"Austin9370;c-1957567" wrote:
Of course having more information is optimal to giving you the best opportunity to win, however, the advantage that it provides is neglible in the majority of cases and doesn't necessitate a change from CG.
The advantage is you are able to Play to Win, Not Attempt Score the Most Points Possible
Yes, those are two different things. If I know I'll be able to win by clearing all my opponents territories in the 1st attempt, I won't need to risk sending in some undersized squads (that may lose) just to get a few more points that have the potential to cost me the match if things go south. The opposite would apply as well. I know my opponent did really well on offense, I need to get every last point to win and take a lot of chances with undersized squads.
With that said, taking away seeing your opponents progress would make the game mode less entertaining to many. Also, who says you can't fool your opponent by attacking separately and giving them a false confidence. Also, putting pressure on your opponent could force mistakes too.
Overall, there isn't a material advantage. Just an interesting discussion that doesn't hold a lot of weight.
"evoluza;c-1957679" wrote:"Dmitry_M81;c-1957512" wrote:"Kyno;c-1957471" wrote:"Dmitry_M81;c-1957413" wrote:"GJO;c-1957381" wrote:
Hide the banners! Simple, easy and effective.
Perfect and the only way to stop this thread )
If someone will complain "get back banners so we can see them!" - it means knowing opponent's banners IS advantage and they used it ))
Not quite. I mean people where tin foil on their heads because they think it will keep them safe, that doesnt make it true.
I haven't seen any vote against hiding banners yet, just "it's not advantage", "do your best anyway", blah-blah-blah.
If some part of community wants to hide them as well as other part not against that - let's just hide them for good, it should be simple for devs to disable that counter.
Simple, easy, everyone happy
You didn't? Take anyone who wants battle logs... Now you wanna hide even the score and at the you see you got cleared with max banners.
Next time think it trough before bringing it up.
"Waqui;c-1957698" wrote:"Dmitry_M81;c-1957512" wrote:"Kyno;c-1957471" wrote:"Dmitry_M81;c-1957413" wrote:"GJO;c-1957381" wrote:
Hide the banners! Simple, easy and effective.
Perfect and the only way to stop this thread )
If someone will complain "get back banners so we can see them!" - it means knowing opponent's banners IS advantage and they used it ))
Not quite. I mean people where tin foil on their heads because they think it will keep them safe, that doesnt make it true.
I haven't seen any vote against hiding banners yet, just "it's not advantage", "do your best anyway", blah-blah-blah.
If some part of community wants to hide them as well as other part not against that - let's just hide them for good, it should be simple for devs to disable that counter.
Simple, easy, everyone happy
In a previous thread on the same subject, I expressed my opposition to hiding the scores. My most intense round of GA was when both my opponent and I were active at the same time. After 3-4 battles each we were tied. After 7 battles each we were tied again. That really added to the fun and intensity.
"Waqui;c-1957701" wrote:"Rosstheboss89;c-1957686" wrote:
It’s definitely an advantage to go second. My third round the guy was trying to save squads to beat my Best defence team and in doing so he used 4 attacks on one of my teams and 2 on the other. He also failed against my best defence.
I now know I don’t need to full clear. Just kill the weaker side efficiently and kill 1 team in the other front row defence and I’ve won. I know I don’t need to save toons for his DR.
So clear advantage imo.
What you describe is not really an advantage. The information, you got in that situation, simply helps you to a less stressfull attack phase. You score less than your best and still win easily. It didn't help you perform better in this situation.
"NicWester;c-1957770" wrote:"Rosstheboss89;c-1957686" wrote:
I now know I don’t need to full clear. Just kill the weaker side efficiently and kill 1 team in the other front row defence and I’ve won. I know I don’t need to save toons for his DR.
So clear advantage imo.
Except that there are material benefits to you if you full clear anyway. There are feats, for one, and the more banners you get the better your rank will be which gives you better rewards both when you promote and when the event ends. You should be going for a full clear every time. Saying that going second is a worthwhile advantage and then saying it's because you know you don't need to get the most banners possible is like saying taking three days off at work is an advantage because you know you only need two days pay to make rent."plindboe;c-1957760" wrote:
I don't much care about the issue, but it bothers me way too much that there are people who deny the obvious fact that there's an advantage to attacking second. It's like people insisting that the Moon is made of cheese. Sure, it's a harmless belief, but I can't help getting irritated by it. :s
People aren't saying it's not an advantage. They're saying it's a negligible advantage that doesn't really matter and that people are blowing it out of proportion. They're also saying that going first has its own set of advantages that are being overlooked by the OP and their supporters.
"Kyno;c-1957775" wrote:"IntrepidFox;c-1957761" wrote:"Kyno;c-1957758" wrote:"IntrepidFox;c-1957712" wrote:"Kyno;c-1956867" wrote:"Dmitry_M81;c-1956855" wrote:
And it's huge advantage when you know opponent's banners, so you can either use undersized squads for extra banners or full squads for guaranteed win.
If banners (and maybe even squads defeated) are hidden - noone has advantage or disadvantage, fair deal for me.
Please explain how knowing you need to use an undersized team, makes winning the match easier??
It's not about making it easy to win. It's not about guaranteeing a win. It's about the advantage which comes with knowledge.
Like when CG announce a new event with 48 hours notice. Sure giving people more notice wouldn't make it easier for them to get ready for the event. But if people know it's coming more people are going to be ready for it when it arrives.
If you'd announced it months in advance it wouldn't be easier that's true. But when armed with knowledge a player can plan and strategist effectively. Sure, without the knowledge plenty of players were ready for Malek. But at the same time, you threw in a surprise minimum GP, which led to many people who had prepared still being unable to get Malek, because at the end of the day it's just guess work.
Your argument is that guesswork and knowledge are as accurate and effective as each other. I disagree. Suspect the dictionary disagrees too.
Guess work and knowledge have nothing to do with actually winning the points.
If you need 62 points and you have a team that can make that score and you go into the battle and come out with 61 points, guess what that knowledge did nothing for you and you could have done that attacking first or second.
A proper plan and strategy works no matter the time you choose to attack. The feeling that people get when the choice is made for them doesnt change the fact that they could have won or lost the battle regardless.
It's really cute talking about needing 62 points to win. The problem is obviously the fact I can't know I need that unless I've gone last.
Question: You're in the last battle of the round. You are facing a g11/g12 padme lead team. You have no idea how many points you need. How many points do you need?
The answer is - you don't know. So how many units do you take into the fight? If you 4 man it do you win? What about 3 manning it? Do you win?
Is the answer - "I don't know"
It should be. But from your response it seems the answer is to take in the units which are going to get the points needed.
Obi Wan: "I have the high ground Anakin"
Anakin: "It's not an advantage. It's possible to win either way."
If I think I can win with 4, I go in with 4. That's how you play the game. I have my teams I know I can score better with, i strategize around using them to their max ability and work the plan. Waiting to attack second doesnt mean you will be able to earn the point you need to win, even if you know that number.
Last time I watched the movies, Anakin won that war. But maybe that's just how I view it when he killed Obi Wan. Thinking you have an advantage doesnt mean you do, and it certainly doesnt mean you will win.
"DarjeloSalas;c-1957873" wrote:"Eddiemundie;c-1957872" wrote:"Kyno;c-1956693" wrote:"CordycepsX;c-1956675" wrote:
How about this.... a player sets an absolute FU defence. Both revans, GG, padme, etc, etc. Their best 8 teams straight onto defence. Then waits. If u full clear, they lose. If u don’t, they know exactly how many banners they need with whatever offence they have left. Their whole strategy revolves around hitting second. I’m not saying it’s an unfair strategy, it’s quite good, actually. The only thing I was asking originally is why not make the starting times fair for everyone?
You need 62 points in a battle, can you please explain how knowing this makes getting those points easier in battle?
The game is world wide, there is no time that works for everyone.
The solution was posted and suggested many times - rotate GAC starting times by 6hrs each round.
So now rounds last 30 hours? And a whole GA within GAC lasts 36 hours longer?
Are you sure the forums want that?
"DarkSouls;c-1958418" wrote:
There are so many cheaters at the GAC, so it doesn't matter when you play your battles, till they fix that mode and add the battle reports it is pointless to discuss it at all.
"DarkSouls;c-1958418" wrote:
There are so many cheaters at the GAC, so it doesn't matter when you play your battles, till they fix that mode and add the battle reports it is pointless to discuss it at all.
