People complain about being matched up with it. Too bad. That's the game model. People work hard or spend hard to get it, and yeah, they do so for an advantage over those that don't. This time you were given months and months of advance notice, and if you were paying any attention to the Star Wars landscape late last year, you could have started prepping even earlier. That's what I did.
Get your own meta character, or develop a counter, and stop asking CG to fix your problems for you.
People complain about being matched up with it. Too bad. That's the game model. People work hard or spend hard to get it, and yeah, they do so for an advantage over those that don't. This time you were given months and months of advance notice, and if you were paying any attention to the Star Wars landscape late last year, you could have started prepping even earlier. That's what I did.
Get your own meta character, or develop a counter, and stop asking CG to fix your problems for you.
People complain about being matched up with it. Too bad. That's the game model. People work hard or spend hard to get it, and yeah, they do so for an advantage over those that don't. This time you were given months and months of advance notice, and if you were paying any attention to the Star Wars landscape late last year, you could have started prepping even earlier. That's what I did.
Get your own meta character, or develop a counter, and stop asking CG to fix your problems for you.
10-20% difference in gp is not 1 team
Irrelevant to my point, which was not only directed at your post btw.
But mm is based on top gp, so you've just not invested your gp as wisely as your opponents if you have less viable teams.
People complain about being matched up with it. Too bad. That's the game model. People work hard or spend hard to get it, and yeah, they do so for an advantage over those that don't. This time you were given months and months of advance notice, and if you were paying any attention to the Star Wars landscape late last year, you could have started prepping even earlier. That's what I did.
Get your own meta character, or develop a counter, and stop asking CG to fix your problems for you.
10-20% difference in gp is not 1 team
Irrelevant to my point, which was not only directed at your post btw.
But mm is based on top gp, so you've just not invested your gp as wisely as your opponents if you have less viable teams.
Maybe you should be more specific.
On a gp of just shy of 5 million, 20% is a lot, its 2 or 3 maxed teams
I agree with the original OP. 3v3 just not fun for me. As others have said, perhaps if we had an area to mess around with 3v3 synergies it would be better. But as it stands, the game is based on 5v5 synergies, and these battles seem to be more dependent on luck and RNG than any strategy. Or I timeout. The 5 minute cap needs to go in PvP
I agree with the original OP. 3v3 just not fun for me. As others have said, perhaps if we had an area to mess around with 3v3 synergies it would be better. But as it stands, the game is based on 5v5 synergies, and these battles seem to be more dependent on luck and RNG than any strategy. Or I timeout. The 5 minute cap needs to go in PvP
Luck? Not really. You just have to think differently. Hell, if anything this is LESS random. My jawas have about a 75% success rate in 5v5 vs Geonosians, in the last two 3v3s (ie: the two rounds so far and the entirety of the last one) they've been 100%. This latest round I even won without losing anyone against a relic Brood Alpha.
The ticket is not to put down bad defenses, or else bad teams can beat you and good teams can flawlessly beat you. It's also not to put down your best defenses, or else your opponent gets to handpick the counter team to beat you and you have nothing left for offense.
The ticket is to put down defenses that are okay enough that they'll do damage and maybe kill an opponent. If you can get a defensive win, even better. This means they won't roll you over and it saves your best teams to one-shot theirs.
I think the reason people have trouble with 3v3 is that it depends on you having a wide roster with some depth, while the other areas of the game encourage you to have a narrow, tall roster with a couple specialized teams. They hate it because it's the only mode in the game that doesn't reward them.
The good news is that you can always work on other teams. Get yourself a couple G11 teams, they punch up a lot better than you'd think.
I personally have been enjoying 3v3. I've had to put a lot more thought into my attacks to make sure the roster that I kept for offense can full clear. You really have to think more about how to properly split your roster to make the most out of it for defense and offense.
The game is designed around 5 man squads. Some of the squads REQUIRE 4 or more just to function right, and in most cases, if you break apart a 5 man squad the 2 leftovers are not able to make a 2nd squad very effectively.
If you absolutely have to do 3v3, don't make us set more teams on defense, with the assumption that the leftover pieces of squads we had to break will make wholes. They don't.
The game is designed around 5 man squads. Some of the squads REQUIRE 4 or more just to function right, and in most cases, if you break apart a 5 man squad the 2 leftovers are not able to make a 2nd squad very effectively.
If you absolutely have to do 3v3, don't make us set more teams on defense, with the assumption that the leftover pieces of squads we had to break will make wholes. They don't.
The reason you have trouble making squads out of those leftover characters is that you haven't developed your roster. I keep saying it in a bunch of different threads--hell, these all blend together so I may have even already said it here--but whether someone likes or dislikes 3v3 can be predicted if you look at their roster. If they constantly chase the meta to make the newest hottest team and then drop whatever team they were using before or ask in a bunch of threads what the minimum requirements to unlock a certain character are ("Can I do it with a g9 Canderous Ordo? I heard I can do it with a g8, do I need to waste more gear?") the more likely they are to not like it.
If you see they've got a 7* g11+ Rose, you know they're going to like it.
Build out your teams. Work on the 6th or 7th character in a faction. Stop hording because some day there'll be some new character you need to beat the people you're already colluding with over discord for who shares out 1st place.
I really hope the new content delivery system is 3v3 specific just for the laughs.
Well, one of the complaints against 3v3 is that there is no game mode for 3v3 so players can't really practice without losing actual GAC battles
I would love a 3v3 focused game mode on top of whatever else they can quickly produce with these new tools
Totally agree. I've been testing 3v5 in Galactic War just to get a sense of win conditions and how the AI will play the team (assuming auto and defense are the same), but even then it's too easy and I don't see the teams I actually want to test out.
Certain AI elements are more easily exploited in 3v3 (like characters who waste a dispel on a single DoT or Health Down).
It would be awesome if there were a way to set a team from your roster on defense and battle against it. Has anyone ever requested such a feature?
True. But assumptions aren't always bad--so long as you're willing to accept that your assumption is just a starting point and that new information will mean you have to revise it later.
People complain about being matched up with it. Too bad. That's the game model. People work hard or spend hard to get it, and yeah, they do so for an advantage over those that don't. This time you were given months and months of advance notice, and if you were paying any attention to the Star Wars landscape late last year, you could have started prepping even earlier. That's what I did.
Get your own meta character, or develop a counter, and stop asking CG to fix your problems for you.
Counters don't work very effectively in 3v3 vs some characters. You can't just Padme a malak team in 3v3 because you don't have enough room to have 3PO with Padme, Anakin, and GK. Without GK you won't make it to the solo malak part of a DR/Malak team, and without 3PO you'll just get drained to death 1 by 1, and without Anakin Malak will just lifesteal himself to full health repeatedly. Same thing with a CLS counter, doesn't work because you need that 4th team member to make it work. Even GS easily loses to Malak in 3v3. because he himself eats the drains.
3v3 simply results in less counterplay.
and that's a bad thing.
This isn’t a problem if you just place teams that work together well. I used foo and wampa for a win. You have to get creative, which is why gac should always be 3v3
If you end up with no synergy you are using the wrong teams.
That's what happens when you break apart teams and have leftovers that don't fit into anything else, you end up with 2 from 1 squad and just have to hope you have a plug and play character to fit in that won't benefit from the leader skill or anything but somehow works. It doesn't always
A lot of people don't have 6 developed members of every faction in order to evenly split 3 and 3, they have a squad of 3.. then 2 left over, maybe neither of them is a leader.
Then you have characters that are the capstone for certain squads like 3PO that just doesn't really work in a 3 man because it means no damage if you do
Replies
People complain about being matched up with it. Too bad. That's the game model. People work hard or spend hard to get it, and yeah, they do so for an advantage over those that don't. This time you were given months and months of advance notice, and if you were paying any attention to the Star Wars landscape late last year, you could have started prepping even earlier. That's what I did.
Get your own meta character, or develop a counter, and stop asking CG to fix your problems for you.
10-20% difference in gp is not 1 team
Irrelevant to my point, which was not only directed at your post btw.
But mm is based on top gp, so you've just not invested your gp as wisely as your opponents if you have less viable teams.
Maybe you should be more specific.
On a gp of just shy of 5 million, 20% is a lot, its 2 or 3 maxed teams
but the game wasn't designed for ships!!!
If it wasnt that you get rewards even when you lose i wouldnt do that
Luck? Not really. You just have to think differently. Hell, if anything this is LESS random. My jawas have about a 75% success rate in 5v5 vs Geonosians, in the last two 3v3s (ie: the two rounds so far and the entirety of the last one) they've been 100%. This latest round I even won without losing anyone against a relic Brood Alpha.
The ticket is not to put down bad defenses, or else bad teams can beat you and good teams can flawlessly beat you. It's also not to put down your best defenses, or else your opponent gets to handpick the counter team to beat you and you have nothing left for offense.
The ticket is to put down defenses that are okay enough that they'll do damage and maybe kill an opponent. If you can get a defensive win, even better. This means they won't roll you over and it saves your best teams to one-shot theirs.
I think the reason people have trouble with 3v3 is that it depends on you having a wide roster with some depth, while the other areas of the game encourage you to have a narrow, tall roster with a couple specialized teams. They hate it because it's the only mode in the game that doesn't reward them.
The good news is that you can always work on other teams. Get yourself a couple G11 teams, they punch up a lot better than you'd think.
Well, one of the complaints against 3v3 is that there is no game mode for 3v3 so players can't really practice without losing actual GAC battles
I would love a 3v3 focused game mode on top of whatever else they can quickly produce with these new tools
If you absolutely have to do 3v3, don't make us set more teams on defense, with the assumption that the leftover pieces of squads we had to break will make wholes. They don't.
The reason you have trouble making squads out of those leftover characters is that you haven't developed your roster. I keep saying it in a bunch of different threads--hell, these all blend together so I may have even already said it here--but whether someone likes or dislikes 3v3 can be predicted if you look at their roster. If they constantly chase the meta to make the newest hottest team and then drop whatever team they were using before or ask in a bunch of threads what the minimum requirements to unlock a certain character are ("Can I do it with a g9 Canderous Ordo? I heard I can do it with a g8, do I need to waste more gear?") the more likely they are to not like it.
If you see they've got a 7* g11+ Rose, you know they're going to like it.
Build out your teams. Work on the 6th or 7th character in a faction. Stop hording because some day there'll be some new character you need to beat the people you're already colluding with over discord for who shares out 1st place.
Totally agree. I've been testing 3v5 in Galactic War just to get a sense of win conditions and how the AI will play the team (assuming auto and defense are the same), but even then it's too easy and I don't see the teams I actually want to test out.
Certain AI elements are more easily exploited in 3v3 (like characters who waste a dispel on a single DoT or Health Down).
It would be awesome if there were a way to set a team from your roster on defense and battle against it. Has anyone ever requested such a feature?
True. But assumptions aren't always bad--so long as you're willing to accept that your assumption is just a starting point and that new information will mean you have to revise it later.
Counters don't work very effectively in 3v3 vs some characters. You can't just Padme a malak team in 3v3 because you don't have enough room to have 3PO with Padme, Anakin, and GK. Without GK you won't make it to the solo malak part of a DR/Malak team, and without 3PO you'll just get drained to death 1 by 1, and without Anakin Malak will just lifesteal himself to full health repeatedly. Same thing with a CLS counter, doesn't work because you need that 4th team member to make it work. Even GS easily loses to Malak in 3v3. because he himself eats the drains.
3v3 simply results in less counterplay.
and that's a bad thing.
You end up with mish mash with no synergy
This isn’t a problem if you just place teams that work together well. I used foo and wampa for a win. You have to get creative, which is why gac should always be 3v3
4v4 and 6v6 please
If you end up with no synergy you are using the wrong teams.
That's what happens when you break apart teams and have leftovers that don't fit into anything else, you end up with 2 from 1 squad and just have to hope you have a plug and play character to fit in that won't benefit from the leader skill or anything but somehow works. It doesn't always
A lot of people don't have 6 developed members of every faction in order to evenly split 3 and 3, they have a squad of 3.. then 2 left over, maybe neither of them is a leader.
Then you have characters that are the capstone for certain squads like 3PO that just doesn't really work in a 3 man because it means no damage if you do