GaC time advantage....
Now that gac is more important than ever, I believe CG needs to address the competitive advantage to going 2nd. There is an obvious strategy advantage to knowing how your opponent performed per b...
Forum Discussion
"Salatious_Scrum;c-2325039" wrote:
In regards to undermanning, if you take the risk you can get rewarded with extra banners. If you don’t you won’t get extra banners. Take Geonosians as an example. It’s an easy team to under-man by using Darth Vader and possible a second character like Thrawn. Can you run a full team to positively nuke them? Sure, same as you being able to just take those 2 and doing the same. Then there are teams where under-manning is a ridiculous proposition, like if someone places JMK w CAT on defense.
As for the argument of running a full team to get a guaranteed win or running -1 person, like the CLS v JKR fight mentioned earlier, I don’t get why you’d want to underman a team you only have a chance at beating down one character. If you lose congrats you just lost CLS’ team, which realistically should be used elsewhere.
“Let’s stay on subject to this post” can be applied to any post made on the forums. Tagging the devs in a lot of your posts doesn’t mean you can magically summon them. So yes this is on topic since it’s being posted here…
The first player assumes all the risk by trying to maximize banners since they don't know their opponents outcome. The second player has that information and can use it in their gameplan, which is the advantage.
If I know I just need to win against geos ,I will 5 man that battle every time and take the win. Why take the unnecessary risk?
Me tagging the devs and why I choose or not choose to do it has nothing to do with the subject of the post. It is a part of my post, but not the subject and one I don't wish to discuss with you.
