3v3 territory war?

SBC: Where does Padmé fit best in the game?
CGF: Padmé is a leader of the Galactic Republic squad and should be very competitive in PvP. Our goal is for her squad to sit alongside Darth Revan (without Malak) and Jedi Knight Revan squads in terms of power level and competitive viability.

"Acrofales;c-1850923" wrote:

"Liath;c-1850895" wrote:

"Skylicus;c-1850881" wrote:

"Kokie;c-1850874" wrote:
For those highly competitive tw guilds complaining of 3v3 and a wall of DR malak teams well guess what? Your opponent has the exact same problem. This 3v3 simply makes it even more competitive which is exactly what I though you wanted. Besides I thought everyone said JKA simply destroys DR/malak so it should be easy :p

So I should be happy that my opponent as well as I can't clear the first two walls? That isn't competition, that is a broken game mode.

If it can be beaten by mirrors can’t you just save your own DRs for offense and avoid the problem?

No. It's basically the same as the current unfortunate GA. You have a choice:

1. Set DR on defense. If you do this and your opponent does the same, you both probably don't clear that territory. You then plan on being able to beat everything else more efficiently and win on points. If you both set DR and he can clear it and you can't, you lose. If he saves DR for offense, there is still a significant RNG component in winning a DR vs DR fight.

2. Hold DR for offense. If you do this and your opponent does the same, you both have total overkill and it comes down to points. If you do this and your opponent put his on defense, then you still have a significant RNG component in winning, while your opponent doesn't.

Mods pay a big role in mitigating the RNG, so further decisionmaking goes as follows: if you have a slower DR, you should never hold it for attack, because even if your opponent put his DR on defense, you have an uphill RNG fight to win. So a slower DR should always go on defense. However, knowing this, a faster DR has two choices: hold his for offense, and face the slight RNG chance battle, or set his on defense as well, especially given that people don't play perfectly and you might just outright win by his slower DR being on offense and getting messed up by RNG. So you should also set your DR on defense.

In other words, game theory says set DR on defense and then bet on clearing the rest more efficiently. Worst case: you both face a complete gamble on trying to beat DR without your own. Best case: you don't have to worry about DR and he does.

So, no, you cannot just keep DR for offense and call it a day. In TW, you *could* keep some magic percentage of your DRs for offense, and that is exactly where all that preparation that TW leaders do: look at how well modded your opponents DR+malaks are. Look at how many other counters you can "waste" throwing them at a possible full DR wall, etc. etc. And all of this is completely new for 3v3 and has nowhere to be tested, making it a hell of a lot of work. If it's hard to do for GA, imagine trying to do that for a 50v50 guild battle.

It’s not the same as GA because you have some number of DR/Malak that is higher than 1 (and I would imagine in most cases less than 50 but maybe you all live in the 300m GP guild world that doesn’t really exist to me). So there isn’t a binary choice of set on defense or save for offense, you can do a combination, as you acknowledge.

Plus it will depend on the map. We don’t actually know what the map will look like in 3v3 so it’s not clear that you will be able to block off the entire thing with just Malak Teams. There may be more than 50 teams in front territories which allows you to play for the other squads and zones, much like you can with GA. So it’s a bit early to declare the match a stalemate.

Unless they actually add territories (and nothing CG has ever done would lead me to believe they will) 20-25 malaks in the front two zones does the same thing whether its 25 teams per zone or 100.

My guild already settles for 2nd place rewards in TW. Looks like this is a done deal now.

"Ikky2win;c-1850876" wrote:

"Kokie;c-1850874" wrote:
For those highly competitive tw guilds complaining of 3v3 and a wall of DR malak teams well guess what? Your opponent has the exact same problem. This 3v3 simply makes it even more competitive which is exactly what I though you wanted. Besides I thought everyone said JKA simply destroys DR/malak so it should be easy :p

Apparently someone hasn’t read the nerf to JKA that was posted yesterday.

That was just me being sarcastic about all the panic post about JKR lol

"Jaxom;c-1850995" wrote:

"Firebrigade;c-1850970" wrote:

"yohann269;c-1850938" wrote:
SBC: Where does Padmé fit best in the game?
CGF: Padmé is a leader of the Galactic Republic squad and should be very competitive in PvP. Our goal is for her squad to sit alongside Darth Revan (without Malak) and Jedi Knight Revan squads in terms of power level and competitive viability.

"Skylicus;c-1850940" wrote:

While you are correct we don't have Padme available to us currently, word from the testers is that Padme doesn't have an easy time against DR (w/malak) in 5's and in 3s she stands no chance. Obviously that's from a relatively small test base but I for one am not holding my breath that Padme will affect this at all.

I’m well aware of what they posted in the insights post. It doesn’t make any specific reference to 3v3, and nothing I’ve heard coming out of the testing has specifically mentioned how she fared in 3v3. Having 1/3 of your squad be immune to fear seems like better odds than 1/5. Graceful Assault also has an undispellable Stun on it, making it so you can actually stun the team despite DRs unique. Pair the two of them up with C3PO, and all of a sudden you’ll be able to run that stun just about every turn thanks to Translate as well as fully leveraging JKA’s nerfed unique. Additionally, JKA/Padme synergy will negate DR Deathmark. Seems like it’s got a pretty solid chance to me.

"Skylicus;c-1850940" wrote:

Separate note to your separate note. Did you read the rest of the thread? I've said at least twice and others have as well that we are not complaining about change. We are complaining about about poorly thought out bad change. Saying change is good just because it is change is just flat wrong.

Yes I’ve read it all. I wasn’t implying that all change is good just because it’s change, but what I am implying is that just because *you* find the change bad doesn’t mean the change is objectively bad. That’s just, like, your opinion, man.

I like it. I think it’s a good change. You don’t. We disagree. That’s ok. That doesn’t mean you have the one right answer.

Several of us have spoken to the testers and they were unable to consistently beat DR/malak using padme.

And they were specifically referring to 3v3? Because I’ve only heard discussion around 5v5 so far. I’m reserving judgement until she’s in the wild, the community has a tendency to underestimate new character utility (remember when the general sentiment was that DR was a waste and would never dethrone JKR?). At least based on the kit, it seems like she’s got as solid a chance as anyone at the moment.

"Firebrigade;c-1850970" wrote:

"yohann269;c-1850938" wrote:
SBC: Where does Padmé fit best in the game?
CGF: Padmé is a leader of the Galactic Republic squad and should be very competitive in PvP. Our goal is for her squad to sit alongside Darth Revan (without Malak) and Jedi Knight Revan squads in terms of power level and competitive viability.

"Skylicus;c-1850940" wrote:

While you are correct we don't have Padme available to us currently, word from the testers is that Padme doesn't have an easy time against DR (w/malak) in 5's and in 3s she stands no chance. Obviously that's from a relatively small test base but I for one am not holding my breath that Padme will affect this at all.

I’m well aware of what they posted in the insights post. It doesn’t make any specific reference to 3v3, and nothing I’ve heard coming out of the testing has specifically mentioned how she fared in 3v3. Having 1/3 of your squad be immune to fear seems like better odds than 1/5. Graceful Assault also has an undispellable Stun on it, making it so you can actually stun the team despite DRs unique. Pair the two of them up with C3PO, and all of a sudden you’ll be able to run that stun just about every turn thanks to Translate as well as fully leveraging JKA’s nerfed unique. Additionally, JKA/Padme synergy will negate DR Deathmark. Seems like it’s got a pretty solid chance to me.

"Skylicus;c-1850940" wrote:

Separate note to your separate note. Did you read the rest of the thread? I've said at least twice and others have as well that we are not complaining about change. We are complaining about about poorly thought out bad change. Saying change is good just because it is change is just flat wrong.

Yes I’ve read it all. I wasn’t implying that all change is good just because it’s change, but what I am implying is that just because *you* find the change bad doesn’t mean the change is objectively bad. That’s just, like, your opinion, man.

I like it. I think it’s a good change. You don’t. We disagree. That’s ok. That doesn’t mean you have the one right answer.

Agreed - I have no issues with people expressing differing opinions, and I'm even willing to be proven wrong. I feel pretty strongly on this issue as TW is the only thing in this game I like and the way I like to play it is being stripped away piece by piece. I realize that is my opinion and others have different ones - my comment was specifically directed at those saying "stop whining about change".

I will gladly engage in a conversation about whether this change is a good or bad one, heck if it was timed differently I could probably even be convinced to hold my judgement until we actually have the war. Half the people posting in favor of this aren't addressing the issues the rest of us are bringing up, they are just telling us to shut up and accept it.

That doesn't strike me as productive or good for the health of the game.....granted CG doesn't have a history of caring about anything we post here so maybe I'm just wasting my time.

We've had so much 3v3 practice in GA. Does this community seriously not know how to do it yet? 3v3 is nothing new already. I know which teams are better on D and which are better on O...just transfer those ideas and methods to TW.

"keiths9216;c-1851295" wrote:
We've had so much 3v3 practice in GA. Does this community seriously not know how to do it yet? 3v3 is nothing new already. I know which teams are better on D and which are better on O...just transfer those ideas and methods to TW.

And in a guild setting how will you beat 50 DR/MALAK/DSBS teams? Even with faster mods there is an RNG element to this matchup in 1 vs 1 GA settings. Magnify this to 50 and it is ridiculous.

Elite guilds are struggling with the 5s version of the DR/Malak team. No one is clearing these walls clean.

"Morgoth_Lives;c-1851341" wrote:

"keiths9216;c-1851295" wrote:
We've had so much 3v3 practice in GA. Does this community seriously not know how to do it yet? 3v3 is nothing new already. I know which teams are better on D and which are better on O...just transfer those ideas and methods to TW.

And in a guild setting how will you beat 50 DR/MALAK/DSBS teams? Even with faster mods there is an RNG element to this matchup in 1 vs 1 GA settings. Magnify this to 50 and it is ridiculous.

Elite guilds are struggling with the 5s version of the DR/Malak team. No one is clearing these walls clean.

Welcome back to the same reality as us mere mortals. :D