Grand Arena Hitting Last an Advantage?

"Kyno;c-1956717" wrote:

"EduardoCadav;c-1956710" wrote:

"Kyno;c-1956693" wrote:
The game is world wide, there is no time that works for everyone.

Come on Kyno, read the OP's suggestion which is the topic of discussion. "There is no time that works for everyone" is exactly countered by his/her suggestion of rotating start times.

You need 62 points in a battle, can you please explain how knowing this makes getting those points easier in battle?

@EduardoCadav
I replied to this post >>>

"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?

There is no staring time that is fair for everyone.

Rotating doesnt mean its fair for everyone, it means it's good at times and bad at times. Fair would be having it start at the same local time for everyone, because everyone would be subject to the same "rule".

Agreed. The most fair that it could get is: not showing your opponents score until the end. You will only know your opponent's score and how many teams/territory he got after is over. For both players.

That would be nice. Then, starting our ending time wouldn't matter.

"Neo43;c-1956829" wrote:
You can't please everyone....

Hiding banners CAN please (1) those who can't attack last cuz of timezones, (2) those who feel the pressure attacking first, (3) those who say they don't care and good anyway.
It won't please those who like to know opponent's banners before attacking, well they gonna lose that advantage and GAC matches gonna be more equal which is not bad at all

I'm not sure whether or not its an advantage. So I usually just clear front row first if I have time. Then clear the rest later. That puts some pressure on them.

I have had people tell me that they wait until last minute and then forgot to check speeds on some teams and lost.

"4Lateralus7;c-1956742" wrote:
Guys... The concept of asymmetric information is a major concept in economics and game theory... Its not really something you can choose whether or not to believe in... ?

Don’t waste your time man. This topic has already gone around multiple times. Some people understand logic and game theory, and others .....come here and argue it’s not an advantage to go second.

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.

"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??

Just don't show the opponent's progress until the end of the round. Problem solved.
If it is an advantage or it isn't an advantage - whoever is arguing which way... if they don't care then there shouldn't be a need to see the opponent's progress anyway.

@Kyno

By knowing you need to use an undersized team you can take the required risk to win. Losing by 1 banner is equal to losing by 500 banners.

If I knew I needed to 2 man a fight to win the match I'd attempt a risky 2 man. If I went first I may have gone for a safer 3 man.

Essentially you take whatever risks may result in victory (fights which may fail 50% of the time) as you know you can't play it safe.

I'm struggling to see why some people can't grasp this simple differentiation. The advantage is more than psychological. It's a case or having more information.

This is school level knowledge.

"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 doesn't but if you are 45 score behind (excluding territory victory points) and you have 1 battle left... you know you can just send in 5 toons and clear it up instead of sending in an undersized squad to take a gamble to get a higher score.

This is just common sense.

"Nauros;c-1956875" wrote:

"UltimateZeus;c-1956873" 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 doesn't but if you are 45 score behind (excluding territory victory points) and you have 1 battle left... you know you can just send in 5 toons and clear it up instead of sending in an undersized squad to take a gamble to get a higher score.

This is just common sense.

Also, if you are 60 points behind, you know you have to take the risk and go undersized even if you wouldn't otherwise.

Exactly. I I don’t understand after being spelled out so many times why ppl still don’t grasp this basic concept. It’s not rocket science, just common sense.