If you can't think of a good reason to use Chimera now, given the recent releases, then nobody else can help you.
Please oh wise one, what use for Chimera w/ no ships is there?
With no ships? It's useless. With an empire fleet? It's now amazing - both against Negotiator and as a solid 2-shot Executor strategy.
And there’s only enough ships for one empire fleet. Leaving either the Chimera or Executrix useless with no ships to use. Although still either would be arguably better than the endurance bahahaha
If you can't think of a good reason to use Chimera now, given the recent releases, then nobody else can help you.
Please oh wise one, what use for Chimera w/ no ships is there?
With no ships? It's useless. With an empire fleet? It's now amazing - both against Negotiator and as a solid 2-shot Executor strategy.
And there’s only enough ships for one empire fleet. Leaving either the Chimera or Executrix useless with no ships to use. Although still either would be arguably better than the endurance bahahaha
Well, Chimaera is much better than Executrix, so it's not really a question.
We of course need more ships, and it's weird that each Capital still doesn't have at least 5 distinct ships it can use, but here we are. Eventually we'll get those ships, so it's a very temporary "issue."
If you can't think of a good reason to use Chimera now, given the recent releases, then nobody else can help you.
Please oh wise one, what use for Chimera w/ no ships is there?
With no ships? It's useless. With an empire fleet? It's now amazing - both against Negotiator and as a solid 2-shot Executor strategy.
And there’s only enough ships for one empire fleet. Leaving either the Chimera or Executrix useless with no ships to use. Although still either would be arguably better than the endurance bahahaha
Well, Chimaera is much better than Executrix, so it's not really a question.
We of course need more ships, and it's weird that each Capital still doesn't have at least 5 distinct ships it can use, but here we are. Eventually we'll get those ships, so it's a very temporary "issue."
Oh I agree. Some may find a better use for executrix if they don’t own the Interceptor but personally I’d run chimera with that ship all day
If you can't think of a good reason to use Chimera now, given the recent releases, then nobody else can help you.
Please oh wise one, what use for Chimera w/ no ships is there?
With no ships? It's useless. With an empire fleet? It's now amazing - both against Negotiator and as a solid 2-shot Executor strategy.
And there’s only enough ships for one empire fleet. Leaving either the Chimera or Executrix useless with no ships to use. Although still either would be arguably better than the endurance bahahaha
Yeah-my point was that the person I was originally responding to was saying that Chimera was worthless - and I had commented that if they think Chimera is useless-particularly after TieInt comes out, then they can't really be helped.
During the rebel, then mal, nego meta where neither empire ship had any chance of reaching ult, I think Executrix was the better empire capital, with better tm gains for the fleet, and straight offence increase, where crits were not required.
Now the interceptor puts the ults back on the table with more cap ship tm gain, I'd go back to Chimera.
It's just absurd. Everyone knows the vast majority of the time the opponent won't have enough capital ships to clear, so all the gls will be placed on the bottom as that's where all the point are. It's just such a **** update removing the last bit of fun from this game
Based on where the game currently is with ships, this is possibly the worst decisions ever made.
Basically it gifts GAC win to the more gl/gp accounts. I understand the new GAC match-ups and have faced maybe 4 total opponents with the same/less Gls than me. I have no issue with fighting up. I usually could compete because I have done well to beef up some fleets. My opponent just placed a defense (900k more gp + 1 more GL) and all 3 meta ships so they could win on efficiency. Which is possible with more GLs and more Gp.
By placing more Ships, it makes it almost radically impossible to full clear someone who does that and can Basically just rely on the fact they have more gl/bigger roster to win.
Skill has been removed from GAC for the time being.
Manufacturing pain to create demand when there is no competition is a cruel business practice
I had 0 ground drops, and my opponent had 5. Yet I lost? I one shot executor, and chimera, but lost to negotiator. My opponent two shot both negotiator and nego? He magically had 8 strong fleet to attack? Regardless of the common cheating in GAC, I dominated overall yet lost to ship rng. Adding a fleet with no fleets avilable is such a huge mistake, if you care about the better player winning.
I don't get the point of this discussion. As we all know genius CG don't caring about logic or good gameplay at all.
Also the two devs (can't be more of them) neverever talk with the other one. May first one said: "I'll prog some new (bugged) ships, that's my work for the next 12 months." The other on answered: "Okay, so I'll change GAC a bit." Both are fine with each other, they never talked about a timeline or so...
... really, again and again, it's the same. CG devs neverever play their own game, they simply have no idea, how 'their' game really works, sadlywise.
Based on where the game currently is with ships, this is possibly the worst decisions ever made.
Basically it gifts GAC win to the more gl/gp accounts.
So where's the problem?
The problem is moving crystals to a game mode based on skill (which I had no problem with). I even had no problem with fighting people who have 1 million more GP and 1-3 more GLs. However, in this latest update, the people with more GLs, are all but guaranteed a win, where as before, this wasn't so (if I can full clear but you can't clear my exec, I win).
As I mentioned, it's based on this point in time. Without having the "ship load" of new content, this move could have been postponed until more Ships were added.
Based on where the game currently is with ships, this is possibly the worst decisions ever made.
Basically it gifts GAC win to the more gl/gp accounts.
So where's the problem?
The problem is moving crystals to a game mode based on skill (which I had no problem with). I even had no problem with fighting people who have 1 million more GP and 1-3 more GLs. However, in this latest update, the people with more GLs, are all but guaranteed a win, where as before, this wasn't so (if I can full clear but you can't clear my exec, I win).
As I mentioned, it's based on this point in time. Without having the "ship load" of new content, this move could have been postponed until more Ships were added.
So you were OK with getting an automatic win for having exec, but not for having 3 more GLs?
Based on where the game currently is with ships, this is possibly the worst decisions ever made.
Basically it gifts GAC win to the more gl/gp accounts.
So where's the problem?
The problem is moving crystals to a game mode based on skill (which I had no problem with). I even had no problem with fighting people who have 1 million more GP and 1-3 more GLs. However, in this latest update, the people with more GLs, are all but guaranteed a win, where as before, this wasn't so (if I can full clear but you can't clear my exec, I win).
As I mentioned, it's based on this point in time. Without having the "ship load" of new content, this move could have been postponed until more Ships were added.
So you were OK with getting an automatic win for having exec, but not for having 3 more GLs?
The exec wasn't an auto win as almost every opponent also had it. I did however like having the chance to win, not the opponent just setting all 3 Meta fleets.
Based on where the game currently is with ships, this is possibly the worst decisions ever made.
Basically it gifts GAC win to the more gl/gp accounts.
So where's the problem?
The problem is moving crystals to a game mode based on skill (which I had no problem with). I even had no problem with fighting people who have 1 million more GP and 1-3 more GLs. However, in this latest update, the people with more GLs, are all but guaranteed a win, where as before, this wasn't so (if I can full clear but you can't clear my exec, I win).
As I mentioned, it's based on this point in time. Without having the "ship load" of new content, this move could have been postponed until more Ships were added.
So you were OK with getting an automatic win for having exec, but not for having 3 more GLs?
The exec wasn't an auto win as almost every opponent also had it. I did however like having the chance to win, not the opponent just setting all 3 Meta fleets.
Based on where the game currently is with ships, this is possibly the worst decisions ever made.
Basically it gifts GAC win to the more gl/gp accounts.
So where's the problem?
The problem is moving crystals to a game mode based on skill (which I had no problem with). I even had no problem with fighting people who have 1 million more GP and 1-3 more GLs. However, in this latest update, the people with more GLs, are all but guaranteed a win, where as before, this wasn't so (if I can full clear but you can't clear my exec, I win).
As I mentioned, it's based on this point in time. Without having the "ship load" of new content, this move could have been postponed until more Ships were added.
So you were OK with getting an automatic win for having exec, but not for having 3 more GLs?
The exec wasn't an auto win as almost every opponent also had it. I did however like having the chance to win, not the opponent just setting all 3 Meta fleets.
Having more GLs still isn't an auto win either.
If you have more Gls (and exec) and set all 3 meta fleets, it's a higher win % than before. Again, I don't mind this change, if they did it after we got the ship content.
As I said before, manufacturing pain to create demand is a cruel business practice.
Also, you are missing the point. My issue is with the timing of adding the fleet. Eventually we were going to gave 3, but atleast give us the ships to do it.
Also, you are missing the point. My issue is with the timing of adding the fleet. Eventually we were going to gave 3, but atleast give us the ships to do it.
We have the ships to do it now. I set 3 fleets on defense (2 of which got holds) and I cleared 3 fleets on offense.
Also, you are missing the point. My issue is with the timing of adding the fleet. Eventually we were going to gave 3, but atleast give us the ships to do it.
I don't disagree that the timing is odd/bad. But if the only downside you see is that someone with exec and more GLs has a higher win rate, I can't get on board with your reasoning.
Thanks CG for ruining GAC which I enjoyed the most... all my enemies are with 7* Executors which is 50/50 to beat with Malevolence + Tie Fighter combo and my Empire team lose a valuable ship there. If anyone can give tips for a good fleet defense I'd love to hear it. Not everyone has all the money to make the greedy devs of CG richer...
I’m f2p and I suspected that executor would be worth more than going for another GL. Hindsight I’m glad I did.
Given the scarcity of fleets and the high crystal yield of being on top of the ship game, whenever a new ship is released always make sure to go for it.
Also, you are missing the point. My issue is with the timing of adding the fleet. Eventually we were going to gave 3, but atleast give us the ships to do it.
You have 7 fleets for 3 nodes. That's not plenty, but that's enough.
I really don't like that whoever fights first is at disadvantage. Following scenario: Both players set a strong Defense with Exe and Nego. Player a) goes first, two-shots executor and then fails on Nego. Now the opponent knows, he does not need to take the risky Exe fight. He can just battle the other two fleets and automatically makes more points. If he would not know whether he needs to clear that field, he must also try do beat Executor.
I really don't like that whoever fights first is at disadvantage. Following scenario: Both players set a strong Defense with Exe and Nego. Player a) goes first, two-shots executor and then fails on Nego. Now the opponent knows, he does not need to take the risky Exe fight. He can just battle the other two fleets and automatically makes more points. If he would not know whether he needs to clear that field, he must also try do beat Executor.
This has been covered pretty thoroughly before. Going second is only a perceived advantage. If it were statistically relevant CG would have done something. The amount of battles won or lost as a result are going to be pretty low. And if I'm wrong, then there is no way to prove that going second is why someone won or that going first is why someone lost.
I really don't like that whoever fights first is at disadvantage. Following scenario: Both players set a strong Defense with Exe and Nego. Player a) goes first, two-shots executor and then fails on Nego. Now the opponent knows, he does not need to take the risky Exe fight. He can just battle the other two fleets and automatically makes more points. If he would not know whether he needs to clear that field, he must also try do beat Executor.
This has been covered pretty thoroughly before. Going second is only a perceived advantage. If it were statistically relevant CG would have done something. The amount of battles won or lost as a result are going to be pretty low. And if I'm wrong, then there is no way to prove that going second is why someone won or that going first is why someone lost.
I think the situation has changed because we have not enough fleets to compensate fails.
Replies
And there’s only enough ships for one empire fleet. Leaving either the Chimera or Executrix useless with no ships to use. Although still either would be arguably better than the endurance bahahaha
Well, Chimaera is much better than Executrix, so it's not really a question.
We of course need more ships, and it's weird that each Capital still doesn't have at least 5 distinct ships it can use, but here we are. Eventually we'll get those ships, so it's a very temporary "issue."
Oh I agree. Some may find a better use for executrix if they don’t own the Interceptor but personally I’d run chimera with that ship all day
Yeah-my point was that the person I was originally responding to was saying that Chimera was worthless - and I had commented that if they think Chimera is useless-particularly after TieInt comes out, then they can't really be helped.
Now the interceptor puts the ults back on the table with more cap ship tm gain, I'd go back to Chimera.
Basically it gifts GAC win to the more gl/gp accounts. I understand the new GAC match-ups and have faced maybe 4 total opponents with the same/less Gls than me. I have no issue with fighting up. I usually could compete because I have done well to beef up some fleets. My opponent just placed a defense (900k more gp + 1 more GL) and all 3 meta ships so they could win on efficiency. Which is possible with more GLs and more Gp.
By placing more Ships, it makes it almost radically impossible to full clear someone who does that and can Basically just rely on the fact they have more gl/bigger roster to win.
Skill has been removed from GAC for the time being.
Manufacturing pain to create demand when there is no competition is a cruel business practice
GAC is 99% ships now. They might as well eliminate ground.
So where's the problem?
Also the two devs (can't be more of them) neverever talk with the other one. May first one said: "I'll prog some new (bugged) ships, that's my work for the next 12 months." The other on answered: "Okay, so I'll change GAC a bit." Both are fine with each other, they never talked about a timeline or so...
... really, again and again, it's the same. CG devs neverever play their own game, they simply have no idea, how 'their' game really works, sadlywise.
The problem is moving crystals to a game mode based on skill (which I had no problem with). I even had no problem with fighting people who have 1 million more GP and 1-3 more GLs. However, in this latest update, the people with more GLs, are all but guaranteed a win, where as before, this wasn't so (if I can full clear but you can't clear my exec, I win).
As I mentioned, it's based on this point in time. Without having the "ship load" of new content, this move could have been postponed until more Ships were added.
So you were OK with getting an automatic win for having exec, but not for having 3 more GLs?
The exec wasn't an auto win as almost every opponent also had it. I did however like having the chance to win, not the opponent just setting all 3 Meta fleets.
Having more GLs still isn't an auto win either.
If you have more Gls (and exec) and set all 3 meta fleets, it's a higher win % than before. Again, I don't mind this change, if they did it after we got the ship content.
As I said before, manufacturing pain to create demand is a cruel business practice.
We have the ships to do it now. I set 3 fleets on defense (2 of which got holds) and I cleared 3 fleets on offense.
I don't disagree that the timing is odd/bad. But if the only downside you see is that someone with exec and more GLs has a higher win rate, I can't get on board with your reasoning.
Given the scarcity of fleets and the high crystal yield of being on top of the ship game, whenever a new ship is released always make sure to go for it.
You have 7 fleets for 3 nodes. That's not plenty, but that's enough.
This has been covered pretty thoroughly before. Going second is only a perceived advantage. If it were statistically relevant CG would have done something. The amount of battles won or lost as a result are going to be pretty low. And if I'm wrong, then there is no way to prove that going second is why someone won or that going first is why someone lost.
I think the situation has changed because we have not enough fleets to compensate fails.