"Obi_six_Kenobi;c-2355851" wrote:
I’m somewhat new to GAC, I hear a lot of people saying the don’t like 3v3. But I haven’t heard anyone explain why. Can someone please explain what it is about 3v3 that bothers many people?
It's mostly that when the game is balanced for 5v5, it's difficult for people to get into the mindset of the 3v3 matches when a lot of the standard counters change. For example, five-person CLS teams can take out higher geared JKR teams. Can a three-person CLS, Han, Chewie take out higher geared JKR core trio? Eh, not so much. What ends up happening is that if you are in the mindset that you need to reduce your squads to core trios, you are left with two supports of a faction that are now in need of a leader. You can maybe find a leader if the same faction, or maybe stick on a generic leader, but can a random second-rate leader do a lot with two supports? It becomes especially problematic given that 3v3 requires more defense teams, but you may feel like you have fewer squads available.
These things aren't as big of issues for people who have adapted to 3v3. You can come up with combos that you may not have thought of otherwise. Sometimes you may have no leader or use an old leader ability that you wouldn't consider in 5v5. There are also so many solo team options that become available. I wouldn't really find much opportunity to send in Han Solo solo in 5v5, but in 3v3, a solo Han Solo can solo more of what's available.
Another trap I think 3v3 detractors may fall into is oversetting defense. Since there are more teams required, you may feel like you don't want to set a really bad squad, so you end up setting too many good teams. You are then stretched on offense, especially if your opponent also turtles. The remedy to that is to remember it's ok to set some weaker squads sometimes. It'll still make your opponent work for it. You need to make sure you have enough for offense.
