3v3 when will it go away?

2Next

Replies

  • CCyrilS
    5398 posts Member
    TVF wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    I know it's hard to be flexible but some people actually like that.

    What seems "hard to be flexible" is the idea that everyone has to do it. It seems like "flexible" would be offering a choice of 3v3 or 5v5. I would bet my next paycheck that if given the choice there wouldn't be enough opt-ins for 3v3 to even have a decent season.

    I rest my case.

    Please rest your case. You didn't make a very point when betting your next paycheck.

    I already did rest my case. Why are you asking me to do something after I did it? What point did I not make? You think the majority of people will choose 3v3 over 5v5? Clarify what you mean by your drive-by snark?

    First off, welcome to the forums. I think you are right; the majority of people will pick 5v5, but the best players will pick 3v3. You are right to suggest that synergies are limited in 3v3, but it is adversity that everyone faces. The players who work around this challenge best will come out the best players. Grand Arena was meant to be competitive; its sole purpose is to find the best GoH players. And if people keep defaulting to 5v5, it will become stale much quicker. Some could argue TW already is, and TW is a pretty similar landscape to Grand Arena. 3v3 has enough nuance to be different enough from 5v5 (probably more so than 4v4) but not extremely limiting like 2v2 or 1v1. It also helps make for some more creative feats and plays. If you aren't interested in 3v3, try changing up your strategy, especially if winning comes easily to you (I'm guessing that's why in OP you said you were disinterested). Try to engage with the content instead of degrading it here. You might find something you really enjoy along the way.

    Yay. Thanks so much for putting thought into this discussion. Why do you think the "best" players would choose 3v3? I'm certainly one of the "best" players given my lifetime GAC record and I have zero trouble in 3v3. In fact, the few losses I have incurred in this game mode were at the end when I was so bored I just started trying crazy stuff to make it interesting. I'll be 11-1 in this dreadful recurrence of 3v3.

    What's your gg link?

    Why do you want my GG link?

    Because you hate 3v3 yet make all these boasts about how good you are at it. If you can't back it up with proof then no one believes you.

    Oh. I really don't care what you believe is the thing because that is completely immaterial to my complaint. I could be the worst player ever and my point would still hold. I just mentioned I win every round pretty much so that this could be eliminated as the motivation of my dislike for 3v3.

    Caring about what we think actually is a reason to not post it, not the other way around. See, now we all have to assume you're really just bad at it and that's why you're complaining.
  • TVF
    30981 posts Member
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    I know it's hard to be flexible but some people actually like that.

    What seems "hard to be flexible" is the idea that everyone has to do it. It seems like "flexible" would be offering a choice of 3v3 or 5v5. I would bet my next paycheck that if given the choice there wouldn't be enough opt-ins for 3v3 to even have a decent season.

    I rest my case.

    Please rest your case. You didn't make a very point when betting your next paycheck.

    I already did rest my case. Why are you asking me to do something after I did it? What point did I not make? You think the majority of people will choose 3v3 over 5v5? Clarify what you mean by your drive-by snark?

    First off, welcome to the forums. I think you are right; the majority of people will pick 5v5, but the best players will pick 3v3. You are right to suggest that synergies are limited in 3v3, but it is adversity that everyone faces. The players who work around this challenge best will come out the best players. Grand Arena was meant to be competitive; its sole purpose is to find the best GoH players. And if people keep defaulting to 5v5, it will become stale much quicker. Some could argue TW already is, and TW is a pretty similar landscape to Grand Arena. 3v3 has enough nuance to be different enough from 5v5 (probably more so than 4v4) but not extremely limiting like 2v2 or 1v1. It also helps make for some more creative feats and plays. If you aren't interested in 3v3, try changing up your strategy, especially if winning comes easily to you (I'm guessing that's why in OP you said you were disinterested). Try to engage with the content instead of degrading it here. You might find something you really enjoy along the way.

    Yay. Thanks so much for putting thought into this discussion. Why do you think the "best" players would choose 3v3? I'm certainly one of the "best" players given my lifetime GAC record and I have zero trouble in 3v3. In fact, the few losses I have incurred in this game mode were at the end when I was so bored I just started trying crazy stuff to make it interesting. I'll be 11-1 in this dreadful recurrence of 3v3.

    What's your gg link?

    Why do you want my GG link?

    Because you hate 3v3 yet make all these boasts about how good you are at it. If you can't back it up with proof then no one believes you.

    Oh. I really don't care what you believe is the thing because that is completely immaterial to my complaint. I could be the worst player ever and my point would still hold. I just mentioned I win every round pretty much so that this could be eliminated as the motivation of my dislike for 3v3.

    Caring about what we think actually is a reason to not post it, not the other way around. See, now we all have to assume you're really just bad at it and that's why you're complaining.

    1kxup2.jpg.d04e3e45ad047517cbd413b66c039775.jpg
    The CGDF is no more. Now we hate CG because of conquest. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • CCyrilS wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    I know it's hard to be flexible but some people actually like that.

    What seems "hard to be flexible" is the idea that everyone has to do it. It seems like "flexible" would be offering a choice of 3v3 or 5v5. I would bet my next paycheck that if given the choice there wouldn't be enough opt-ins for 3v3 to even have a decent season.

    I rest my case.

    Please rest your case. You didn't make a very point when betting your next paycheck.

    I already did rest my case. Why are you asking me to do something after I did it? What point did I not make? You think the majority of people will choose 3v3 over 5v5? Clarify what you mean by your drive-by snark?

    First off, welcome to the forums. I think you are right; the majority of people will pick 5v5, but the best players will pick 3v3. You are right to suggest that synergies are limited in 3v3, but it is adversity that everyone faces. The players who work around this challenge best will come out the best players. Grand Arena was meant to be competitive; its sole purpose is to find the best GoH players. And if people keep defaulting to 5v5, it will become stale much quicker. Some could argue TW already is, and TW is a pretty similar landscape to Grand Arena. 3v3 has enough nuance to be different enough from 5v5 (probably more so than 4v4) but not extremely limiting like 2v2 or 1v1. It also helps make for some more creative feats and plays. If you aren't interested in 3v3, try changing up your strategy, especially if winning comes easily to you (I'm guessing that's why in OP you said you were disinterested). Try to engage with the content instead of degrading it here. You might find something you really enjoy along the way.

    Yay. Thanks so much for putting thought into this discussion. Why do you think the "best" players would choose 3v3? I'm certainly one of the "best" players given my lifetime GAC record and I have zero trouble in 3v3. In fact, the few losses I have incurred in this game mode were at the end when I was so bored I just started trying crazy stuff to make it interesting. I'll be 11-1 in this dreadful recurrence of 3v3.

    What's your gg link?

    Why do you want my GG link?

    Because you hate 3v3 yet make all these boasts about how good you are at it. If you can't back it up with proof then no one believes you.

    Oh. I really don't care what you believe is the thing because that is completely immaterial to my complaint. I could be the worst player ever and my point would still hold. I just mentioned I win every round pretty much so that this could be eliminated as the motivation of my dislike for 3v3.

    Caring about what we think actually is a reason to not post it, not the other way around. See, now we all have to assume you're really just bad at it and that's why you're complaining.

    Yeah, I get it. You are trying to attack my character to undermine my argument. Is this all you're going to do? It's not helpful.
  • TVF
    30981 posts Member
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    I know it's hard to be flexible but some people actually like that.

    What seems "hard to be flexible" is the idea that everyone has to do it. It seems like "flexible" would be offering a choice of 3v3 or 5v5. I would bet my next paycheck that if given the choice there wouldn't be enough opt-ins for 3v3 to even have a decent season.

    I rest my case.

    Please rest your case. You didn't make a very point when betting your next paycheck.

    I already did rest my case. Why are you asking me to do something after I did it? What point did I not make? You think the majority of people will choose 3v3 over 5v5? Clarify what you mean by your drive-by snark?

    First off, welcome to the forums. I think you are right; the majority of people will pick 5v5, but the best players will pick 3v3. You are right to suggest that synergies are limited in 3v3, but it is adversity that everyone faces. The players who work around this challenge best will come out the best players. Grand Arena was meant to be competitive; its sole purpose is to find the best GoH players. And if people keep defaulting to 5v5, it will become stale much quicker. Some could argue TW already is, and TW is a pretty similar landscape to Grand Arena. 3v3 has enough nuance to be different enough from 5v5 (probably more so than 4v4) but not extremely limiting like 2v2 or 1v1. It also helps make for some more creative feats and plays. If you aren't interested in 3v3, try changing up your strategy, especially if winning comes easily to you (I'm guessing that's why in OP you said you were disinterested). Try to engage with the content instead of degrading it here. You might find something you really enjoy along the way.

    Yay. Thanks so much for putting thought into this discussion. Why do you think the "best" players would choose 3v3? I'm certainly one of the "best" players given my lifetime GAC record and I have zero trouble in 3v3. In fact, the few losses I have incurred in this game mode were at the end when I was so bored I just started trying crazy stuff to make it interesting. I'll be 11-1 in this dreadful recurrence of 3v3.

    What's your gg link?

    Why do you want my GG link?

    Because you hate 3v3 yet make all these boasts about how good you are at it. If you can't back it up with proof then no one believes you.

    Oh. I really don't care what you believe is the thing because that is completely immaterial to my complaint. I could be the worst player ever and my point would still hold. I just mentioned I win every round pretty much so that this could be eliminated as the motivation of my dislike for 3v3.

    Caring about what we think actually is a reason to not post it, not the other way around. See, now we all have to assume you're really just bad at it and that's why you're complaining.

    Yeah, I get it. You are trying to attack my character to undermine my argument. Is this all you're going to do? It's not helpful.

    No, you just have no actual argument you can support.
    The CGDF is no more. Now we hate CG because of conquest. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • TVF wrote: »
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    I know it's hard to be flexible but some people actually like that.

    What seems "hard to be flexible" is the idea that everyone has to do it. It seems like "flexible" would be offering a choice of 3v3 or 5v5. I would bet my next paycheck that if given the choice there wouldn't be enough opt-ins for 3v3 to even have a decent season.

    I rest my case.

    Please rest your case. You didn't make a very point when betting your next paycheck.

    I already did rest my case. Why are you asking me to do something after I did it? What point did I not make? You think the majority of people will choose 3v3 over 5v5? Clarify what you mean by your drive-by snark?

    First off, welcome to the forums. I think you are right; the majority of people will pick 5v5, but the best players will pick 3v3. You are right to suggest that synergies are limited in 3v3, but it is adversity that everyone faces. The players who work around this challenge best will come out the best players. Grand Arena was meant to be competitive; its sole purpose is to find the best GoH players. And if people keep defaulting to 5v5, it will become stale much quicker. Some could argue TW already is, and TW is a pretty similar landscape to Grand Arena. 3v3 has enough nuance to be different enough from 5v5 (probably more so than 4v4) but not extremely limiting like 2v2 or 1v1. It also helps make for some more creative feats and plays. If you aren't interested in 3v3, try changing up your strategy, especially if winning comes easily to you (I'm guessing that's why in OP you said you were disinterested). Try to engage with the content instead of degrading it here. You might find something you really enjoy along the way.

    Yay. Thanks so much for putting thought into this discussion. Why do you think the "best" players would choose 3v3? I'm certainly one of the "best" players given my lifetime GAC record and I have zero trouble in 3v3. In fact, the few losses I have incurred in this game mode were at the end when I was so bored I just started trying crazy stuff to make it interesting. I'll be 11-1 in this dreadful recurrence of 3v3.

    What's your gg link?

    Why do you want my GG link?

    Because you hate 3v3 yet make all these boasts about how good you are at it. If you can't back it up with proof then no one believes you.

    Oh. I really don't care what you believe is the thing because that is completely immaterial to my complaint. I could be the worst player ever and my point would still hold. I just mentioned I win every round pretty much so that this could be eliminated as the motivation of my dislike for 3v3.

    Caring about what we think actually is a reason to not post it, not the other way around. See, now we all have to assume you're really just bad at it and that's why you're complaining.

    Yeah, I get it. You are trying to attack my character to undermine my argument. Is this all you're going to do? It's not helpful.

    No, you just have no actual argument you can support.

    I already supported it. Now you're supposed to use logic to kick out the support, that's how a debate works. Not go "oh well I don't believe you that your record is good therefore I will use that to discredit anything else that you type". It's childish. You must see this.
  • UdalCuain
    4426 posts Member
    Each to their own. I'm at 6.7m GP and really enjoy 3v3. It's less predictable than 5v5, where its mainly the same 7-10 teams I see on defence.

    Yes, some teams become less effective with fewer characters (though Ewoks is the first one that comes to mind). The flip side of that is there's more room for theory crafting and having fun with different comps. You can get two Imperial Trooper teams, same for Nightsisters. 3/4 decent Separatist teams. I'd never use Wampa under Old Ben in 5v5, but it's lots of fun in 3v3. Rey, Kuiil and IG-11 has been a defensive rock for me.
  • TVF
    30981 posts Member
    TVF wrote: »
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    I know it's hard to be flexible but some people actually like that.

    What seems "hard to be flexible" is the idea that everyone has to do it. It seems like "flexible" would be offering a choice of 3v3 or 5v5. I would bet my next paycheck that if given the choice there wouldn't be enough opt-ins for 3v3 to even have a decent season.

    I rest my case.

    Please rest your case. You didn't make a very point when betting your next paycheck.

    I already did rest my case. Why are you asking me to do something after I did it? What point did I not make? You think the majority of people will choose 3v3 over 5v5? Clarify what you mean by your drive-by snark?

    First off, welcome to the forums. I think you are right; the majority of people will pick 5v5, but the best players will pick 3v3. You are right to suggest that synergies are limited in 3v3, but it is adversity that everyone faces. The players who work around this challenge best will come out the best players. Grand Arena was meant to be competitive; its sole purpose is to find the best GoH players. And if people keep defaulting to 5v5, it will become stale much quicker. Some could argue TW already is, and TW is a pretty similar landscape to Grand Arena. 3v3 has enough nuance to be different enough from 5v5 (probably more so than 4v4) but not extremely limiting like 2v2 or 1v1. It also helps make for some more creative feats and plays. If you aren't interested in 3v3, try changing up your strategy, especially if winning comes easily to you (I'm guessing that's why in OP you said you were disinterested). Try to engage with the content instead of degrading it here. You might find something you really enjoy along the way.

    Yay. Thanks so much for putting thought into this discussion. Why do you think the "best" players would choose 3v3? I'm certainly one of the "best" players given my lifetime GAC record and I have zero trouble in 3v3. In fact, the few losses I have incurred in this game mode were at the end when I was so bored I just started trying crazy stuff to make it interesting. I'll be 11-1 in this dreadful recurrence of 3v3.

    What's your gg link?

    Why do you want my GG link?

    Because you hate 3v3 yet make all these boasts about how good you are at it. If you can't back it up with proof then no one believes you.

    Oh. I really don't care what you believe is the thing because that is completely immaterial to my complaint. I could be the worst player ever and my point would still hold. I just mentioned I win every round pretty much so that this could be eliminated as the motivation of my dislike for 3v3.

    Caring about what we think actually is a reason to not post it, not the other way around. See, now we all have to assume you're really just bad at it and that's why you're complaining.

    Yeah, I get it. You are trying to attack my character to undermine my argument. Is this all you're going to do? It's not helpful.

    No, you just have no actual argument you can support.

    I already supported it. Now you're supposed to use logic to kick out the support, that's how a debate works. Not go "oh well I don't believe you that your record is good therefore I will use that to discredit anything else that you type". It's childish. You must see this.

    I see that you refuse to prove what you claimed and therefore we cannot rule out that you just don't like 3v3 because you aren't doing well in it.
    The CGDF is no more. Now we hate CG because of conquest. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • TVF
    30981 posts Member
    UdalCuain wrote: »
    Each to their own. I'm at 6.7m GP and really enjoy 3v3. It's less predictable than 5v5, where its mainly the same 7-10 teams I see on defence.

    Yes, some teams become less effective with fewer characters (though Ewoks is the first one that comes to mind). The flip side of that is there's more room for theory crafting and having fun with different comps. You can get two Imperial Trooper teams, same for Nightsisters. 3/4 decent Separatist teams. I'd never use Wampa under Old Ben in 5v5, but it's lots of fun in 3v3. Rey, Kuiil and IG-11 has been a defensive rock for me.

    I'd never use Wedge lead in 5v5 but here we are. Good stuff.

    The CGDF is no more. Now we hate CG because of conquest. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • What I find really difficult is your claim that 3v3 is “boring”.

    Do you play 5v5? Virtually every match I play in 5v5 features identical teams on defence - and it’s the same stuff I face in TW all the time.

    I’ve not once had 2 3v3 matches in a GAC with the same teams on defence.

    You’re free to dislike the game mode, but your reason doesn’t hold much water I’m afraid.
  • UdalCuain
    4426 posts Member
    TVF wrote: »
    UdalCuain wrote: »
    Each to their own. I'm at 6.7m GP and really enjoy 3v3. It's less predictable than 5v5, where its mainly the same 7-10 teams I see on defence.

    Yes, some teams become less effective with fewer characters (though Ewoks is the first one that comes to mind). The flip side of that is there's more room for theory crafting and having fun with different comps. You can get two Imperial Trooper teams, same for Nightsisters. 3/4 decent Separatist teams. I'd never use Wampa under Old Ben in 5v5, but it's lots of fun in 3v3. Rey, Kuiil and IG-11 has been a defensive rock for me.

    I'd never use Wedge lead in 5v5 but here we are. Good stuff.

    Mean neither. Happy times.
  • TVF wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    I know it's hard to be flexible but some people actually like that.

    What seems "hard to be flexible" is the idea that everyone has to do it. It seems like "flexible" would be offering a choice of 3v3 or 5v5. I would bet my next paycheck that if given the choice there wouldn't be enough opt-ins for 3v3 to even have a decent season.

    I rest my case.

    Please rest your case. You didn't make a very point when betting your next paycheck.

    I already did rest my case. Why are you asking me to do something after I did it? What point did I not make? You think the majority of people will choose 3v3 over 5v5? Clarify what you mean by your drive-by snark?

    First off, welcome to the forums. I think you are right; the majority of people will pick 5v5, but the best players will pick 3v3. You are right to suggest that synergies are limited in 3v3, but it is adversity that everyone faces. The players who work around this challenge best will come out the best players. Grand Arena was meant to be competitive; its sole purpose is to find the best GoH players. And if people keep defaulting to 5v5, it will become stale much quicker. Some could argue TW already is, and TW is a pretty similar landscape to Grand Arena. 3v3 has enough nuance to be different enough from 5v5 (probably more so than 4v4) but not extremely limiting like 2v2 or 1v1. It also helps make for some more creative feats and plays. If you aren't interested in 3v3, try changing up your strategy, especially if winning comes easily to you (I'm guessing that's why in OP you said you were disinterested). Try to engage with the content instead of degrading it here. You might find something you really enjoy along the way.

    Yay. Thanks so much for putting thought into this discussion. Why do you think the "best" players would choose 3v3? I'm certainly one of the "best" players given my lifetime GAC record and I have zero trouble in 3v3. In fact, the few losses I have incurred in this game mode were at the end when I was so bored I just started trying crazy stuff to make it interesting. I'll be 11-1 in this dreadful recurrence of 3v3.

    What's your gg link?

    Why do you want my GG link?

    Because you hate 3v3 yet make all these boasts about how good you are at it. If you can't back it up with proof then no one believes you.

    Oh. I really don't care what you believe is the thing because that is completely immaterial to my complaint. I could be the worst player ever and my point would still hold. I just mentioned I win every round pretty much so that this could be eliminated as the motivation of my dislike for 3v3.

    Caring about what we think actually is a reason to not post it, not the other way around. See, now we all have to assume you're really just bad at it and that's why you're complaining.

    Yeah, I get it. You are trying to attack my character to undermine my argument. Is this all you're going to do? It's not helpful.

    No, you just have no actual argument you can support.

    I already supported it. Now you're supposed to use logic to kick out the support, that's how a debate works. Not go "oh well I don't believe you that your record is good therefore I will use that to discredit anything else that you type". It's childish. You must see this.

    I see that you refuse to prove what you claimed and therefore we cannot rule out that you just don't like 3v3 because you aren't doing well in it.

    Are you coming to that conclusion because you really, truly believe I'm terrible at 3v3 or because your bad faith predisposition relies on it? It's obvious you like 3v3 and are very offended that I don't so you are attacking me as some kind of liar to use as a placeholder to discredit all else. This is a garbage tactic and one that is really looked down on in debate. Do you debate much? I can't imagine so.
  • Legend91
    2010 posts Member
    TVF wrote: »
    UdalCuain wrote: »
    Each to their own. I'm at 6.7m GP and really enjoy 3v3. It's less predictable than 5v5, where its mainly the same 7-10 teams I see on defence.

    Yes, some teams become less effective with fewer characters (though Ewoks is the first one that comes to mind). The flip side of that is there's more room for theory crafting and having fun with different comps. You can get two Imperial Trooper teams, same for Nightsisters. 3/4 decent Separatist teams. I'd never use Wampa under Old Ben in 5v5, but it's lots of fun in 3v3. Rey, Kuiil and IG-11 has been a defensive rock for me.

    I'd never use Wedge lead in 5v5 but here we are. Good stuff.

    Wedge lead OP pls nerf
    Legend#6873 | YouTube | swgoh.gg
  • Kyno
    31587 posts Moderator
    TVF wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    I know it's hard to be flexible but some people actually like that.

    What seems "hard to be flexible" is the idea that everyone has to do it. It seems like "flexible" would be offering a choice of 3v3 or 5v5. I would bet my next paycheck that if given the choice there wouldn't be enough opt-ins for 3v3 to even have a decent season.

    I rest my case.

    Please rest your case. You didn't make a very point when betting your next paycheck.

    I already did rest my case. Why are you asking me to do something after I did it? What point did I not make? You think the majority of people will choose 3v3 over 5v5? Clarify what you mean by your drive-by snark?

    First off, welcome to the forums. I think you are right; the majority of people will pick 5v5, but the best players will pick 3v3. You are right to suggest that synergies are limited in 3v3, but it is adversity that everyone faces. The players who work around this challenge best will come out the best players. Grand Arena was meant to be competitive; its sole purpose is to find the best GoH players. And if people keep defaulting to 5v5, it will become stale much quicker. Some could argue TW already is, and TW is a pretty similar landscape to Grand Arena. 3v3 has enough nuance to be different enough from 5v5 (probably more so than 4v4) but not extremely limiting like 2v2 or 1v1. It also helps make for some more creative feats and plays. If you aren't interested in 3v3, try changing up your strategy, especially if winning comes easily to you (I'm guessing that's why in OP you said you were disinterested). Try to engage with the content instead of degrading it here. You might find something you really enjoy along the way.

    Yay. Thanks so much for putting thought into this discussion. Why do you think the "best" players would choose 3v3? I'm certainly one of the "best" players given my lifetime GAC record and I have zero trouble in 3v3. In fact, the few losses I have incurred in this game mode were at the end when I was so bored I just started trying crazy stuff to make it interesting. I'll be 11-1 in this dreadful recurrence of 3v3.

    What's your gg link?

    Why do you want my GG link?

    Because you hate 3v3 yet make all these boasts about how good you are at it. If you can't back it up with proof then no one believes you.

    Oh. I really don't care what you believe is the thing because that is completely immaterial to my complaint. I could be the worst player ever and my point would still hold. I just mentioned I win every round pretty much so that this could be eliminated as the motivation of my dislike for 3v3.

    Caring about what we think actually is a reason to not post it, not the other way around. See, now we all have to assume you're really just bad at it and that's why you're complaining.

    Yeah, I get it. You are trying to attack my character to undermine my argument. Is this all you're going to do? It's not helpful.

    No, you just have no actual argument you can support.

    I already supported it. Now you're supposed to use logic to kick out the support, that's how a debate works. Not go "oh well I don't believe you that your record is good therefore I will use that to discredit anything else that you type". It's childish. You must see this.

    I see that you refuse to prove what you claimed and therefore we cannot rule out that you just don't like 3v3 because you aren't doing well in it.

    Are you coming to that conclusion because you really, truly believe I'm terrible at 3v3 or because your bad faith predisposition relies on it? It's obvious you like 3v3 and are very offended that I don't so you are attacking me as some kind of liar to use as a placeholder to discredit all else. This is a garbage tactic and one that is really looked down on in debate. Do you debate much? I can't imagine so.

    in defense of the situation. you are saying that you gain nothing from disclosing it, but you also have nothing "to hide", unless you do. You also lose nothing by posting it, and even gain some ease in conversation as many things can just be observed without any back and forth.

    you are stating that your statement X, proves Y. being asked to back up X with information that is out there and easily accessible (with a pointer to who you want to see) seems logical.

    some quick research on debates and I found this, which seems applicable:
    In informal debates the authority of the speaker can often stand as citation enough, if they're speaking on a topic about which they're recognized as an authority. But one reason why they can do this is because it's understood that an expert could produce references if asked.

    you would seem to be declaring yourself an expert or to have the authority, but since that doesn't seem to be recognized here, they are asking for you to produce the reference. This seem like a standard, and not a garbage tactic.
  • @Julian_Sixty_Six You say others are trying to attack your character, yet haven't you been doing the same with others (Like that athlete's foot post)? You haven't attacked mine which I appreciate, but you ignored many of my points that I tried to make as objective as possible and yours have been entirely subjective with little to no objective justification. And nothing here would really hold up in any form of debate, why try bringing it up?
  • Julian_Sixty_Six
    108 posts Member
    edited April 19
    Kyno wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    I know it's hard to be flexible but some people actually like that.

    What seems "hard to be flexible" is the idea that everyone has to do it. It seems like "flexible" would be offering a choice of 3v3 or 5v5. I would bet my next paycheck that if given the choice there wouldn't be enough opt-ins for 3v3 to even have a decent season.

    I rest my case.

    Please rest your case. You didn't make a very point when betting your next paycheck.

    I already did rest my case. Why are you asking me to do something after I did it? What point did I not make? You think the majority of people will choose 3v3 over 5v5? Clarify what you mean by your drive-by snark?

    First off, welcome to the forums. I think you are right; the majority of people will pick 5v5, but the best players will pick 3v3. You are right to suggest that synergies are limited in 3v3, but it is adversity that everyone faces. The players who work around this challenge best will come out the best players. Grand Arena was meant to be competitive; its sole purpose is to find the best GoH players. And if people keep defaulting to 5v5, it will become stale much quicker. Some could argue TW already is, and TW is a pretty similar landscape to Grand Arena. 3v3 has enough nuance to be different enough from 5v5 (probably more so than 4v4) but not extremely limiting like 2v2 or 1v1. It also helps make for some more creative feats and plays. If you aren't interested in 3v3, try changing up your strategy, especially if winning comes easily to you (I'm guessing that's why in OP you said you were disinterested). Try to engage with the content instead of degrading it here. You might find something you really enjoy along the way.

    Yay. Thanks so much for putting thought into this discussion. Why do you think the "best" players would choose 3v3? I'm certainly one of the "best" players given my lifetime GAC record and I have zero trouble in 3v3. In fact, the few losses I have incurred in this game mode were at the end when I was so bored I just started trying crazy stuff to make it interesting. I'll be 11-1 in this dreadful recurrence of 3v3.

    What's your gg link?

    Why do you want my GG link?

    Because you hate 3v3 yet make all these boasts about how good you are at it. If you can't back it up with proof then no one believes you.

    Oh. I really don't care what you believe is the thing because that is completely immaterial to my complaint. I could be the worst player ever and my point would still hold. I just mentioned I win every round pretty much so that this could be eliminated as the motivation of my dislike for 3v3.

    Caring about what we think actually is a reason to not post it, not the other way around. See, now we all have to assume you're really just bad at it and that's why you're complaining.

    Yeah, I get it. You are trying to attack my character to undermine my argument. Is this all you're going to do? It's not helpful.

    No, you just have no actual argument you can support.

    I already supported it. Now you're supposed to use logic to kick out the support, that's how a debate works. Not go "oh well I don't believe you that your record is good therefore I will use that to discredit anything else that you type". It's childish. You must see this.

    I see that you refuse to prove what you claimed and therefore we cannot rule out that you just don't like 3v3 because you aren't doing well in it.

    Are you coming to that conclusion because you really, truly believe I'm terrible at 3v3 or because your bad faith predisposition relies on it? It's obvious you like 3v3 and are very offended that I don't so you are attacking me as some kind of liar to use as a placeholder to discredit all else. This is a garbage tactic and one that is really looked down on in debate. Do you debate much? I can't imagine so.

    in defense of the situation. you are saying that you gain nothing from disclosing it, but you also have nothing "to hide", unless you do. You also lose nothing by posting it, and even gain some ease in conversation as many things can just be observed without any back and forth.

    you are stating that your statement X, proves Y. being asked to back up X with information that is out there and easily accessible (with a pointer to who you want to see) seems logical.

    some quick research on debates and I found this, which seems applicable:
    In informal debates the authority of the speaker can often stand as citation enough, if they're speaking on a topic about which they're recognized as an authority. But one reason why they can do this is because it's understood that an expert could produce references if asked.

    you would seem to be declaring yourself an expert or to have the authority, but since that doesn't seem to be recognized here, they are asking for you to produce the reference. This seem like a standard, and not a garbage tactic.

    When did I declare myself an "expert"? An expert on what, exactly? All I did was declare that my gripe isn't derived from getting beat. Also, which of my complaints about 3v3 require an "expert" analysis to be obvious? Are you saying that 3v3 does NOT create toons that have no place in the story for four weeks? What are you disputing, Kyno? What part about what I've said is just so impossible to believe without seeing a GAC record to "back it up"? All of these things anyone can experience/see for themselves.
  • BioHazard wrote: »
    @Julian_Sixty_Six You say others are trying to attack your character, yet haven't you been doing the same with others (Like that athlete's foot post)? You haven't attacked mine which I appreciate, but you ignored many of my points that I tried to make as objective as possible and yours have been entirely subjective with little to no objective justification. And nothing here would really hold up in any form of debate, why try bringing it up?

    This person said they enjoy seeing people miserable. I don't really think he enjoys seeing people miserable and I don't think he really enjoys athlete's foot. Throwing barbs in fun back and forth is quite different then you and others seriously insinuating I am a liar about my GAC record. It's actually quite insulting, given all I have done is express flaws with 3v3 that anyone can observe.

    But it is quite telling how the witch hunt has honed in on this particular thing to detract away from the actual argument. But I won't let you get away with it.
  • TVF
    30981 posts Member
    So you do have something to hide then. Only conclusion that can be drawn.
    The CGDF is no more. Now we hate CG because of conquest. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • TVF wrote: »
    So you do have something to hide then. Only conclusion that can be drawn.

    Well, I'll find a way to deal with some dude on the internet called TVF drawing some conclusion or whatever. You aren't getting my identity, plain and simple. If that is necessary for you to participate in the debate then find another debate because you won't be happy.
  • BioHazard wrote: »
    @Julian_Sixty_Six You say others are trying to attack your character, yet haven't you been doing the same with others (Like that athlete's foot post)? You haven't attacked mine which I appreciate, but you ignored many of my points that I tried to make as objective as possible and yours have been entirely subjective with little to no objective justification. And nothing here would really hold up in any form of debate, why try bringing it up?

    This person said they enjoy seeing people miserable. I don't really think he enjoys seeing people miserable and I don't think he really enjoys athlete's foot. Throwing barbs in fun back and forth is quite different then you and others seriously insinuating I am a liar about my GAC record. It's actually quite insulting, given all I have done is express flaws with 3v3 that anyone can observe.

    But it is quite telling how the witch hunt has honed in on this particular thing to detract away from the actual argument. But I won't let you get away with it.

    This is valid criticism, not a witch hunt. And I never insinuated that you were lying about your record (in fact, saying that I insinuated that you lied is a lie). We want to see your 3v3 record to see what teams you are fighting; to get a better landscape of the gamemode from your perspective.
  • Are you saying that 3v3 does NOT create toons that have no place in the story for four weeks?

    I'm no Kyno, but I do say that.

    3v3 create toons that are less efficient and other that are more efficient than in 5v5, but doesn't create toons that have no place in the story. It's not because your choices of trios left characters on the bench that it would be the same characters on the bench for everyone. It's not because you didn't use your bench that they had no place in the story. It's just that you played well and didn't need your bench.

    Swgoh has multiple game modes. Some characters are better for 5v5 GAC, other better for 3v3 GAC, other better for Raids, other better for Assault battles. 3v3 is just another layer.
  • BioHazard wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    @Julian_Sixty_Six You say others are trying to attack your character, yet haven't you been doing the same with others (Like that athlete's foot post)? You haven't attacked mine which I appreciate, but you ignored many of my points that I tried to make as objective as possible and yours have been entirely subjective with little to no objective justification. And nothing here would really hold up in any form of debate, why try bringing it up?

    This person said they enjoy seeing people miserable. I don't really think he enjoys seeing people miserable and I don't think he really enjoys athlete's foot. Throwing barbs in fun back and forth is quite different then you and others seriously insinuating I am a liar about my GAC record. It's actually quite insulting, given all I have done is express flaws with 3v3 that anyone can observe.

    But it is quite telling how the witch hunt has honed in on this particular thing to detract away from the actual argument. But I won't let you get away with it.

    This is valid criticism, not a witch hunt. And I never insinuated that you were lying about your record (in fact, saying that I insinuated that you lied is a lie). We want to see your 3v3 record to see what teams you are fighting; to get a better landscape of the gamemode from your perspective.

    Okay let's do this. Let's say hypothetically that you looked at my record and saw a what I claimed it to be. How would that change my argument and how would it change your approach to my argument? Would you then consider it valid? I'm concerned that you aren't really interested in the merit of the argument itself but the messenger of the argument.

    So, if my record is what I say it is, what would be your newfound response to my initial argument? I mean, you have to know this given you want to vet the record so badly. I can't imagine this being such a requirement if it wouldn't change anything. Or would it change anything? My guess if I'm honest is it wouldn't change anything. But, you can prove me wrong. How would it change?
  • BioHazard wrote: »
    @Julian_Sixty_Six You say others are trying to attack your character, yet haven't you been doing the same with others (Like that athlete's foot post)? You haven't attacked mine which I appreciate, but you ignored many of my points that I tried to make as objective as possible and yours have been entirely subjective with little to no objective justification. And nothing here would really hold up in any form of debate, why try bringing it up?

    This person said they enjoy seeing people miserable. I don't really think he enjoys seeing people miserable and I don't think he really enjoys athlete's foot. Throwing barbs in fun back and forth is quite different then you and others seriously insinuating I am a liar about my GAC record. It's actually quite insulting, given all I have done is express flaws with 3v3 that anyone can observe.

    But it is quite telling how the witch hunt has honed in on this particular thing to detract away from the actual argument. But I won't let you get away with it.

    You’ve expressed opinion - not flaws.
    Kyno wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    I know it's hard to be flexible but some people actually like that.

    What seems "hard to be flexible" is the idea that everyone has to do it. It seems like "flexible" would be offering a choice of 3v3 or 5v5. I would bet my next paycheck that if given the choice there wouldn't be enough opt-ins for 3v3 to even have a decent season.

    I rest my case.

    Please rest your case. You didn't make a very point when betting your next paycheck.

    I already did rest my case. Why are you asking me to do something after I did it? What point did I not make? You think the majority of people will choose 3v3 over 5v5? Clarify what you mean by your drive-by snark?

    First off, welcome to the forums. I think you are right; the majority of people will pick 5v5, but the best players will pick 3v3. You are right to suggest that synergies are limited in 3v3, but it is adversity that everyone faces. The players who work around this challenge best will come out the best players. Grand Arena was meant to be competitive; its sole purpose is to find the best GoH players. And if people keep defaulting to 5v5, it will become stale much quicker. Some could argue TW already is, and TW is a pretty similar landscape to Grand Arena. 3v3 has enough nuance to be different enough from 5v5 (probably more so than 4v4) but not extremely limiting like 2v2 or 1v1. It also helps make for some more creative feats and plays. If you aren't interested in 3v3, try changing up your strategy, especially if winning comes easily to you (I'm guessing that's why in OP you said you were disinterested). Try to engage with the content instead of degrading it here. You might find something you really enjoy along the way.

    Yay. Thanks so much for putting thought into this discussion. Why do you think the "best" players would choose 3v3? I'm certainly one of the "best" players given my lifetime GAC record and I have zero trouble in 3v3. In fact, the few losses I have incurred in this game mode were at the end when I was so bored I just started trying crazy stuff to make it interesting. I'll be 11-1 in this dreadful recurrence of 3v3.

    What's your gg link?

    Why do you want my GG link?

    Because you hate 3v3 yet make all these boasts about how good you are at it. If you can't back it up with proof then no one believes you.

    Oh. I really don't care what you believe is the thing because that is completely immaterial to my complaint. I could be the worst player ever and my point would still hold. I just mentioned I win every round pretty much so that this could be eliminated as the motivation of my dislike for 3v3.

    Caring about what we think actually is a reason to not post it, not the other way around. See, now we all have to assume you're really just bad at it and that's why you're complaining.

    Yeah, I get it. You are trying to attack my character to undermine my argument. Is this all you're going to do? It's not helpful.

    No, you just have no actual argument you can support.

    I already supported it. Now you're supposed to use logic to kick out the support, that's how a debate works. Not go "oh well I don't believe you that your record is good therefore I will use that to discredit anything else that you type". It's childish. You must see this.

    I see that you refuse to prove what you claimed and therefore we cannot rule out that you just don't like 3v3 because you aren't doing well in it.

    Are you coming to that conclusion because you really, truly believe I'm terrible at 3v3 or because your bad faith predisposition relies on it? It's obvious you like 3v3 and are very offended that I don't so you are attacking me as some kind of liar to use as a placeholder to discredit all else. This is a garbage tactic and one that is really looked down on in debate. Do you debate much? I can't imagine so.

    in defense of the situation. you are saying that you gain nothing from disclosing it, but you also have nothing "to hide", unless you do. You also lose nothing by posting it, and even gain some ease in conversation as many things can just be observed without any back and forth.

    you are stating that your statement X, proves Y. being asked to back up X with information that is out there and easily accessible (with a pointer to who you want to see) seems logical.

    some quick research on debates and I found this, which seems applicable:
    In informal debates the authority of the speaker can often stand as citation enough, if they're speaking on a topic about which they're recognized as an authority. But one reason why they can do this is because it's understood that an expert could produce references if asked.

    you would seem to be declaring yourself an expert or to have the authority, but since that doesn't seem to be recognized here, they are asking for you to produce the reference. This seem like a standard, and not a garbage tactic.
    Are you saying that 3v3 does NOT create toons that have no place in the story for four weeks?

    Yes, 100% yes, that’s what I’m saying. Every time DSTB is running, do you consider your entire LS roster as having no place in the story for 6 days?

  • Kyno
    31587 posts Moderator
    Kyno wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    I know it's hard to be flexible but some people actually like that.

    What seems "hard to be flexible" is the idea that everyone has to do it. It seems like "flexible" would be offering a choice of 3v3 or 5v5. I would bet my next paycheck that if given the choice there wouldn't be enough opt-ins for 3v3 to even have a decent season.

    I rest my case.

    Please rest your case. You didn't make a very point when betting your next paycheck.

    I already did rest my case. Why are you asking me to do something after I did it? What point did I not make? You think the majority of people will choose 3v3 over 5v5? Clarify what you mean by your drive-by snark?

    First off, welcome to the forums. I think you are right; the majority of people will pick 5v5, but the best players will pick 3v3. You are right to suggest that synergies are limited in 3v3, but it is adversity that everyone faces. The players who work around this challenge best will come out the best players. Grand Arena was meant to be competitive; its sole purpose is to find the best GoH players. And if people keep defaulting to 5v5, it will become stale much quicker. Some could argue TW already is, and TW is a pretty similar landscape to Grand Arena. 3v3 has enough nuance to be different enough from 5v5 (probably more so than 4v4) but not extremely limiting like 2v2 or 1v1. It also helps make for some more creative feats and plays. If you aren't interested in 3v3, try changing up your strategy, especially if winning comes easily to you (I'm guessing that's why in OP you said you were disinterested). Try to engage with the content instead of degrading it here. You might find something you really enjoy along the way.

    Yay. Thanks so much for putting thought into this discussion. Why do you think the "best" players would choose 3v3? I'm certainly one of the "best" players given my lifetime GAC record and I have zero trouble in 3v3. In fact, the few losses I have incurred in this game mode were at the end when I was so bored I just started trying crazy stuff to make it interesting. I'll be 11-1 in this dreadful recurrence of 3v3.

    What's your gg link?

    Why do you want my GG link?

    Because you hate 3v3 yet make all these boasts about how good you are at it. If you can't back it up with proof then no one believes you.

    Oh. I really don't care what you believe is the thing because that is completely immaterial to my complaint. I could be the worst player ever and my point would still hold. I just mentioned I win every round pretty much so that this could be eliminated as the motivation of my dislike for 3v3.

    Caring about what we think actually is a reason to not post it, not the other way around. See, now we all have to assume you're really just bad at it and that's why you're complaining.

    Yeah, I get it. You are trying to attack my character to undermine my argument. Is this all you're going to do? It's not helpful.

    No, you just have no actual argument you can support.

    I already supported it. Now you're supposed to use logic to kick out the support, that's how a debate works. Not go "oh well I don't believe you that your record is good therefore I will use that to discredit anything else that you type". It's childish. You must see this.

    I see that you refuse to prove what you claimed and therefore we cannot rule out that you just don't like 3v3 because you aren't doing well in it.

    Are you coming to that conclusion because you really, truly believe I'm terrible at 3v3 or because your bad faith predisposition relies on it? It's obvious you like 3v3 and are very offended that I don't so you are attacking me as some kind of liar to use as a placeholder to discredit all else. This is a garbage tactic and one that is really looked down on in debate. Do you debate much? I can't imagine so.

    in defense of the situation. you are saying that you gain nothing from disclosing it, but you also have nothing "to hide", unless you do. You also lose nothing by posting it, and even gain some ease in conversation as many things can just be observed without any back and forth.

    you are stating that your statement X, proves Y. being asked to back up X with information that is out there and easily accessible (with a pointer to who you want to see) seems logical.

    some quick research on debates and I found this, which seems applicable:
    In informal debates the authority of the speaker can often stand as citation enough, if they're speaking on a topic about which they're recognized as an authority. But one reason why they can do this is because it's understood that an expert could produce references if asked.

    you would seem to be declaring yourself an expert or to have the authority, but since that doesn't seem to be recognized here, they are asking for you to produce the reference. This seem like a standard, and not a garbage tactic.

    When did I declare myself an "expert"? An expert on what, exactly? All I did was declare that my gripe isn't derived from getting beat. Also, which of my complaints about 3v3 require an "expert" analysis to be obvious? Are you saying that 3v3 does NOT create toons that have no place in the story for four weeks? What are you disputing, Kyno? What part about what I've said is just so impossible to believe without seeing a GAC record to "back it up"? All of these things anyone can experience/see for themselves.

    I have no dog in this fight, and you will see I also said "have the authority", so while you may no have declared yourself an expert, you seem to be saying that your record allows you to speak with some authority, as you are not just bitter about losing. You then have declared bad form on the comments of others in the form of accepted practices for a debate. I was merely pointing out that what they are asking for seem logical and even common practice for an open debate.

    This would be akin to someone standing up at a public forum and announcing themselves and maybe even their profession to allow other to find or verify the basis for their statements.

    I am not saying it necessary or anything, just that your dismissal of the suggestion is not entirely accurate.
  • BioHazard wrote: »
    @Julian_Sixty_Six You say others are trying to attack your character, yet haven't you been doing the same with others (Like that athlete's foot post)? You haven't attacked mine which I appreciate, but you ignored many of my points that I tried to make as objective as possible and yours have been entirely subjective with little to no objective justification. And nothing here would really hold up in any form of debate, why try bringing it up?

    This person said they enjoy seeing people miserable. I don't really think he enjoys seeing people miserable and I don't think he really enjoys athlete's foot. Throwing barbs in fun back and forth is quite different then you and others seriously insinuating I am a liar about my GAC record. It's actually quite insulting, given all I have done is express flaws with 3v3 that anyone can observe.

    But it is quite telling how the witch hunt has honed in on this particular thing to detract away from the actual argument. But I won't let you get away with it.

    You’ve expressed opinion - not flaws.
    Kyno wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    I know it's hard to be flexible but some people actually like that.

    What seems "hard to be flexible" is the idea that everyone has to do it. It seems like "flexible" would be offering a choice of 3v3 or 5v5. I would bet my next paycheck that if given the choice there wouldn't be enough opt-ins for 3v3 to even have a decent season.

    I rest my case.

    Please rest your case. You didn't make a very point when betting your next paycheck.

    I already did rest my case. Why are you asking me to do something after I did it? What point did I not make? You think the majority of people will choose 3v3 over 5v5? Clarify what you mean by your drive-by snark?

    First off, welcome to the forums. I think you are right; the majority of people will pick 5v5, but the best players will pick 3v3. You are right to suggest that synergies are limited in 3v3, but it is adversity that everyone faces. The players who work around this challenge best will come out the best players. Grand Arena was meant to be competitive; its sole purpose is to find the best GoH players. And if people keep defaulting to 5v5, it will become stale much quicker. Some could argue TW already is, and TW is a pretty similar landscape to Grand Arena. 3v3 has enough nuance to be different enough from 5v5 (probably more so than 4v4) but not extremely limiting like 2v2 or 1v1. It also helps make for some more creative feats and plays. If you aren't interested in 3v3, try changing up your strategy, especially if winning comes easily to you (I'm guessing that's why in OP you said you were disinterested). Try to engage with the content instead of degrading it here. You might find something you really enjoy along the way.

    Yay. Thanks so much for putting thought into this discussion. Why do you think the "best" players would choose 3v3? I'm certainly one of the "best" players given my lifetime GAC record and I have zero trouble in 3v3. In fact, the few losses I have incurred in this game mode were at the end when I was so bored I just started trying crazy stuff to make it interesting. I'll be 11-1 in this dreadful recurrence of 3v3.

    What's your gg link?

    Why do you want my GG link?

    Because you hate 3v3 yet make all these boasts about how good you are at it. If you can't back it up with proof then no one believes you.

    Oh. I really don't care what you believe is the thing because that is completely immaterial to my complaint. I could be the worst player ever and my point would still hold. I just mentioned I win every round pretty much so that this could be eliminated as the motivation of my dislike for 3v3.

    Caring about what we think actually is a reason to not post it, not the other way around. See, now we all have to assume you're really just bad at it and that's why you're complaining.

    Yeah, I get it. You are trying to attack my character to undermine my argument. Is this all you're going to do? It's not helpful.

    No, you just have no actual argument you can support.

    I already supported it. Now you're supposed to use logic to kick out the support, that's how a debate works. Not go "oh well I don't believe you that your record is good therefore I will use that to discredit anything else that you type". It's childish. You must see this.

    I see that you refuse to prove what you claimed and therefore we cannot rule out that you just don't like 3v3 because you aren't doing well in it.

    Are you coming to that conclusion because you really, truly believe I'm terrible at 3v3 or because your bad faith predisposition relies on it? It's obvious you like 3v3 and are very offended that I don't so you are attacking me as some kind of liar to use as a placeholder to discredit all else. This is a garbage tactic and one that is really looked down on in debate. Do you debate much? I can't imagine so.

    in defense of the situation. you are saying that you gain nothing from disclosing it, but you also have nothing "to hide", unless you do. You also lose nothing by posting it, and even gain some ease in conversation as many things can just be observed without any back and forth.

    you are stating that your statement X, proves Y. being asked to back up X with information that is out there and easily accessible (with a pointer to who you want to see) seems logical.

    some quick research on debates and I found this, which seems applicable:
    In informal debates the authority of the speaker can often stand as citation enough, if they're speaking on a topic about which they're recognized as an authority. But one reason why they can do this is because it's understood that an expert could produce references if asked.

    you would seem to be declaring yourself an expert or to have the authority, but since that doesn't seem to be recognized here, they are asking for you to produce the reference. This seem like a standard, and not a garbage tactic.
    Are you saying that 3v3 does NOT create toons that have no place in the story for four weeks?

    Yes, 100% yes, that’s what I’m saying. Every time DSTB is running, do you consider your entire LS roster as having no place in the story for 6 days?

    Yes, I consider my LS roster as having no place in the story for 6 days because they don't. But it doesn't bother me. That game mode is fun and has other value to enjoy like guild teamwork. It's engaging. 3v3 doesn't possess those. Again, I can appreciate trying to *technically* vet 3v3 as totally amazing. But value is subjective. And given the amount of anti-3v3 threads I just found in search, and the absence of anti-5v5 I feel I'm on firm ground in my criticisms, regardless of my "GAC record".
  • Every discussion about 3v3 seems to come down to “My feels are more important than your feels”
    DISCLAIMER: Post is subject to change.
  • BioHazard wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    @Julian_Sixty_Six You say others are trying to attack your character, yet haven't you been doing the same with others (Like that athlete's foot post)? You haven't attacked mine which I appreciate, but you ignored many of my points that I tried to make as objective as possible and yours have been entirely subjective with little to no objective justification. And nothing here would really hold up in any form of debate, why try bringing it up?

    This person said they enjoy seeing people miserable. I don't really think he enjoys seeing people miserable and I don't think he really enjoys athlete's foot. Throwing barbs in fun back and forth is quite different then you and others seriously insinuating I am a liar about my GAC record. It's actually quite insulting, given all I have done is express flaws with 3v3 that anyone can observe.

    But it is quite telling how the witch hunt has honed in on this particular thing to detract away from the actual argument. But I won't let you get away with it.

    This is valid criticism, not a witch hunt. And I never insinuated that you were lying about your record (in fact, saying that I insinuated that you lied is a lie). We want to see your 3v3 record to see what teams you are fighting; to get a better landscape of the gamemode from your perspective.

    Okay let's do this. Let's say hypothetically that you looked at my record and saw a what I claimed it to be. How would that change my argument and how would it change your approach to my argument? Would you then consider it valid? I'm concerned that you aren't really interested in the merit of the argument itself but the messenger of the argument.

    So, if my record is what I say it is, what would be your newfound response to my initial argument? I mean, you have to know this given you want to vet the record so badly. I can't imagine this being such a requirement if it wouldn't change anything. Or would it change anything? My guess if I'm honest is it wouldn't change anything. But, you can prove me wrong. How would it change?

    I am not wanting to "vet" your record, just look at the players and teams you are facing to see what is making the game mode so boring for you. 3v3 is not boring for me, nor is it for most people in this thread, so stating that the gamemode is boring isn't an argument. It's an opinion. You have been stating an opinion since the OP. Your "argument" has no merit. And because you posted an opinion, we can't prove you wrong when there is no right or wrong. The only thing that you are right about is that most characters are built for 5v5, which we acknowledged as fact, but we then stated that there are other game modes to use our benched characters, so we aren't complaining about it.

    Our experiences are clearly different, but I want to see how different. The people I am up against are putting up a fight. My record is 10-2, but I have had to earn it. Yours is 11-1 and claim its a cakewalk. It might not be you so much as the people you are up against.

    If you are more comfortable with it, you can DM me your swgoh.gg. I won't leak it anywhere. And I think I have proven myself the most empathetic opposition, not witch-hunting like you claim I have been.
  • BioHazard wrote: »
    @Julian_Sixty_Six You say others are trying to attack your character, yet haven't you been doing the same with others (Like that athlete's foot post)? You haven't attacked mine which I appreciate, but you ignored many of my points that I tried to make as objective as possible and yours have been entirely subjective with little to no objective justification. And nothing here would really hold up in any form of debate, why try bringing it up?

    This person said they enjoy seeing people miserable. I don't really think he enjoys seeing people miserable and I don't think he really enjoys athlete's foot. Throwing barbs in fun back and forth is quite different then you and others seriously insinuating I am a liar about my GAC record. It's actually quite insulting, given all I have done is express flaws with 3v3 that anyone can observe.

    But it is quite telling how the witch hunt has honed in on this particular thing to detract away from the actual argument. But I won't let you get away with it.

    You’ve expressed opinion - not flaws.
    Kyno wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    BioHazard wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    I know it's hard to be flexible but some people actually like that.

    What seems "hard to be flexible" is the idea that everyone has to do it. It seems like "flexible" would be offering a choice of 3v3 or 5v5. I would bet my next paycheck that if given the choice there wouldn't be enough opt-ins for 3v3 to even have a decent season.

    I rest my case.

    Please rest your case. You didn't make a very point when betting your next paycheck.

    I already did rest my case. Why are you asking me to do something after I did it? What point did I not make? You think the majority of people will choose 3v3 over 5v5? Clarify what you mean by your drive-by snark?

    First off, welcome to the forums. I think you are right; the majority of people will pick 5v5, but the best players will pick 3v3. You are right to suggest that synergies are limited in 3v3, but it is adversity that everyone faces. The players who work around this challenge best will come out the best players. Grand Arena was meant to be competitive; its sole purpose is to find the best GoH players. And if people keep defaulting to 5v5, it will become stale much quicker. Some could argue TW already is, and TW is a pretty similar landscape to Grand Arena. 3v3 has enough nuance to be different enough from 5v5 (probably more so than 4v4) but not extremely limiting like 2v2 or 1v1. It also helps make for some more creative feats and plays. If you aren't interested in 3v3, try changing up your strategy, especially if winning comes easily to you (I'm guessing that's why in OP you said you were disinterested). Try to engage with the content instead of degrading it here. You might find something you really enjoy along the way.

    Yay. Thanks so much for putting thought into this discussion. Why do you think the "best" players would choose 3v3? I'm certainly one of the "best" players given my lifetime GAC record and I have zero trouble in 3v3. In fact, the few losses I have incurred in this game mode were at the end when I was so bored I just started trying crazy stuff to make it interesting. I'll be 11-1 in this dreadful recurrence of 3v3.

    What's your gg link?

    Why do you want my GG link?

    Because you hate 3v3 yet make all these boasts about how good you are at it. If you can't back it up with proof then no one believes you.

    Oh. I really don't care what you believe is the thing because that is completely immaterial to my complaint. I could be the worst player ever and my point would still hold. I just mentioned I win every round pretty much so that this could be eliminated as the motivation of my dislike for 3v3.

    Caring about what we think actually is a reason to not post it, not the other way around. See, now we all have to assume you're really just bad at it and that's why you're complaining.

    Yeah, I get it. You are trying to attack my character to undermine my argument. Is this all you're going to do? It's not helpful.

    No, you just have no actual argument you can support.

    I already supported it. Now you're supposed to use logic to kick out the support, that's how a debate works. Not go "oh well I don't believe you that your record is good therefore I will use that to discredit anything else that you type". It's childish. You must see this.

    I see that you refuse to prove what you claimed and therefore we cannot rule out that you just don't like 3v3 because you aren't doing well in it.

    Are you coming to that conclusion because you really, truly believe I'm terrible at 3v3 or because your bad faith predisposition relies on it? It's obvious you like 3v3 and are very offended that I don't so you are attacking me as some kind of liar to use as a placeholder to discredit all else. This is a garbage tactic and one that is really looked down on in debate. Do you debate much? I can't imagine so.

    in defense of the situation. you are saying that you gain nothing from disclosing it, but you also have nothing "to hide", unless you do. You also lose nothing by posting it, and even gain some ease in conversation as many things can just be observed without any back and forth.

    you are stating that your statement X, proves Y. being asked to back up X with information that is out there and easily accessible (with a pointer to who you want to see) seems logical.

    some quick research on debates and I found this, which seems applicable:
    In informal debates the authority of the speaker can often stand as citation enough, if they're speaking on a topic about which they're recognized as an authority. But one reason why they can do this is because it's understood that an expert could produce references if asked.

    you would seem to be declaring yourself an expert or to have the authority, but since that doesn't seem to be recognized here, they are asking for you to produce the reference. This seem like a standard, and not a garbage tactic.
    Are you saying that 3v3 does NOT create toons that have no place in the story for four weeks?

    Yes, 100% yes, that’s what I’m saying. Every time DSTB is running, do you consider your entire LS roster as having no place in the story for 6 days?

    But value is subjective.

    Bingo. You’ve stated an opinion, I and many others disagree with you.

    And given the amount of anti-3v3 threads I just found in search, and the absence of anti-5v5 I feel I'm on firm ground in my criticisms, regardless of my "GAC record".

    Have you actually read those threads though? They are not one sided affairs. This is also specious reasoning: there are hundreds of threads complaining about character shard drop rates - every single one of them erroneous.

    I’m happy to hear more people don’t like 3v3 and don’t engage with it. Makes it easier / more likely for me to get to Kyber (something easily verified on swgoh.gg).
Sign In or Register to comment.