GAC Skill and banners.

You need to attack to get participation rewards. I’d also recommend trying to kill at least one team on the off chance your opponent forgets to attack.

Other than that? Pretty sure there’s no value besides maybe GAC battle stats. So yeah.

Yeah. That might be something to revise in the future.

I did two attacks because I needed credit and because I wanted to test a counter (it worked!). But otherwise I’m set to be blown out and don’t see any incentive to do more. That isn’t the intent of the design.

At least in the old version I could chase feats. I understand why they were removed, but that also unintentionally removed any reason for me to do more.

That said? If anything, this is the right week to figure that out! At least I won’t be too busy for the holidays!

I strongly advise not to do meaningless attacks if it is clear you are not going to win. Because the only result you will achieve by attacking is to give away your attack strategy (to swgoh.gg). So your future opponents will be able to use them against you.

"Antario;c-2324182" wrote:
I strongly advise not to do meaningless attacks if it is clear you are not going to win. Because the only result you will achieve by attacking is to give away your attack strategy (to swgoh.gg). So your future opponents will be able to use them against you.

Meh. If anyone cares that much they can just have the win...

I for one am happy to no longer chase feats and extra banners. Especially the dumb feats outside of GAC.

"Crayons;c-2324218" wrote:
It’s such a stupid way to work things out. This isn’t call of duty. We don’t all start from the same point, with access to the same resources.

This is a wallet based GAC now. Skill is a cover. No matter your skill, you can beat bigger rosters.before you winner be placed with them. Now you do.

Yet another person offended by CG's poor (in hindsight) use of the word "skill" when creating their rating system.

WE. KNOW. They know. It's just a value that's meant to decide who is more likely to win in a heads up match. Let it go.

I for one have been initially fascinated with what happens when efficiency players in the 7.5-8.5M range go up against the 9.5M+ krakens who have previously been isolated from the rest of the peasants. Small sample size based on the GAC streaming crew in my guild. But thus far, the krakens have been blindsided. They have lost to the smaller efficiency player because they have been groomed to just brute force their way through matches and not banner pinch. Think about how happy Ahnald is to use is Jawas on offense in GAC. No efficiency player I know would do such a thing, even if they had them geared, because the banners are so terrible, it's practically a lost battle. It will be very interesting to see what happens after they realize they can't just muscle their way to the top. I suspect they will adjust their strategy enough to get on top, but I enjoy watching all this work out.

And to those saying they have no incentive to do meaningless battles if they know they can't win. There is no sandbox mode. Best try and learn a thing or two with some riskier counters or get experience with a new Omi squad. Or enjoy the day off.

Maybe have some system that tracks a “crushing defeat” or “crushing victory” that advances/retracts more Skill Points if the disparity is off by 500 banners or something?

That would help to some degree, although I feel like there would be unintended consequences.

Welllllllllll for the record it looks like maybe I’ll win? Probably not. I’m sure they’ll attack and full-clear with undersized teams. But their defense was almost as bad as mine. I saw their SEE and figured I was boned, but the team around SEE was so ho hum I figured I’d try.

Still have two more teams to clear out on my next break at work, though. We’ll see by then. But, as I said, I fully expect to lose this and have wasted quite a bit of time!

"TargetEadu;c-2324268" wrote:
Maybe have some system that tracks a “crushing defeat” or “crushing victory” that advances/retracts more Skill Points if the disparity is off by 500 banners or something?

That would help to some degree, although I feel like there would be unintended consequences.

This would be problematic, imo. I don't think there's a simple way to tell how close a match was just from the scores. I've seen a player just barely fail on my last front wall team and get stopped there. Huge banner disparity, real close match.

I've also seen plenty of players win/lose by 40-60 where the match wasn't close at all, they just happened to struggle to a clear.

Removing banner totals and margins allows us the most flexibility for different strategies and playstyles.

You play for fun and/or for rewards. If you know after 1 battle in gac that you lost the round, 2 options:
1) you play for fun, enjoy the battles, keep on fighting and be happy to do so
2) you play for rewards, stop there, saved yourself 30mn and be happy to do so
Everybody wins.