly designed.
Honestly good for you they cry about you taking away their choice while trying to take away yours....and winning the best rewards while doing it..... it's hilarious
I dont care about credits, i just like destroying my opponents teams, last GA i aced all my opponents and didnt lose any teams on defense and so far i am on the path to do the same this GA, when my opponents dont place teams it is boring because then they nvr atk ether so its just a wasted 2 days for us both
With that said i think last place in GA should get no rewards, if people cant join and afk and still get pay outs then less will do it
What if the last place person tried to win? “Oh I’m sorry, you tried the best you could and failed, so you get nothing! How was that grand waste of time?”
They tried which means the might learn and thus do better next GA, if they get 8th they dont deserve anything, you fight people at your same or similar power so its not unfair to expect you to win 33% of the fights to atleast get somthing...like “i did all 5 of my arena fights so give me top 200 or 100 awards because its unfair for me to have to actually win”
Until they “fix” GA, I will continue not setting defense. Why? Because it’s a legal game move. Is it moral? Doesn’t matter. Most business is immoral. This is what I will do to protest GA and get out of it what I can. It’s poorly designed.
Honestly good for you they cry about you taking away their choice while trying to take away yours....and winning the best rewards while doing it..... it's hilarious
We are asking for a change in the game that would secure our ability to actually play, to have fun, which is why most of us downloaded the game in the first place. You did nothing here except moking, belittling and trolling. So of course negative people such as you will be fine ruining other’s experiences just because. We know selfish, unfun people exist (we can see quite a few on this very thread), we’re meeting them in ga already. Personally i’m not interested in hearing poor justifications, i’m here to ask for their negative impact to be removed from the game.
Nihion summed it all up. Negative people will spread their negativity as long as they have the possibility to do so, because they can and that’s what they do. So we are asking for a change so that they won’t be able to do so anymore. It’s simple and really, as VonZant said, does not warrant any kind of argument.
Until they “fix” GA, I will continue not setting defense. Why? Because it’s a legal game move. Is it moral? Doesn’t matter. Most business is immoral. This is what I will do to protest GA and get out of it what I can. It’s poorly designed.
Honestly good for you they cry about you taking away their choice while trying to take away yours....and winning the best rewards while doing it..... it's hilarious
We are asking for a change in the game that would secure our ability to actually play, to have fun, which is why most of us downloaded the game in the first place. You did nothing here except moking, belittling and trolling. So of course negative people such as you will be fine ruining other’s experiences just because. We know selfish, unfun people exist (we can see quite a few on this very thread), we’re meeting them in ga already. Personally i’m not interested in hearing poor justifications, i’m here to ask for their negative impact to be removed from the game.
Nihion summed it all up. Negative people will spread their negativity as long as they have the possibility to do so, because they can and that’s what they do. So we are asking for a change so that they won’t be able to do so anymore. It’s simple and really, as VonZant said, does not warrant any kind of argument.
Except it does as its your selfish point of view. Because those ppl who set no D also have an issue with how this event is set up. But only your opinion matters right? If they punished ppl for not setting Defense based on fair play or what not , theyd have to eliminate shards. You know for fair play so ppl cant be kept from rewards they earned. So since thatll never happen, neither will this
Until they “fix” GA, I will continue not setting defense. Why? Because it’s a legal game move. Is it moral? Doesn’t matter. Most business is immoral. This is what I will do to protest GA and get out of it what I can. It’s poorly designed.
Honestly good for you they cry about you taking away their choice while trying to take away yours....and winning the best rewards while doing it..... it's hilarious
We are asking for a change in the game that would secure our ability to actually play, to have fun, which is why most of us downloaded the game in the first place. You did nothing here except moking, belittling and trolling. So of course negative people such as you will be fine ruining other’s experiences just because. We know selfish, unfun people exist (we can see quite a few on this very thread), we’re meeting them in ga already. Personally i’m not interested in hearing poor justifications, i’m here to ask for their negative impact to be removed from the game.
Nihion summed it all up. Negative people will spread their negativity as long as they have the possibility to do so, because they can and that’s what they do. So we are asking for a change so that they won’t be able to do so anymore. It’s simple and really, as VonZant said, does not warrant any kind of argument.
I would say that my argument is warranted. And if you would like my ability to argue to be taken from me, then you have succeeded in the belittling. I’m simply expressing my right to play the game using legal strategies. I intend to spread no negativity. But until they fix this, my right to use an “unfair” and “immoral” strategy is protected. Just like people used the zombie Traya loop, or the Finn/C3PO one. By all means, call for a fix, but I’m actually giving people rewards by using this form of protest, so please leave me alone.
I dont care about credits, i just like destroying my opponents teams, last GA i aced all my opponents and didnt lose any teams on defense and so far i am on the path to do the same this GA, when my opponents dont place teams it is boring because then they nvr atk ether so its just a wasted 2 days for us both
With that said i think last place in GA should get no rewards, if people cant join and afk and still get pay outs then less will do it
What if the last place person tried to win? “Oh I’m sorry, you tried the best you could and failed, so you get nothing! How was that grand waste of time?”
They tried which means the might learn and thus do better next GA, if they get 8th they dont deserve anything, you fight people at your same or similar power so its not unfair to expect you to win 33% of the fights to atleast get somthing...like “i did all 5 of my arena fights so give me top 200 or 100 awards because its unfair for me to have to actually win”
And this is where GA’s poor design comes to play: GP is not a good representation of a players strength. I could have 80 level 1 characters and 40 extremely powerful ones, or a selective balance including a lot of G8’s. So someone will always be bound to lose before GA begins because they are simply worse. No strategy to it. So by giving the last place player nothing, you are neglecting someone who might just not have planned out their farming well. Think of it as participation: Even the loser gets recognition for being a part of or trying in the event. They deserve those rewards.
Until they “fix” GA, I will continue not setting defense. Why? Because it’s a legal game move. Is it moral? Doesn’t matter. Most business is immoral. This is what I will do to protest GA and get out of it what I can. It’s poorly designed.
Honestly good for you they cry about you taking away their choice while trying to take away yours....and winning the best rewards while doing it..... it's hilarious
We are asking for a change in the game that would secure our ability to actually play, to have fun, which is why most of us downloaded the game in the first place. You did nothing here except moking, belittling and trolling. So of course negative people such as you will be fine ruining other’s experiences just because. We know selfish, unfun people exist (we can see quite a few on this very thread), we’re meeting them in ga already. Personally i’m not interested in hearing poor justifications, i’m here to ask for their negative impact to be removed from the game.
Nihion summed it all up. Negative people will spread their negativity as long as they have the possibility to do so, because they can and that’s what they do. So we are asking for a change so that they won’t be able to do so anymore. It’s simple and really, as VonZant said, does not warrant any kind of argument.
Except it does as its your selfish point of view. Because those ppl who set no D also have an issue with how this event is set up. But only your opinion matters right? If they punished ppl for not setting Defense based on fair play or what not , theyd have to eliminate shards. You know for fair play so ppl cant be kept from rewards they earned. So since thatll never happen, neither will this
It’s selfish of me to want to actually play the game ? Sure, you can say what you want for the sake of being argumentative, i don’t mind.
The issue they have with the game mode (mostly balance issue) has nothing to do with this thread. Their opponents have nothing to do with the matchmaking, they are not responsible for the issues they have and they can’t do anything to change it. They are just people like them, trying to have fun in a game they like.
You talk about punishment, i don’t see any punishment anywhere. So i don’t understand what you mean here. No one asked for punishments.
You keep bringing shard chats, i don’t know why since again it’s 100% unrelated to this thread and the fact that people in ga right now are deprived of actual gameplay by others, and we are asking for that to not be possible anymore, so that all can have fun playing the game.
I haven’t said anywhere that only my opinion matters. Some people here just seem to be out looking for fights and arguments just for the sake of it. I admit i don’t understand that.
Until they “fix” GA, I will continue not setting defense. Why? Because it’s a legal game move. Is it moral? Doesn’t matter. Most business is immoral. This is what I will do to protest GA and get out of it what I can. It’s poorly designed.
Honestly good for you they cry about you taking away their choice while trying to take away yours....and winning the best rewards while doing it..... it's hilarious
We are asking for a change in the game that would secure our ability to actually play, to have fun, which is why most of us downloaded the game in the first place. You did nothing here except moking, belittling and trolling. So of course negative people such as you will be fine ruining other’s experiences just because. We know selfish, unfun people exist (we can see quite a few on this very thread), we’re meeting them in ga already. Personally i’m not interested in hearing poor justifications, i’m here to ask for their negative impact to be removed from the game.
Nihion summed it all up. Negative people will spread their negativity as long as they have the possibility to do so, because they can and that’s what they do. So we are asking for a change so that they won’t be able to do so anymore. It’s simple and really, as VonZant said, does not warrant any kind of argument.
Except it does as its your selfish point of view. Because those ppl who set no D also have an issue with how this event is set up. But only your opinion matters right? If they punished ppl for not setting Defense based on fair play or what not , theyd have to eliminate shards. You know for fair play so ppl cant be kept from rewards they earned. So since thatll never happen, neither will this
It’s selfish of me to want to actually play the game ? Sure, you can say what you want for the sake of being argumentative, i don’t mind.
The issue they have with the game mode (mostly balance issue) has nothing to do with this thread. Their opponents have nothing to do with the matchmaking, they are not responsible for the issues they have and they can’t do anything to change it. They are just people like them, trying to have fun in a game they like.
You talk about punishment, i don’t see any punishment anywhere. So i don’t understand what you mean here. No one asked for punishments.
You keep bringing shard chats, i don’t know why since again it’s 100% unrelated to this thread and the fact that people in ga right now are deprived of actual gameplay by others, and we are asking for that to not be possible anymore, so that all can have fun playing the game.
I haven’t said anywhere that only my opinion matters. Some people here just seem to be out looking for fights and arguments just for the sake of it. I admit i don’t understand that.
Technically you are playing the game. Not setting defense is a LEGAL MOVE, and you are still setting defense and getting better rewards than I am. I admit that GA is flawed, and that’s why I do this. So that they change it!
GUUUMMIIIE my Defense ppl : "CG this is not fair.... I wanted to embarass my opponent and then mock him over text relentlessly (something that should be dealt with)
GUUMMIIIEE my Defense ppl ": "CG do you realize I have not mocked anyone in a month what's the point of getting first place rewards when I can't mock anyone or feel good aboot muyself
hahaha, what? You think anyone who beats you is "mocking you?" Are you seriously that insecure? Who hurt you?
GUUUMMIIIE my Defense ppl : "CG this is not fair.... I wanted to embarass my opponent and then mock him over text relentlessly (something that should be dealt with)
GUUMMIIIEE my Defense ppl ": "CG do you realize I have not mocked anyone in a month what's the point of getting first place rewards when I can't mock anyone or feel good aboot muyself
hahaha, what? You think anyone who beats you is "mocking you?" Are you seriously that insecure? Who hurt you?
Aw man, I love when one guy calls someone’s whole side negative, and then some guy from his side is really negative so that I can say that his whole side is negative, but nah man. Humans were born negativity.
GUUUMMIIIE my Defense ppl : "CG this is not fair.... I wanted to embarass my opponent and then mock him over text relentlessly (something that should be dealt with)
GUUMMIIIEE my Defense ppl ": "CG do you realize I have not mocked anyone in a month what's the point of getting first place rewards when I can't mock anyone or feel good aboot muyself
hahaha, what? You think anyone who beats you is "mocking you?" Are you seriously that insecure? Who hurt you?
me....no why would i care about a phone game...let's not get crazy now...
I mean some people take this stuff wayyyy to serious to the end sometimes "ya know what i mean ?" They don't need people giving them that bump over the edge
Check out the threads on "the other sites people talk about this game on" go check out the threads my dude...
I would fathom anything that could be considered hurtful that would actually make someone not want to play this game would be pretty high on my "not good for the game" thing.... I like the chat feature just really really hate those threads going around with the ppl abusing them
I keep wanting to do this, and I should have not set D on the first round, I just forgot that was an option. lol.
I do so wish I'd get someone who doesn't set D though, I'd love a free win and free rewards, lol.
I still can't believe people are complaining about this still. Why can't you give me all your free wins, I'd gladly go up against people who don't set D, it is there right to do so, they can play the game how they like
I dont care about credits, i just like destroying my opponents teams, last GA i aced all my opponents and didnt lose any teams on defense and so far i am on the path to do the same this GA, when my opponents dont place teams it is boring because then they nvr atk ether so its just a wasted 2 days for us both
With that said i think last place in GA should get no rewards, if people cant join and afk and still get pay outs then less will do it
What on Earth even is this stance? I've won all my GA as well, and I think GA is a terrible terrible thing that's designed really badly and has terrible matchmaking algorithms. The least they can do is reward someone for joining and being placed as the underdog in a GA where all seven players besides them have double their G12's and zeta's.
GA literally hinders your GP progression. We had nothing in the game before that actively punished you for seven starring your toons. Nothing existed before that made you NOT want to seven star everything.
The moment you focus on stars over gear you lose GA 100% of the time.
That is why winning means nothing. Losing means nothing. The roll of the dice as to who you go up against is what determines who wins the GA. It has nothing to do with your input.
Because GP is a terrible way to match people. GP means nothing. It means nothing. it means squat. it means Jack. Yet they insist on matching by GP.
Last place rewards should be better then they are.
Until they “fix” GA, I will continue not setting defense. Why? Because it’s a legal game move. Is it moral? Doesn’t matter. Most business is immoral. This is what I will do to protest GA and get out of it what I can. It’s poorly designed.
Honestly good for you they cry about you taking away their choice while trying to take away yours....and winning the best rewards while doing it..... it's hilarious
We are asking for a change in the game that would secure our ability to actually play, to have fun, which is why most of us downloaded the game in the first place. You did nothing here except moking, belittling and trolling. So of course negative people such as you will be fine ruining other’s experiences just because. We know selfish, unfun people exist (we can see quite a few on this very thread), we’re meeting them in ga already. Personally i’m not interested in hearing poor justifications, i’m here to ask for their negative impact to be removed from the game.
Nihion summed it all up. Negative people will spread their negativity as long as they have the possibility to do so, because they can and that’s what they do. So we are asking for a change so that they won’t be able to do so anymore. It’s simple and really, as VonZant said, does not warrant any kind of argument.
Except it does as its your selfish point of view. Because those ppl who set no D also have an issue with how this event is set up. But only your opinion matters right? If they punished ppl for not setting Defense based on fair play or what not , theyd have to eliminate shards. You know for fair play so ppl cant be kept from rewards they earned. So since thatll never happen, neither will this
It’s selfish of me to want to actually play the game ? Sure, you can say what you want for the sake of being argumentative, i don’t mind.
The issue they have with the game mode (mostly balance issue) has nothing to do with this thread. Their opponents have nothing to do with the matchmaking, they are not responsible for the issues they have and they can’t do anything to change it. They are just people like them, trying to have fun in a game they like.
You talk about punishment, i don’t see any punishment anywhere. So i don’t understand what you mean here. No one asked for punishments.
You keep bringing shard chats, i don’t know why since again it’s 100% unrelated to this thread and the fact that people in ga right now are deprived of actual gameplay by others, and we are asking for that to not be possible anymore, so that all can have fun playing the game.
I haven’t said anywhere that only my opinion matters. Some people here just seem to be out looking for fights and arguments just for the sake of it. I admit i don’t understand that.
Because thats how i feel ,exactly , about the arena lol. But the shard chats keeps me out and stops me from enjoying my game. AND negatively affects my rewards. On a much higher level than not setting a D in GA. They have refused to fix that , why should this be any different.
If people want to not set D to use their toons on offense to maximize what they will get, they should be allowed to do it.
Or are you saying they should have to set a defense so they cant get their credits for winning on offense, and certainly wont win the match, thereby getting nothing, so you can have fun ?
Or should they have to set something, lets say 1 toon or a group of 5 lvl 1 toons, does that create fun? No only gets you 600k credits. So is it the credits? Cause thats an easy fix for cg to give the credits for no defense set.
Your fun doesnt override someone elses gameplay.
I dont care about credits, i just like destroying my opponents teams, last GA i aced all my opponents and didnt lose any teams on defense and so far i am on the path to do the same this GA, when my opponents dont place teams it is boring because then they nvr atk ether so its just a wasted 2 days for us both
With that said i think last place in GA should get no rewards, if people cant join and afk and still get pay outs then less will do it
What if the last place person tried to win? “Oh I’m sorry, you tried the best you could and failed, so you get nothing! How was that grand waste of time?”
They tried which means the might learn and thus do better next GA, if they get 8th they dont deserve anything, you fight people at your same or similar power so its not unfair to expect you to win 33% of the fights to atleast get somthing...like “i did all 5 of my arena fights so give me top 200 or 100 awards because its unfair for me to have to actually win”
That's very nice, the 8th best player gets nothing, and the 9th gets 1st place.
In every group of 8 of every event, someone has to come last.
Hey folks, if we want to debate stuff, that's fine - but let's try to be a bit more respectful towards one and other while doing so, so let's please try to do that from here out.
Replies
(Oh, good we're entering game theory territory)
I will submit that this is exactly a rational choice for a competitive game. GA has multiple reward currencies. One of which is credits. Personally, I would prefer the other items but if the choice is credits or nothing then the rational choice is credits. If a person prefers credits over the other items then the rational choice would be to work within the rules to obtain the rewards they desire.
What is not rational is to pursue a strategy that maximizes my opponent's rewards while minimizing my own. The caveat to this being that if I help my opponent benefit that I would earn "good will" or some other nebulous long-term benefit. Since there is a large pool of player it is unlikely that I will ever again encounter the same opponent in GA. (Note this is a different situation from Arena where the population is fixed). Therefore the rational focus is on short-term gain either credits or the other rewards.
You are assuming that I have adopted this strategy. It is irrelevant if I have. What is relevant is that this strategy is not adopted out of a wish deprive an opponent of reward or fun but to maximize personal rewards. That is the core of rational decision making. Ideally, the rules would allow every player rational choices.
This isnt a zero sum game. Again, you have proved the point. By not setting D you dont allow every player the same rational choice to attack. Exactly. The. Point. Thanks.
Have a nice day with your contined rationalizations.
Well this confirms that you only care about the 600k credits
Actually GA is zero sum. A person's choice to deploy defenses or not has a direct impact on how much or little an opponent can benefit. If it was treated as such by the developers then the rules would reflect that.
Er u do realise that leaves you the ability to take one high level toon in to each team and beat the snot out of them, getting extra points for 6, 8, 10, etc., teams while your opponent with all his highest level toons has to try the same thing against your "balanced" defense to win?
This...that guy could be in your arena shard or in a guildies arena shard...I don't want or need anyones good will if the guy saying "but it's competitive".....well then like this guy said....it's the +EV strategy choice..
Like he said...I don't do it...but fully endorse anyone who does when they cannot win
As to that good will when they send you 200 messages after you set your D and get crushed rubbing it in like a jerkface...yeah good will right.......that's glorious...
With that said i think last place in GA should get no rewards, if people cant join and afk and still get pay outs then less will do it
You left out an option: They forgot.
I’d be fine with a patch. But until then, I will use this opportunity.
You don’t want to deprive other people of rewards? By that logic, you better stop competing in arena, or competing at all for that matter. Is my decision “immoral?” Maybe. But that’s how you win. Most businesses make tons of immoral decisions for their well-being, it’s not irregular.
So I will continue to set no D, reap “1.8m” credits from it, and allow my opponents to win and achieve free zetas and good gear. Because GA was already poorly designed. I’m sorry that you can’t restrict my ability to play fair.
lol I'm pretty sure saying "you won the argument" cause you said so doesn't mean what you think it means....
I'm not even sure what we are arguing about...CG caved to the incessant whining way back and are working on a fix.... your "logic" did not win any argument..the fact CG said they were going to make sure you get your Saaatteeeesssfaaaccctioon but were working on it kinda won the argument.
GUUUMMIIIE my Defense ppl : "CG this is not fair.... I wanted to embarass my opponent and then mock him over text relentlessly (something that should be dealt with)
CG: We are working on a fix
GUUMMIIIEE my Defense ppl ": "CG do you realize I have not mocked anyone in a month what's the point of getting first place rewards when I can't mock anyone or feel good aboot muyself
CG : We are working on a fix it will take time as we have other thinks like Finn and such we are working on, stuff
GUUMMIIIEEE my Defense ppl : "But i want my entitlement check now, NOW NOW NOW gimmie gimmie"
CG : We are working on a fix please be patient
Me : Can we get some ship content instead of worrying about people whining about non issues
What if the last place person tried to win? “Oh I’m sorry, you tried the best you could and failed, so you get nothing! How was that grand waste of time?”
Honestly good for you they cry about you taking away their choice while trying to take away yours....and winning the best rewards while doing it..... it's hilarious
They tried which means the might learn and thus do better next GA, if they get 8th they dont deserve anything, you fight people at your same or similar power so its not unfair to expect you to win 33% of the fights to atleast get somthing...like “i did all 5 of my arena fights so give me top 200 or 100 awards because its unfair for me to have to actually win”
We are asking for a change in the game that would secure our ability to actually play, to have fun, which is why most of us downloaded the game in the first place. You did nothing here except moking, belittling and trolling. So of course negative people such as you will be fine ruining other’s experiences just because. We know selfish, unfun people exist (we can see quite a few on this very thread), we’re meeting them in ga already. Personally i’m not interested in hearing poor justifications, i’m here to ask for their negative impact to be removed from the game.
Nihion summed it all up. Negative people will spread their negativity as long as they have the possibility to do so, because they can and that’s what they do. So we are asking for a change so that they won’t be able to do so anymore. It’s simple and really, as VonZant said, does not warrant any kind of argument.
I mean the guy should have just set up a cheese defense and get the points.
Except it does as its your selfish point of view. Because those ppl who set no D also have an issue with how this event is set up. But only your opinion matters right? If they punished ppl for not setting Defense based on fair play or what not , theyd have to eliminate shards. You know for fair play so ppl cant be kept from rewards they earned. So since thatll never happen, neither will this
I would say that my argument is warranted. And if you would like my ability to argue to be taken from me, then you have succeeded in the belittling. I’m simply expressing my right to play the game using legal strategies. I intend to spread no negativity. But until they fix this, my right to use an “unfair” and “immoral” strategy is protected. Just like people used the zombie Traya loop, or the Finn/C3PO one. By all means, call for a fix, but I’m actually giving people rewards by using this form of protest, so please leave me alone.
And this is where GA’s poor design comes to play: GP is not a good representation of a players strength. I could have 80 level 1 characters and 40 extremely powerful ones, or a selective balance including a lot of G8’s. So someone will always be bound to lose before GA begins because they are simply worse. No strategy to it. So by giving the last place player nothing, you are neglecting someone who might just not have planned out their farming well. Think of it as participation: Even the loser gets recognition for being a part of or trying in the event. They deserve those rewards.
It’s selfish of me to want to actually play the game ? Sure, you can say what you want for the sake of being argumentative, i don’t mind.
The issue they have with the game mode (mostly balance issue) has nothing to do with this thread. Their opponents have nothing to do with the matchmaking, they are not responsible for the issues they have and they can’t do anything to change it. They are just people like them, trying to have fun in a game they like.
You talk about punishment, i don’t see any punishment anywhere. So i don’t understand what you mean here. No one asked for punishments.
You keep bringing shard chats, i don’t know why since again it’s 100% unrelated to this thread and the fact that people in ga right now are deprived of actual gameplay by others, and we are asking for that to not be possible anymore, so that all can have fun playing the game.
I haven’t said anywhere that only my opinion matters. Some people here just seem to be out looking for fights and arguments just for the sake of it. I admit i don’t understand that.
Technically you are playing the game. Not setting defense is a LEGAL MOVE, and you are still setting defense and getting better rewards than I am. I admit that GA is flawed, and that’s why I do this. So that they change it!
hahaha, what? You think anyone who beats you is "mocking you?" Are you seriously that insecure? Who hurt you?
Aw man, I love when one guy calls someone’s whole side negative, and then some guy from his side is really negative so that I can say that his whole side is negative, but nah man. Humans were born negativity.
me....no why would i care about a phone game...let's not get crazy now...
I mean some people take this stuff wayyyy to serious to the end sometimes "ya know what i mean ?" They don't need people giving them that bump over the edge
Check out the threads on "the other sites people talk about this game on" go check out the threads my dude...
I would fathom anything that could be considered hurtful that would actually make someone not want to play this game would be pretty high on my "not good for the game" thing.... I like the chat feature just really really hate those threads going around with the ppl abusing them
I do so wish I'd get someone who doesn't set D though, I'd love a free win and free rewards, lol.
I still can't believe people are complaining about this still. Why can't you give me all your free wins, I'd gladly go up against people who don't set D, it is there right to do so, they can play the game how they like
What on Earth even is this stance? I've won all my GA as well, and I think GA is a terrible terrible thing that's designed really badly and has terrible matchmaking algorithms. The least they can do is reward someone for joining and being placed as the underdog in a GA where all seven players besides them have double their G12's and zeta's.
GA literally hinders your GP progression. We had nothing in the game before that actively punished you for seven starring your toons. Nothing existed before that made you NOT want to seven star everything.
The moment you focus on stars over gear you lose GA 100% of the time.
That is why winning means nothing. Losing means nothing. The roll of the dice as to who you go up against is what determines who wins the GA. It has nothing to do with your input.
Because GP is a terrible way to match people. GP means nothing. It means nothing. it means squat. it means Jack. Yet they insist on matching by GP.
Last place rewards should be better then they are.
Because thats how i feel ,exactly , about the arena lol. But the shard chats keeps me out and stops me from enjoying my game. AND negatively affects my rewards. On a much higher level than not setting a D in GA. They have refused to fix that , why should this be any different.
If people want to not set D to use their toons on offense to maximize what they will get, they should be allowed to do it.
Or are you saying they should have to set a defense so they cant get their credits for winning on offense, and certainly wont win the match, thereby getting nothing, so you can have fun ?
Or should they have to set something, lets say 1 toon or a group of 5 lvl 1 toons, does that create fun? No only gets you 600k credits. So is it the credits? Cause thats an easy fix for cg to give the credits for no defense set.
Your fun doesnt override someone elses gameplay.
That's very nice, the 8th best player gets nothing, and the 9th gets 1st place.
In every group of 8 of every event, someone has to come last.