I’ve got one GL and Exec. Not a big fan of No Ships GAC.
I don't blame you. But that highlights the fact that there are a lot of people with various strengths and weaknesses who can appreciate a few different variations. Most of us wouldn't do equally well in all possible versions.
Except for LSB and DSB, the first and most basic game mode, in which you can bring a sixth member with a second leader ability.
This game is designed exclusively for 5v5.
Except for TB, where you can summon additional units as you battle more than five opponents in any one wave.
This game is designed exclusively for 5v5.
Except for Fennec’s lead and CAT’s unique, which are designed exclusively for a different number than five. And Wampa’s Omicron.
This game is designed exclusively for 5v5.
Except that the point system in GAC is designed to reward 1v5, 2v5, 3v5, and 4v5 more than 5v5.
This game is designed exclusively for 5v5.
Especially for those whom like to pigeon-hole themselves.
Yes, the game is designed for 5v5. What you listed here is either inconsequential (LS/DS battles that everyone sims anyway) or specially designed exceptions, not the rule. Besides, PvE allows for much more variability than PvP. If you use PvE as an argument, you might as well claim that we should use raid bosses in GAC. And udersizing is entirely in the player's hands, it's a completely different matter when you voluntarily choose to limit your team's synergy for a reward as opposed to being forced into it by design.
So yes, the game is designed for 5v5 with some exceptions, and all your "arguments" fail.
Ok. 3v3 is a specially designed exception too.
Then show me all the mechanisms and balancing that make sure it actually works well.
Come back 10 May.
I will, and if there really is a rebalance for 3v3, I'm willing to change my stance on it. But it's not just about Starkiller and Gideon, others are affected as well. For example, every stat gain per ally/enemy is reduced and should imo be looked into as well. All in all, making 3v3 properly balanced would require a lot of work.
Also GAS is significantly different. He may take less allies that make him stronger, but you also have less firepower to kill the clones before he rises.
And Wampa might be a beast
Less firepower, but less enemies to kill. This is the case for every squad.
GAS mirror and GAS with 120k protection. It took me already 2-3 rounds of GAS kneeling down in a 5 vs 5 match to kill him off.
Of course maybe it is not smart to play it as mirror in 3 vs. 3 though
Then kill the sides faster. Or don't mirror. Use one of the other 10 squads that can beat him. I guarantee GAS isn't unkillable in 3v3.
I think the main problem in 3 vs. 3 is that it is a lot harder to defeat GLs with non-GL teams. So the GL advantage is more important than skill in that mode. You just need to put excessive GLs in the front. Especially JMK+Ahsoka+CAT or JMK+GK+CAT may be an immensive block if you can't mirror it
Not necessarily. As mentioned, Fennec and Wampa, two LG killers, which will certainly benefit from 3v3 setup.
I don’t get arguments that 3v3 isn’t a “real game mode” or similar. How long has 3v3 GAC been in the game? It seems to me that adapting to new units and omicrons and designing teams takes a significant amount of skill/understanding of the game. Highly relevant to a Skill Rating, IMO.
I don’t get arguments that 3v3 isn’t a “real game mode” or similar. How long has 3v3 GAC been in the game? It seems to me that adapting to new units and omicrons and designing teams takes a significant amount of skill/understanding of the game. Highly relevant to a Skill Rating, IMO.
Most people say it would be an imbalanced game mode. Regarding GLs I support this claim.
I always worry with these threads that the devs might take them seriously. 3 v 3 brings a bit of fizz to the game. It’s unpredictable and pushes people out of their comfort zones - which is where all the best bits of life happen. Remember Ray Bradbury said that the secret to life was to jump off the cliff and learn how to grow wings on the way down.
Me and my Wampa are looking forward to the headlong rush towards irrational death very much. See you there!
I always worry with these threads that the devs might take them seriously. 3 v 3 brings a bit of fizz to the game. It’s unpredictable and pushes people out of their comfort zones - which is where all the best bits of life happen. Remember Ray Bradbury said that the secret to life was to jump off the cliff and learn how to grow wings on the way down.
Me and my Wampa are looking forward to the headlong rush towards irrational death very much. See you there!
People want more variety in the game. 3 vs 3 would be perfect if you did not lose crystals by making wrong decisions. With a sandbox-mode where you could test teams composed of three characters, it would be much better.
I always worry with these threads that the devs might take them seriously. 3 v 3 brings a bit of fizz to the game. It’s unpredictable and pushes people out of their comfort zones - which is where all the best bits of life happen. Remember Ray Bradbury said that the secret to life was to jump off the cliff and learn how to grow wings on the way down.
Me and my Wampa are looking forward to the headlong rush towards irrational death very much. See you there!
People want more variety in the game. 3 vs 3 would be perfect if you did not lose crystals by making wrong decisions. With a sandbox-mode where you could test teams composed of three characters, it would be much better.
How dull would it be if there was no jeopardy attached to our decisions? It’s not a primary school sports day where everyone gets a prize for trying - it’s (ahem) an, well it’s a little game on a phone - but still my point stands. Decisions should have consequences- that’s agency.
I always worry with these threads that the devs might take them seriously. 3 v 3 brings a bit of fizz to the game. It’s unpredictable and pushes people out of their comfort zones - which is where all the best bits of life happen. Remember Ray Bradbury said that the secret to life was to jump off the cliff and learn how to grow wings on the way down.
Me and my Wampa are looking forward to the headlong rush towards irrational death very much. See you there!
People want more variety in the game. 3 vs 3 would be perfect if you did not lose crystals by making wrong decisions. With a sandbox-mode where you could test teams composed of three characters, it would be much better.
How dull would it be if there was no jeopardy attached to our decisions? It’s not a primary school sports day where everyone gets a prize for trying - it’s (ahem) an, well it’s a little game on a phone - but still my point stands. Decisions should have consequences- that’s agency.
TIL, practice is for losers?
Seriously, what is this take? Anyone who wants to prepare for something is a participation trophy hungry snowflake? Wut?
It's not like NFL teams spend hours prepping for their games... oh wait, they do. Actually, the only group I can think of that doesn't are little kids or casuals.
I always worry with these threads that the devs might take them seriously. 3 v 3 brings a bit of fizz to the game. It’s unpredictable and pushes people out of their comfort zones - which is where all the best bits of life happen. Remember Ray Bradbury said that the secret to life was to jump off the cliff and learn how to grow wings on the way down.
Me and my Wampa are looking forward to the headlong rush towards irrational death very much. See you there!
People want more variety in the game. 3 vs 3 would be perfect if you did not lose crystals by making wrong decisions. With a sandbox-mode where you could test teams composed of three characters, it would be much better.
How dull would it be if there was no jeopardy attached to our decisions? It’s not a primary school sports day where everyone gets a prize for trying - it’s (ahem) an, well it’s a little game on a phone - but still my point stands. Decisions should have consequences- that’s agency.
You still have to decide which teams you set in defense and which you use for offense. The possibility of testing a team in general does not take away the RnG or the influence of you opponents mods.
I think it will be a good mix up. Some will not like a change if they are happy with their current GAC strategy and like a fixed approach. But I was starting to get bored having met my ceiling now, last few seasons for me have been the 50:50 win rate of playing people equal to my skill and yes I mean skill. Hopefully I may have a chance to do well next month if my opponents are not quick to adapt to the 3v3. I already have some squads ready for 3v3 we did have a hint in the defence set up recently. Of course, expect 3v3 meta to be different to 5v5, I don’t see a point of rebalancing everything, it’s all proportional. If abilities do not fully work or less advantageous in 3v3 they are not working any better for the opponent anyway, so there is no disadvantage. The change to meta is what makes it fresh. I don’t think I particularly have a preference it’s just something different. Get ready to earn the skill rating by your ability to adapt to new requirements!
I always worry with these threads that the devs might take them seriously. 3 v 3 brings a bit of fizz to the game. It’s unpredictable and pushes people out of their comfort zones - which is where all the best bits of life happen. Remember Ray Bradbury said that the secret to life was to jump off the cliff and learn how to grow wings on the way down.
Me and my Wampa are looking forward to the headlong rush towards irrational death very much. See you there!
People want more variety in the game. 3 vs 3 would be perfect if you did not lose crystals by making wrong decisions. With a sandbox-mode where you could test teams composed of three characters, it would be much better.
How dull would it be if there was no jeopardy attached to our decisions? It’s not a primary school sports day where everyone gets a prize for trying - it’s (ahem) an, well it’s a little game on a phone - but still my point stands. Decisions should have consequences- that’s agency.
TIL, practice is for losers?
Seriously, what is this take? Anyone who wants to prepare for something is a participation trophy hungry snowflake? Wut?
It's not like NFL teams spend hours prepping for their games... oh wait, they do. Actually, the only group I can think of that doesn't are little kids or casuals.
No that’s not what I wrote - although feel free to elide what you want. I think practice is good. But GAC isn’t practice. It’s real PvP competition with winners and losers. The point I was trying to make is that decisions should have consequences and jeopardy is good for enjoyable competition . Interesting that you use NFL as an analogy as in my opinion it’s a terrible example - there’s hardly any genuine jeopardy as everything is sewn up by the big franchises to protect financial interests. The draft system & lack of relegation deadens a real sense of jeopardy. Association football is much better - like the English Premier League - where there’s so much more at stake.
I always worry with these threads that the devs might take them seriously. 3 v 3 brings a bit of fizz to the game. It’s unpredictable and pushes people out of their comfort zones - which is where all the best bits of life happen. Remember Ray Bradbury said that the secret to life was to jump off the cliff and learn how to grow wings on the way down.
Me and my Wampa are looking forward to the headlong rush towards irrational death very much. See you there!
People want more variety in the game. 3 vs 3 would be perfect if you did not lose crystals by making wrong decisions. With a sandbox-mode where you could test teams composed of three characters, it would be much better.
How dull would it be if there was no jeopardy attached to our decisions? It’s not a primary school sports day where everyone gets a prize for trying - it’s (ahem) an, well it’s a little game on a phone - but still my point stands. Decisions should have consequences- that’s agency.
TIL, practice is for losers?
Seriously, what is this take? Anyone who wants to prepare for something is a participation trophy hungry snowflake? Wut?
It's not like NFL teams spend hours prepping for their games... oh wait, they do. Actually, the only group I can think of that doesn't are little kids or casuals.
No that’s not what I wrote - although feel free to elide what you want. I think practice is good. But GAC isn’t practice. It’s real PvP competition with winners and losers. The point I was trying to make is that decisions should have consequences and jeopardy is good for enjoyable competition . Interesting that you use NFL as an analogy as in my opinion it’s a terrible example - there’s hardly any genuine jeopardy as everything is sewn up by the big franchises to protect financial interests. The draft system & lack of relegation deadens a real sense of jeopardy. Association football is much better - like the English Premier League - where there’s so much more at stake.
You responded to someone saying they want a practice mode by insulting them. Perhaps you can clarify how giving us a way to practice counters before using them in GAC is somehow coddling people?
I do like 3v3, feels refreshing and different every now and then.
However, I do agree 3v3 should have an independent skill rating and divisions bracket.
I do like 3v3, feels refreshing and different every now and then.
However, I do agree 3v3 should have an independent skill rating and divisions bracket.
I would prefer a mixed map. Lets say a 3 vs 3 field in front of fleets and two 5 vs 5 field at the bottom.
I always worry with these threads that the devs might take them seriously. 3 v 3 brings a bit of fizz to the game. It’s unpredictable and pushes people out of their comfort zones - which is where all the best bits of life happen. Remember Ray Bradbury said that the secret to life was to jump off the cliff and learn how to grow wings on the way down.
Me and my Wampa are looking forward to the headlong rush towards irrational death very much. See you there!
People want more variety in the game. 3 vs 3 would be perfect if you did not lose crystals by making wrong decisions. With a sandbox-mode where you could test teams composed of three characters, it would be much better.
How dull would it be if there was no jeopardy attached to our decisions? It’s not a primary school sports day where everyone gets a prize for trying - it’s (ahem) an, well it’s a little game on a phone - but still my point stands. Decisions should have consequences- that’s agency.
TIL, practice is for losers?
Seriously, what is this take? Anyone who wants to prepare for something is a participation trophy hungry snowflake? Wut?
It's not like NFL teams spend hours prepping for their games... oh wait, they do. Actually, the only group I can think of that doesn't are little kids or casuals.
No that’s not what I wrote - although feel free to elide what you want. I think practice is good. But GAC isn’t practice. It’s real PvP competition with winners and losers. The point I was trying to make is that decisions should have consequences and jeopardy is good for enjoyable competition . Interesting that you use NFL as an analogy as in my opinion it’s a terrible example - there’s hardly any genuine jeopardy as everything is sewn up by the big franchises to protect financial interests. The draft system & lack of relegation deadens a real sense of jeopardy. Association football is much better - like the English Premier League - where there’s so much more at stake.
You responded to someone saying they want a practice mode by insulting them. Perhaps you can clarify how giving us a way to practice counters before using them in GAC is somehow coddling people?
No I responded to their statement that it wouldn’t be so bad it you weren’t punished for making wrong decisions. Like I said I don’t have a problem with a practice mode. Quordles got one and I enjoy that
I always worry with these threads that the devs might take them seriously. 3 v 3 brings a bit of fizz to the game. It’s unpredictable and pushes people out of their comfort zones - which is where all the best bits of life happen. Remember Ray Bradbury said that the secret to life was to jump off the cliff and learn how to grow wings on the way down.
Me and my Wampa are looking forward to the headlong rush towards irrational death very much. See you there!
People want more variety in the game. 3 vs 3 would be perfect if you did not lose crystals by making wrong decisions. With a sandbox-mode where you could test teams composed of three characters, it would be much better.
How dull would it be if there was no jeopardy attached to our decisions? It’s not a primary school sports day where everyone gets a prize for trying - it’s (ahem) an, well it’s a little game on a phone - but still my point stands. Decisions should have consequences- that’s agency.
TIL, practice is for losers?
Seriously, what is this take? Anyone who wants to prepare for something is a participation trophy hungry snowflake? Wut?
It's not like NFL teams spend hours prepping for their games... oh wait, they do. Actually, the only group I can think of that doesn't are little kids or casuals.
No that’s not what I wrote - although feel free to elide what you want. I think practice is good. But GAC isn’t practice. It’s real PvP competition with winners and losers. The point I was trying to make is that decisions should have consequences and jeopardy is good for enjoyable competition . Interesting that you use NFL as an analogy as in my opinion it’s a terrible example - there’s hardly any genuine jeopardy as everything is sewn up by the big franchises to protect financial interests. The draft system & lack of relegation deadens a real sense of jeopardy. Association football is much better - like the English Premier League - where there’s so much more at stake.
You responded to someone saying they want a practice mode by insulting them. Perhaps you can clarify how giving us a way to practice counters before using them in GAC is somehow coddling people?
No I responded to their statement that it wouldn’t be so bad it you weren’t punished for making wrong decisions. Like I said I don’t have a problem with a practice mode. Quordles got one and I enjoy that
You compared the wish for a sandbox-mode with primary school. If you don't need to test stuff, don't use that tool.
I always worry with these threads that the devs might take them seriously. 3 v 3 brings a bit of fizz to the game. It’s unpredictable and pushes people out of their comfort zones - which is where all the best bits of life happen. Remember Ray Bradbury said that the secret to life was to jump off the cliff and learn how to grow wings on the way down.
Me and my Wampa are looking forward to the headlong rush towards irrational death very much. See you there!
People want more variety in the game. 3 vs 3 would be perfect if you did not lose crystals by making wrong decisions. With a sandbox-mode where you could test teams composed of three characters, it would be much better.
How dull would it be if there was no jeopardy attached to our decisions? It’s not a primary school sports day where everyone gets a prize for trying - it’s (ahem) an, well it’s a little game on a phone - but still my point stands. Decisions should have consequences- that’s agency.
TIL, practice is for losers?
Seriously, what is this take? Anyone who wants to prepare for something is a participation trophy hungry snowflake? Wut?
It's not like NFL teams spend hours prepping for their games... oh wait, they do. Actually, the only group I can think of that doesn't are little kids or casuals.
No that’s not what I wrote - although feel free to elide what you want. I think practice is good. But GAC isn’t practice. It’s real PvP competition with winners and losers. The point I was trying to make is that decisions should have consequences and jeopardy is good for enjoyable competition . Interesting that you use NFL as an analogy as in my opinion it’s a terrible example - there’s hardly any genuine jeopardy as everything is sewn up by the big franchises to protect financial interests. The draft system & lack of relegation deadens a real sense of jeopardy. Association football is much better - like the English Premier League - where there’s so much more at stake.
You responded to someone saying they want a practice mode by insulting them. Perhaps you can clarify how giving us a way to practice counters before using them in GAC is somehow coddling people?
No I responded to their statement that it wouldn’t be so bad it you weren’t punished for making wrong decisions. Like I said I don’t have a problem with a practice mode. Quordles got one and I enjoy that
You compared the wish for a sandbox-mode with primary school. If you don't need to test stuff, don't use that tool.
No. Although I’m genuinely sorry if you misconstrued my reply - I really didn’t want to hurt anyones feelings. I was specifically responding to your statement “ People want more variety in the game. 3 vs 3 would be perfect if you did not lose crystals by making wrong decisions”. Which I disagree with. However I’m all for a practice mode
I always worry with these threads that the devs might take them seriously. 3 v 3 brings a bit of fizz to the game. It’s unpredictable and pushes people out of their comfort zones - which is where all the best bits of life happen. Remember Ray Bradbury said that the secret to life was to jump off the cliff and learn how to grow wings on the way down.
Me and my Wampa are looking forward to the headlong rush towards irrational death very much. See you there!
People want more variety in the game. 3 vs 3 would be perfect if you did not lose crystals by making wrong decisions. With a sandbox-mode where you could test teams composed of three characters, it would be much better.
How dull would it be if there was no jeopardy attached to our decisions? It’s not a primary school sports day where everyone gets a prize for trying - it’s (ahem) an, well it’s a little game on a phone - but still my point stands. Decisions should have consequences- that’s agency.
TIL, practice is for losers?
Seriously, what is this take? Anyone who wants to prepare for something is a participation trophy hungry snowflake? Wut?
It's not like NFL teams spend hours prepping for their games... oh wait, they do. Actually, the only group I can think of that doesn't are little kids or casuals.
No that’s not what I wrote - although feel free to elide what you want. I think practice is good. But GAC isn’t practice. It’s real PvP competition with winners and losers. The point I was trying to make is that decisions should have consequences and jeopardy is good for enjoyable competition . Interesting that you use NFL as an analogy as in my opinion it’s a terrible example - there’s hardly any genuine jeopardy as everything is sewn up by the big franchises to protect financial interests. The draft system & lack of relegation deadens a real sense of jeopardy. Association football is much better - like the English Premier League - where there’s so much more at stake.
You responded to someone saying they want a practice mode by insulting them. Perhaps you can clarify how giving us a way to practice counters before using them in GAC is somehow coddling people?
No I responded to their statement that it wouldn’t be so bad it you weren’t punished for making wrong decisions. Like I said I don’t have a problem with a practice mode. Quordles got one and I enjoy that
You compared the wish for a sandbox-mode with primary school. If you don't need to test stuff, don't use that tool.
No. Although I’m genuinely sorry if you misconstrued my reply - I really didn’t want to hurt anyones feelings. I was specifically responding to your statement “ People want more variety in the game. 3 vs 3 would be perfect if you did not lose crystals by making wrong decisions”. Which I disagree with. However I’m all for a practice mode
The sentence immediately following that is kinda critical to ignore.
I always worry with these threads that the devs might take them seriously. 3 v 3 brings a bit of fizz to the game. It’s unpredictable and pushes people out of their comfort zones - which is where all the best bits of life happen. Remember Ray Bradbury said that the secret to life was to jump off the cliff and learn how to grow wings on the way down.
Me and my Wampa are looking forward to the headlong rush towards irrational death very much. See you there!
People want more variety in the game. 3 vs 3 would be perfect if you did not lose crystals by making wrong decisions. With a sandbox-mode where you could test teams composed of three characters, it would be much better.
How dull would it be if there was no jeopardy attached to our decisions? It’s not a primary school sports day where everyone gets a prize for trying - it’s (ahem) an, well it’s a little game on a phone - but still my point stands. Decisions should have consequences- that’s agency.
TIL, practice is for losers?
Seriously, what is this take? Anyone who wants to prepare for something is a participation trophy hungry snowflake? Wut?
It's not like NFL teams spend hours prepping for their games... oh wait, they do. Actually, the only group I can think of that doesn't are little kids or casuals.
No that’s not what I wrote - although feel free to elide what you want. I think practice is good. But GAC isn’t practice. It’s real PvP competition with winners and losers. The point I was trying to make is that decisions should have consequences and jeopardy is good for enjoyable competition . Interesting that you use NFL as an analogy as in my opinion it’s a terrible example - there’s hardly any genuine jeopardy as everything is sewn up by the big franchises to protect financial interests. The draft system & lack of relegation deadens a real sense of jeopardy. Association football is much better - like the English Premier League - where there’s so much more at stake.
You responded to someone saying they want a practice mode by insulting them. Perhaps you can clarify how giving us a way to practice counters before using them in GAC is somehow coddling people?
No I responded to their statement that it wouldn’t be so bad it you weren’t punished for making wrong decisions. Like I said I don’t have a problem with a practice mode. Quordles got one and I enjoy that
You compared the wish for a sandbox-mode with primary school. If you don't need to test stuff, don't use that tool.
No. Although I’m genuinely sorry if you misconstrued my reply - I really didn’t want to hurt anyones feelings. I was specifically responding to your statement “ People want more variety in the game. 3 vs 3 would be perfect if you did not lose crystals by making wrong decisions”. Which I disagree with. However I’m all for a practice mode
Apology accepted. It seems, though that it was not just me who got your words wrong.
As I wrote a sandbox mode will not guarantee a win. On the one hand you still have RnG and mods (especially turn order) and on the other hand you still need to decide which teams to use for defense and what you keep for offense. Also if several fights you tested work, you have to decide which one you want to use in the real battle, trying to maximize your banner. There is also still the fog of war and some strong teams might catch you off guard
People that dislike 3v3 clearly don't have Reysus and consistently lose to her...
If you don't want to learn the meta, that's your choice. It's a completely legitimate game mode in its own right.
I always worry with these threads that the devs might take them seriously. 3 v 3 brings a bit of fizz to the game. It’s unpredictable and pushes people out of their comfort zones - which is where all the best bits of life happen. Remember Ray Bradbury said that the secret to life was to jump off the cliff and learn how to grow wings on the way down.
Me and my Wampa are looking forward to the headlong rush towards irrational death very much. See you there!
People want more variety in the game. 3 vs 3 would be perfect if you did not lose crystals by making wrong decisions. With a sandbox-mode where you could test teams composed of three characters, it would be much better.
.......You want to devote ALOT of time to a sandbox mode we don't and never will have given how many various 3v3 comps you can make. It'd take you minimum of a week to even just do a couple of the larger factions. But what really bugs me is the whole "3v3 would be great if we didn't lose crystals by making wrong decisions" sentence. Seriously?! You've taken offense to someone responding to you but imagine if you'd said 5v5 instead of 3v3. You'd be laughed out of here. You lose crystals all the time by making the wrong decisions in GAC. That's an element of all PVP gameplay.
... but imagine if you'd said 5v5 instead of 3v3. You'd be laughed out of here. You lose crystals all the time by making the wrong decisions in GAC. That's an element of all PVP gameplay.
Yeah, but we know 5v5 since our first battle in swgoh. Teams of five are used in many game modes. But there is no place in game where we can practice 3v3 fights. The only battles we can play that mode are in GAC and thus directly linked to the crystal income
The movement of payout crystals to GAC was admittedly irritating when it happened, but it was something I could deal with. Was never crazy about GAC but I'll give it a go every now and then. But 3v3, after the months and months of building up 5v5 as the staple source of crystals, people spending money, doing omnicrons, creating entire teams to fit around the 5v5 meta that makes up where our crystals now come from, only to throw 3v3 back in which the developers know was a notorious point of conflict within the community. I wouldn't mind if they asked for feedback to see if the majority actually wanted this, but they haven't. I wouldn't mind if they told us our skill rating wouldn't be affected during 3v3's, but they haven't. I wouldn't mind if we had a separate skill rating for 3v3 and 5v5, but we don't. Personally, I have no desire to change the entire way I strategise for half a game mode that the format has never been seen outside of this game mode (except like once or twice when they were experimenting with TW?) I'm a 5+ year player and it's already more than enough to go through 5v5 with all these GL's and different omnicrons to think about, I don't want to have to create data sets and other various notes for a rather dire format for this game mode, where the focal character of said game mode does not even work in this given format.
Replies
I don't blame you. But that highlights the fact that there are a lot of people with various strengths and weaknesses who can appreciate a few different variations. Most of us wouldn't do equally well in all possible versions.
Not necessarily. As mentioned, Fennec and Wampa, two LG killers, which will certainly benefit from 3v3 setup.
Most people say it would be an imbalanced game mode. Regarding GLs I support this claim.
ftfy
Me and my Wampa are looking forward to the headlong rush towards irrational death very much. See you there!
Why? They already took our SK omi away. Haven't we suffered enough?!
No we have not!
People want more variety in the game. 3 vs 3 would be perfect if you did not lose crystals by making wrong decisions. With a sandbox-mode where you could test teams composed of three characters, it would be much better.
How dull would it be if there was no jeopardy attached to our decisions? It’s not a primary school sports day where everyone gets a prize for trying - it’s (ahem) an, well it’s a little game on a phone - but still my point stands. Decisions should have consequences- that’s agency.
TIL, practice is for losers?
Seriously, what is this take? Anyone who wants to prepare for something is a participation trophy hungry snowflake? Wut?
It's not like NFL teams spend hours prepping for their games... oh wait, they do. Actually, the only group I can think of that doesn't are little kids or casuals.
You still have to decide which teams you set in defense and which you use for offense. The possibility of testing a team in general does not take away the RnG or the influence of you opponents mods.
Edit: removed last sentence
No that’s not what I wrote - although feel free to elide what you want. I think practice is good. But GAC isn’t practice. It’s real PvP competition with winners and losers. The point I was trying to make is that decisions should have consequences and jeopardy is good for enjoyable competition . Interesting that you use NFL as an analogy as in my opinion it’s a terrible example - there’s hardly any genuine jeopardy as everything is sewn up by the big franchises to protect financial interests. The draft system & lack of relegation deadens a real sense of jeopardy. Association football is much better - like the English Premier League - where there’s so much more at stake.
You responded to someone saying they want a practice mode by insulting them. Perhaps you can clarify how giving us a way to practice counters before using them in GAC is somehow coddling people?
However, I do agree 3v3 should have an independent skill rating and divisions bracket.
I would prefer a mixed map. Lets say a 3 vs 3 field in front of fleets and two 5 vs 5 field at the bottom.
No I responded to their statement that it wouldn’t be so bad it you weren’t punished for making wrong decisions. Like I said I don’t have a problem with a practice mode. Quordles got one and I enjoy that
You compared the wish for a sandbox-mode with primary school. If you don't need to test stuff, don't use that tool.
No. Although I’m genuinely sorry if you misconstrued my reply - I really didn’t want to hurt anyones feelings. I was specifically responding to your statement “ People want more variety in the game. 3 vs 3 would be perfect if you did not lose crystals by making wrong decisions”. Which I disagree with. However I’m all for a practice mode
The sentence immediately following that is kinda critical to ignore.
Apology accepted. It seems, though that it was not just me who got your words wrong.
As I wrote a sandbox mode will not guarantee a win. On the one hand you still have RnG and mods (especially turn order) and on the other hand you still need to decide which teams to use for defense and what you keep for offense. Also if several fights you tested work, you have to decide which one you want to use in the real battle, trying to maximize your banner. There is also still the fog of war and some strong teams might catch you off guard
If you don't want to learn the meta, that's your choice. It's a completely legitimate game mode in its own right.
.......You want to devote ALOT of time to a sandbox mode we don't and never will have given how many various 3v3 comps you can make. It'd take you minimum of a week to even just do a couple of the larger factions. But what really bugs me is the whole "3v3 would be great if we didn't lose crystals by making wrong decisions" sentence. Seriously?! You've taken offense to someone responding to you but imagine if you'd said 5v5 instead of 3v3. You'd be laughed out of here.
Yeah, but we know 5v5 since our first battle in swgoh. Teams of five are used in many game modes. But there is no place in game where we can practice 3v3 fights. The only battles we can play that mode are in GAC and thus directly linked to the crystal income