Galactic "Challenge"

"Rius;c-2440302" wrote:
This forum has an issue on topics raised by developing rosters again and again. When experience issues with content increasingly requiring more recent characters and still occasionally very old characters not useful elsewhere at the moment all whilst we balance what to farm, we face claims these are non-issues by those with more mature rosters. Funny, my motivation for developing my roster is to be able to achieve more rewards and I push to achieve as much as possible but there are sometimes when I just do not have the right line up. But there is a distinct lack of awareness for some players with larger rosters that the ease they experience in a task is because of the breadth of their roster. So when some question efficiency, it is not the rewards are not desirable for two battles worth. It is we “do not” all have the “BitDynasty” optimal squad (even something as old as Carth OR). And instead of 2 attempts, we find ourselves using less optimal or under levelled squads requiring 30-50 attempts until the stars align with the best possible RNG. In this case, if the frustration is driving you crazy, yes absolutely get the 2 omicron and call it a day. And hope the next one matches what you already have developed. The nature of this game often means the level of difficulty is relative to what you have available. So developing rosters are playing a much more difficult game. It is not very helpful to gaslight or brag? about how easy you personally find it. Unless you want to provide a range of suggestions with some common core squads and less premium versions. For instance the one with BH worked well with premium BH (greef and Mando) but just executor BH were often destroyed.

The RNG in GC is also wild, “I did it first time with x” could just be very fortunate. I have done so in the pass with a line up, shared it with someone else who failed to reproduce it, then went to try again and failed to reproduce it myself in another 20 battles. I was just lucky.

Yes, but you’re kinda missing the point. Players with less developed rosters are creating this “issue” by complaining that GCs are impossible. In reality this is just the one in five or ten which they shouldn’t expect to maximise. At 8m GP I wouldn’t consider that I should have a roster for every GC. I regularly stop at crate 8 or 9, usually because the specific faction of interest isn’t developed but I can bodge the other feats well enough. The difference, I accept this as part of player progression and don’t create a thread about it to complain about a perfectly reasonable event. Beyond GCs I haven’t maxed every assault battle, almost never maximise conquest, sometimes fail at PG missions and regularly get 1/2 (or 0/2) on TB missions. The events aren’t impossible, it’s just player progression, and not something to complain about.

The players suggesting teams or resources are trying to help, by suggesting ways around for less developed rosters which don’t require the latest shiny. If players don’t have those units then they need to accept that they shouldn’t be able to max events which they haven’t worked towards.