"harvestmouse;c-2355877" wrote:"CCyrilS;c-2355853" wrote:"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?
I assume they're too lazy to think for themselves, and are used to relying on tried and true defenses and counters that were figured out by other people.
When it actually gets going I don't mind it. However, it's kind of GAC 'lite'. A diluted version of the game. It's never been as popular as the 5v5, which the whole balance is based around.
"harvestmouse;c-2355877" wrote:
If it isn't as popular as 5v5, why bring it back? On another thread a guy had a good idea of replacing arena with it. That sounds fun.
"harvestmouse;c-2355877" wrote:
The big problem for me is; we've been working towards getting everybody in their right place for GAC leagues. Now that's all going to be upset by a totally different format.
"harvestmouse;c-2355877" wrote:
What was popular, was GAC without ships. It was temporarily removed though because of the GP problem. Now, GP is no longer a problem.
"harvestmouse;c-2355877" wrote:
What would be most popular if you had standard GAC, 3v3 or 5v5 no ships? I know which I'd most like to play. And it ain't 3v3 or ships!
"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.
"Nauros;c-2355855" wrote:
3v3 is the sequel trilogy of GAC - pretty much everyone hates it, a vocal minority pretends that it's the best thing ever and the powers that be agree with that minority for some inexplicable reason.
"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.
"Nauros;c-2355954" wrote:"CCyrilS;c-2355952" wrote:"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.
Then show me all the mechanisms and balancing that make sure it actually works well.
"Nauros;c-2355956" wrote:"CCyrilS;c-2355955" wrote:"Nauros;c-2355954" wrote:"CCyrilS;c-2355952" wrote:"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.
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.
