3vs3 GAC really?
So CG moved the crystal income to GAC making it the most important area of the game, and now they’re forcing us to play a stupid mode they invented just to give players something different a lot of ti...
Forum Discussion
"Nauros;c-2355946" wrote:"Dwinkelm;c-2355909" wrote:
This game is designed exclusively for 5v5.
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.
