"Underdog" GAC feat is inappropriate during 3v3
I really hope that CG doesn't use this feat next time they hold a 3v3 GAC. They need to come up with something else for those tournaments. It's not that you can't get any underdog victories, but your ability to do so is severely constrained, and people who would normally complete this easily will fail ... Playing 4 on 5 is just very seriously different than playing 2 on 3.
Or, I suppose, if they have to use the underdog category, they can cut the number of UD victories required for the feat in half - that's probably about the same level of difficulty.
As it is, I'm not even trying for underdog wins.
Or, I suppose, if they have to use the underdog category, they can cut the number of UD victories required for the feat in half - that's probably about the same level of difficulty.
As it is, I'm not even trying for underdog wins.
9
Replies
But in regular battles, it's in fact a LOT harder to be sure. Only thing that comes to mind is Nest vs Ewoks.
its not a skill based game mate, you either spend time to get a goodroster or money to get a good roster, idc about the OP really its just nothing about swgoh is about being good at the game
The truth is somewhere in between. The skill is knowing the interactions, counters, modding, kill order, etc.
But, you can know all those things and lose because you didn’t spend to get DR and Malak. Or, you can have every toon possible and send in your poorly modded DR in a mirror match and get smashed.
I read it: it's a common sense therefore I must be against it.
Then again: it is a lot more difficult to get underdog victories.
P.S.: @MasterSeedy try to use Traya + Sion against 3 Geos. Right there you got at least one.
🤣🤣🤣lol. ‘Skill based’ - funniest joke of the century. You made my day!
12/18/19?
Yes, they are f2p now, that was just an outdated example.
There are plenty of options and it's easy enough.
What, did you expect cg to come rushing in and change the feat because some poster said it was harder for reasons?
Do i think it "feels" harder? Yes, but thats because all my knowledge of teams and synergies is focused on 5v5 (and under sizing those teams).
However, I do not believe it is actually harder to do, and almost for the exact same reason you think it is harder. To start, many teams are far less tough on def with 3 instead of 5. Then there is the question of attacking with 2 or less, to which i point to the strong attackers and duos out there. Han and chewie can be a monster offensive team without a leader. Malak can solo some 5 man teams, so 3 should increase the number. Same with nest and to an extent wampa. Characters like GG and boba can do massive aoe damage.
Nope. I expected them to change the feat before I ever posted here to make something more relevant to the 3v3 environment.
3v3 is a different beast, and they obviously change a bunch of the feats with every new GAC, so why does it take a random player to inform CG that 67% is less than 80%?
Because the feat is still a challenge, just because you think the math proves it shouldnt exist doesnt mean it is no longer appropriate. Tell me, has anyone made an actual argument against these feats other than this math? Because this math means nothing. Traya is a hard counter to bugs, yet her team is 60% of their team (and 50% if you factor in brute). Shouldnt that make the battle more difficult? I use the Cls/han/chewie trio to undersize in 5s, should i be more rewarded for a tougher battle of only having 60% of a team with a feat?
Well I'm division 3 and I just got 6 underdogs. 5 two man and 1 one man. It just depends on how your opponent sets up their defense. We ended up with a draw and I win because of a higher GP, but we both did well.
This.
I don't do feats (only indirectly) and I've never missed Kyber
Given I'm Div 5 but yeah
But why though? you have more possible battles to fight, so why should the number of undersized wins decrease?