[MEGA] Road Ahead: July 2021

Replies

  • khdelboy
    703 posts Member
    edited July 27
    So what happens if you and your opponent put every GL on defence in GAC?

    The match would end up as a stalement, and the winner gets the glory if they have a higher GP. Which is a terrible idea to a dull format. I’ll just not bother with GAC anymore. My main concern is conquests, which is the primary source for R8 materials for me. I used Thrawn and Wat with Vader against Sector 4 boss, whom is a GL in form of Rey. Heck with the feats, it’s not possible to use a GL of your own to get the max feat points from that boss.

    I would urge you all to think about dropping those nerfs. It’s an awful idea.
  • Nauros
    4812 posts Member
    khdelboy wrote: »
    So what happens if you and your opponent put every GL on defence in GAC?

    The match would end up as a stalement, and the winner gets the glory if they have a high GP. Which is a terrible idea to a dull format. I’ll just not bother with GAC anymore.

    I would urge you all to think about dropping those nerfs.

    There are 7 spots in the front line (at least in my division) and 6 GLs, the winner will be the one who clears the remaining fight better. Still not much fun, but better than a dumb GP check.
  • Nauros wrote: »
    khdelboy wrote: »
    So what happens if you and your opponent put every GL on defence in GAC?

    The match would end up as a stalement, and the winner gets the glory if they have a high GP. Which is a terrible idea to a dull format. I’ll just not bother with GAC anymore.

    I would urge you all to think about dropping those nerfs.

    There are 7 spots in the front line (at least in my division) and 6 GLs, the winner will be the one who clears the remaining fight better. Still not much fun, but better than a dumb GP check.
    Do you think people would actually do this?

    I play GAC to reach Kyber. If I begin setting all my GLs on defence, I could win all 12 matches but get nowhere near Kyber.

    I don’t think this is something that many players will do, to be honest.
  • Nauros
    4812 posts Member
    Nauros wrote: »
    khdelboy wrote: »
    So what happens if you and your opponent put every GL on defence in GAC?

    The match would end up as a stalement, and the winner gets the glory if they have a high GP. Which is a terrible idea to a dull format. I’ll just not bother with GAC anymore.

    I would urge you all to think about dropping those nerfs.

    There are 7 spots in the front line (at least in my division) and 6 GLs, the winner will be the one who clears the remaining fight better. Still not much fun, but better than a dumb GP check.
    Do you think people would actually do this?

    I play GAC to reach Kyber. If I begin setting all my GLs on defence, I could win all 12 matches but get nowhere near Kyber.

    I don’t think this is something that many players will do, to be honest.

    I don't know, the question was what would happen, not how likely it is.
  • MaruMaru
    2382 posts Member
    In an otherwise losing match, I would consider doing it if I had the gl advantage. At the very least it will make most, more inclined to put more gls in defense.
  • Nauros wrote: »
    khdelboy wrote: »
    So what happens if you and your opponent put every GL on defence in GAC?

    The match would end up as a stalement, and the winner gets the glory if they have a high GP. Which is a terrible idea to a dull format. I’ll just not bother with GAC anymore.

    I would urge you all to think about dropping those nerfs.

    There are 7 spots in the front line (at least in my division) and 6 GLs, the winner will be the one who clears the remaining fight better. Still not much fun, but better than a dumb GP check.
    Do you think people would actually do this?

    I play GAC to reach Kyber. If I begin setting all my GLs on defence, I could win all 12 matches but get nowhere near Kyber.

    I don’t think this is something that many players will do, to be honest.

    Of couse it happens and of course you can reach kyber this way... thats why COUNTERS existed!
  • Another question for the product owner, do you see any other problematic areas of the game that you’re currently discussing changing? Even if that change could be a year away it’s good for us to know and act accordingly.
  • thanos_123 wrote: »
    Nauros wrote: »
    khdelboy wrote: »
    So what happens if you and your opponent put every GL on defence in GAC?

    The match would end up as a stalement, and the winner gets the glory if they have a high GP. Which is a terrible idea to a dull format. I’ll just not bother with GAC anymore.

    I would urge you all to think about dropping those nerfs.

    There are 7 spots in the front line (at least in my division) and 6 GLs, the winner will be the one who clears the remaining fight better. Still not much fun, but better than a dumb GP check.
    Do you think people would actually do this?

    I play GAC to reach Kyber. If I begin setting all my GLs on defence, I could win all 12 matches but get nowhere near Kyber.

    I don’t think this is something that many players will do, to be honest.

    Of couse it happens and of course you can reach kyber this way... thats why COUNTERS existed!

    People think that non-gl counters won’t work anymore, that’s the starting point. Let’s say they’re right.
    So they think the best strat is to put all your GLs on D as long as you have more than the opponent. Then, if your opponent put 1 gl on each of his front row, you won’t pass the front row because non-gls counters don’t work anymore (initial statement) and you don’t have any left to beat them.
    So with this strategy, if non-GLs counters don’t work anymore, you’ll win your matchs but won’t reach kyber, because you won’t score enough points even if you stay undefeated.
  • I think the gear crunch won't be fixed since it makes so much money but how about giving more crystals for completing dailies? Someone not at the top of both arenas (the majority of players) hardly can afford regular energy refreshes and certainly not the super expensive gear. An extra 200 crystals for completing dailies would let ftp feel like they can buy gear occasionally but wouldn't be enough for spenders who want things now.
    200 extra crystals a day would only amount to one piece of gear a week. That wouldn't be enough to significantly ease the gear grind but I think ftp would feel like they have more ability to progress key characters.
    Another option would be to cut gear prices by 50% but that would certainly hurt the games profits.
  • Nauros
    4812 posts Member
    I think the gear crunch won't be fixed since it makes so much money but how about giving more crystals for completing dailies? Someone not at the top of both arenas (the majority of players) hardly can afford regular energy refreshes and certainly not the super expensive gear. An extra 200 crystals for completing dailies would let ftp feel like they can buy gear occasionally but wouldn't be enough for spenders who want things now.
    200 extra crystals a day would only amount to one piece of gear a week. That wouldn't be enough to significantly ease the gear grind but I think ftp would feel like they have more ability to progress key characters.
    Another option would be to cut gear prices by 50% but that would certainly hurt the games profits.

    I think they talked about moving crystals away from arena some time ago, but it's obviously not happening. Funny how player-friendly changes often get talked about and forgotten...
  • thanos_123
    7 posts Member
    edited July 27
    Nauros wrote: »
    khdelboy wrote: »
    So what happens if you and your opponent put every GL on defence in GAC?

    The match would end up as a stalement, and the winner gets the glory if they have a high GP. Which is a terrible idea to a dull format. I’ll just not bother with GAC anymore.

    I would urge you all to think about dropping those nerfs.

    There are 7 spots in the front line (at least in my division) and 6 GLs, the winner will be the one who clears the remaining fight better. Still not much fun, but better than a dumb GP check.
    Do you think people would actually do this?

    I play GAC to reach Kyber. If I begin setting all my GLs on defence, I could win all 12 matches but get nowhere near Kyber.

    I don’t think this is something that many players will do, to be honest.

    misread first post...
    So, i will place my GLs on defense and then hope that my enemy will not place his on defense. I will be able to get more points, because most gl vs gl end in low scores!

    I always kept my GLs on offense and used them to solo teams, while using counters to beat GLs if possible!

    Now, i will keep my GLs on d and hope the enemy keeps his on offense!
    who knows how many will place them on d and how many not!?

    Do i care how many times i beat only one team? nope!
    (besides, i only have 2 gls currently, going on 3...)
  • Kyno
    32039 posts Moderator
    Toben wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Which other skills that have a different effect on raid bosses are not going to be changed to include GLs?

    I can ask.

    I mentioned Traya's Isolate and Jango's Conflagration at the end of my earlier post; a little digging also turned up Greedo's Threaten.

    Thanks.
  • Porgalicious
    65 posts Member
    edited July 27
    I watched the podcast last night and have read the in thread response from Crumb/Doja. I appreciate that you took the time to answer some questions and provided a response here.

    That said -

    I am a bit concerned about GAC. Specifically, for the early game players. We are seeing more and more people getting GLs early. It only takes a look at a few of the updated progression guides to see that the push is to GLs first. That's all well and good, but I think this has the potential to turn people off of the game early, especially if they end up facing only GLs in GAC. I suggest that you take a bit of a closer look at the early GAC experience and, if possible, provide a bifurcated matching system that keeps the GL owners with other GL owners up until a certain GP level. At my level (5.8 mil), I expect to see GLs and I have one. It's not a big deal to me. In my guild, there is only one person above 5 mil who does not have a GL.

    Delivery of the news: Y'all threw out a TON of information on Friday. I hope this will be the last time you throw out that much information on a Friday. The rancor was allowed to fester without a response (and placing an undue burden on the Mods here) for the weekend. Perhaps, next time have a concise set of FAQs (TL;DR, whatever) ready to go. It has been said that most of the issues here were raised by your group and testers - put that in a short form for people to read. That massive chunk of kit change was difficult to read and digest. Also, have either a Q and A or a plan for going on a content creator the same or next day. The quicker you get ahead of things with answers, the quicker the fan base will understand - we may not like all of the answers, but that transparency will not hurt.

    Finally, the gear crunch issue. Crumb said that they've made it better but people might not see it that way because of the trickle effect from Conquest, etc. While I agree I am getting more gear, the quality of the gear leaves something to be desired. While there is other important gear that is awarded as part of conquest, getting gear that is largely useless is a bit disheartening (mk 4 Carbantis, Mk 4 Stun guns. for example). I would encourage you to do a wholesale revisit of gear awarding as part of the Raids, TB, TW, Challenges, and Conquest. If we're putting in time and energy, the rewards should be commensurate to that time and energy.

    Again, I appreciate your time in responding and I hope you think about how to approach these announcements differently in the future to reduce stress and misunderstanding for everyone.
  • Looooki
    719 posts Member
    edited July 27
    LordGrahck wrote: »
    I don't know if this has come up yet or not, but I'm curious about something.

    If the non-GL counters are getting nerfed, and GLs are getting lumped in with Raid Bosses, does that mean that only a GL can do damage to a GL? Also, does this mean that you MUST use the GL as your lead as opposed to using a different toon's lead with the GL in the team, such as using JML under a JKR lead? What if you use one of these soon-to-be nerfed toons with a GL, such as Badstilla or Thrawn with SEE, will that mean that they won't be effective against the GL, even if they're in a group with one? Will the GL's be tweeked to allow these nerfed toons to work as they should under their leaderships?

    It's not entirely correct to put it that way ...

    Let's put it this way. Now counters are like guns vs guns. After the nerf is sticks vs guns.

    After the update things will slide heavily on favor of GLs. Not that the counters cannot work, you probably will need 2 teams to make it work.
  • Looooki
    719 posts Member
    khdelboy wrote: »
    So what happens if you and your opponent put every GL on defence in GAC?

    The match would end up as a stalement, and the winner gets the glory if they have a higher GP. Which is a terrible idea to a dull format. I’ll just not bother with GAC anymore. My main concern is conquests, which is the primary source for R8 materials for me. I used Thrawn and Wat with Vader against Sector 4 boss, whom is a GL in form of Rey. Heck with the feats, it’s not possible to use a GL of your own to get the max feat points from that boss.

    I would urge you all to think about dropping those nerfs. It’s an awful idea.

    The one with the higher banner wins. Nothing changes from that :P
  • Kyno
    32039 posts Moderator
    Kyno wrote: »
    MrFear220 wrote: »
    Can the developers please make a post better explaining their reasoning behind changes like Thrawn not being able to Fracture GLs? This is an extremely niche ability found nowhere else in-game. A healthy meta is where GLs are in a league of their own, sure, but still able to be beaten with a few non-GL teams.

    They said they want GL to be mini-raid bosses. Do you need explanation why fracture can’t full stop raid bosses?

    Okay, Mr. Smarty Pants.

    It appears GLs are getting some raid boss features and not others. Why was Fracture mechanic chosen to be one where they do behave like raid bosses?

    Which other skills that have a different effect on raid bosses are not going to be changed to include GLs?

    I can ask.

    You just reframed the question. Is there a reason why? I'm guessing you found the original questioner's framing of the question unfair?

    To answer your new question, Vader's Culling Blade, after nerf?

    They explained why.

    I see your point, but they also explained that, as they are trying to keep toons like Vader viable in game modes where they already are.
  • Kyno
    32039 posts Moderator
    Kyno wrote: »
    Imagine if there were a test server. And they gave access to the more prominent members of the community. Then, when they announce things like this, those guys could provide assurance that the sky is not in fact falling. That would be a game changer, I dare say.

    Instead, we have 6 weeks to fester and worry over these changes.

    They do, and players did test this, and no the sky is not falling.

    Sorry that I dont think any if them have a youtube channel they can use to tell you that.

    Then they are not "prominent".

    That is not true, FYI.
  • Kyno
    32039 posts Moderator
    TargetEadu wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    MrFear220 wrote: »
    Can the developers please make a post better explaining their reasoning behind changes like Thrawn not being able to Fracture GLs? This is an extremely niche ability found nowhere else in-game. A healthy meta is where GLs are in a league of their own, sure, but still able to be beaten with a few non-GL teams.

    They said they want GL to be mini-raid bosses. Do you need explanation why fracture can’t full stop raid bosses?

    Okay, Mr. Smarty Pants.

    It appears GLs are getting some raid boss features and not others. Why was Fracture mechanic chosen to be one where they do behave like raid bosses?

    Which other skills that have a different effect on raid bosses are not going to be changed to include GLs?

    I can ask.

    Hux and JMK’s TM Block are also on this list. JMK especially, as he might exempt himself from his own TM Manipulation Blocker.

    Hux doesnt have a specific raid boss call out on that ability.

    JMK probably doesnt because GLs are on the same "level" as each other so they wont have call outs on each other like they may for raid bosses.
  • Kyno
    32039 posts Moderator

    Galactic Legends and non-GL counters/interactions:

    The community has always been excellent at puzzle-solving, theory-crafting, and finding ways to maximize the effectiveness of their rosters. The changes are meant to not only allow for more design space for powerful characters below Galactic Legends, but also to prevent situations in which a non-GL could one-shot or otherwise severely and regularly reduce the effectiveness of a Galactic Legend.

    As we mentioned in the video, changing characters post launch is a last resort. There needs to be a balance between how consistent a counter is and how powerful the squad they are facing is in comparison. This is not just for squads with GLs, but for any squad that is able to counter another. For a healthy balance to the meta, counters should require a similar amount of resources to the team they can beat, whether that’s mods, gear/relic level, and/or specific units.

    GLs require a large amount of time and resources to unlock and their place in the meta should reflect the difficulty involved in unlocking them. They are late-game units and it makes sense they would be commensurate in power and effectiveness to their status as late-game roster acquisitions that take a lot of effort to acquire.


    By that logic you should nerf JMK and make JML the most powerful GL since he requires the most resources in total?

    Similar =/= exact. They are fairly similar but will never be exact. Also as we move forward we have all seen some general power creep with GLs, they are similar but some are just better than others in some aspects of the game.
  • Nauros
    4812 posts Member
    Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Imagine if there were a test server. And they gave access to the more prominent members of the community. Then, when they announce things like this, those guys could provide assurance that the sky is not in fact falling. That would be a game changer, I dare say.

    Instead, we have 6 weeks to fester and worry over these changes.

    They do, and players did test this, and no the sky is not falling.

    Sorry that I dont think any if them have a youtube channel they can use to tell you that.

    Then they are not "prominent".

    That is not true, FYI.

    So is there any way other than a youtube channel they can tell us? Or was it supposed to mean that they do have a youtube channel but can't use it to tell us?
  • Metasly
    209 posts Member
    Nauros wrote: »
    There are 7 spots in the front line (at least in my division) and 6 GLs, the winner will be the one who clears the remaining fight better. Still not much fun, but better than a dumb GP check.

    The 3 team side (bottom) is the most valuable point-wise, so if you keep your best 3 GL for offense and put 3 on the bottom :
    - worst case scenario he did exactly the same and the most efficient wins
    - anything else, you should win
  • Kyno
    32039 posts Moderator
    @CG_SBCrumb_MINI

    My biggest issue with the non GL nerf is that if you (rhetorical, I get you're just the messenger) didn't want non GLs beating GLs, why wait a year to nerf them?

    At this point we all assumed the counters were safe and had invested resources into them. Imp troopers is a great example. They countered See from the very beginning. And even after a mega thread over 100 pages the answer was that it was fine. If it was fine then, why isn't it fine now?

    The time to have fixed it was when the GL first came out and with enough warning of, "don't invest in this counter because it's going to be nerfed". Instead, you said it wasn't going to be nerfed and people invested in that counter.

    And refunding the gear to r5 is a joke. If the team no longer has the significant viability it did, the gear and Zetas should be fully refunded. To g1 not r5 or r7.

    For r9. It's too soon. The gear crunch needs eased. Please no more we're looking into it. It needs eased now. It should be eased before r9. Especially with a GL now being a requirement to be competitive in arena. Currently, a new account will take over a year to get there ftp. Previously we had the option of farming a counter to at least try and get more crystals while we reliced the 15 characters needed for a GL (about half of them useless). But now new players that don't drop thousands of dollars have to farm a GL while being locked out of the top of arena even longer.

    This is a very bad change. Please reconsider.

    Why wait - the testing of future relic levels was revealing the issue was getting out of hand due to this specific mechanic.

    I believe the refunds for some of them are based on the level needed for other toons. They probably (I'm guessing) also had a threshold of use that they focused on for which toons would receive this treatment.
  • Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Imagine if there were a test server. And they gave access to the more prominent members of the community. Then, when they announce things like this, those guys could provide assurance that the sky is not in fact falling. That would be a game changer, I dare say.

    Instead, we have 6 weeks to fester and worry over these changes.

    They do, and players did test this, and no the sky is not falling.

    Sorry that I dont think any if them have a youtube channel they can use to tell you that.

    Then they are not "prominent".

    That is not true, FYI.

    Who are they? Where have they made any public comments? If they are prominent, they are muzzled to the point of being useless to the community. They may help CG with testing, but that was not my point.
  • You need to listen to your audience CG. This is ridiculous. There needs to be a full on boycott until we are heard and you start asking before you being telling. SWGOH players…That is all they will respond to. CG, You take our time. Fine. You take out money. Fine. But you will not tell us that now we need to invest more time and money because you began making changes to what was already in place. You are the ones that brought the game to where it is now and we have woven ourselves through the changes. There are plenty of characters that everyone has that nobody uses anymore and that’s ok. You say it takes time to get a galactic legend and that it should reflect in the power of the team. What about the time it has taken players over the years to stay viable competing? WHAT ABOUT THEM CG!? Why would any of this even be considered? Are whales and krakens complaining that winning with their wallets isn’t as easy as it should be?

    You need to figure out how to introduce characters by engaging with the community that is better at using your game that you clearly are. That way you don’t upset the timeline. The road ahead is forgetting the road that got you hear and it’s obvious you care only about the capital and not enough about the game.
  • Kyno
    32039 posts Moderator
    Nauros wrote: »
    I think the gear crunch won't be fixed since it makes so much money but how about giving more crystals for completing dailies? Someone not at the top of both arenas (the majority of players) hardly can afford regular energy refreshes and certainly not the super expensive gear. An extra 200 crystals for completing dailies would let ftp feel like they can buy gear occasionally but wouldn't be enough for spenders who want things now.
    200 extra crystals a day would only amount to one piece of gear a week. That wouldn't be enough to significantly ease the gear grind but I think ftp would feel like they have more ability to progress key characters.
    Another option would be to cut gear prices by 50% but that would certainly hurt the games profits.

    I think they talked about moving crystals away from arena some time ago, but it's obviously not happening. Funny how player-friendly changes often get talked about and forgotten...

    Moving crystal income out of arena is player friendly? .... interesting.
  • I know a lot has been said about the gear crunch especially with R9 and I agree with it all. At the time of the character farm improvements it was mentioned gear was being looked at along the same lines, is this anywhere on the roadmap? As people have said the G9-G12 farm is still a nightmare even for end game so if we are going to add more relics can we at least make getting to G12/13 a bit easier as well as making R8 a bit easier
  • Kyno
    32039 posts Moderator
    Nauros wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Imagine if there were a test server. And they gave access to the more prominent members of the community. Then, when they announce things like this, those guys could provide assurance that the sky is not in fact falling. That would be a game changer, I dare say.

    Instead, we have 6 weeks to fester and worry over these changes.

    They do, and players did test this, and no the sky is not falling.

    Sorry that I dont think any if them have a youtube channel they can use to tell you that.

    Then they are not "prominent".

    That is not true, FYI.

    So is there any way other than a youtube channel they can tell us? Or was it supposed to mean that they do have a youtube channel but can't use it to tell us?

    That would violate any agreements they signed, unless CG gave them permission.
Sign In or Register to comment.