Just had a first here, here i am in GAC , doing as usual,i see my oponent hasn't put any toons in defense,and just 3 powerfull ships ( that i couldn't bypass ) Well,initially I though,heh this guy forgot to put his defense, easy win,don't have to do anything,only now i realise how he brute forced my defense (4-5 attacks on defense ,because he has the upper hand in number of teams ) I never have seen this before,and it seems like the player isn't really penalised for not putting any defenses as he can just brute-force his way through you . I was really caught off guard by this,and i still don't understand why it doens't count as an automatical loss if anyone does this.

"Moorebid;c-2411359" wrote:I thought the AI placed the defense when you didn't...?Sounds like he just saved you some time. If you couldn't clear his ships, you couldn't have outscored, even if he set g7 teams on defence.You got awarded max banners per team he didn't set (59 in 3v3).If you could beat his ships you have an almost guaranteed win. Ships matter. Work on them. Take away this option.

Unforntunately ,that's not how it works, My defense is made in such a way that normally ,with normal amount teams,it is very hard to pass and get to my ships,or,at the very least,making you use teams so you can't finish the last unit territory, yet, he just brute forced it now .

If you cleared his ships.... you would have won and wouldn't be here talking about it..

"newbornFL;c-2411374" wrote:So no matter how well thought my defense plan is,it's useless because I have an handicap in ships (that is covered by good defense) ?I mean,i have no problems with loosing,if you pass my defense and get to my ships,and clear them,you'll probably win,that,i have no problem with, but this is just plain dirt as no strategy can make it off .You have a well thought out defensive plan. He looked at it, and figured out a defensive plan that would allow him to beat you. His plan worked because you've neglected ships. His plan wouldn't work against most players. He just discovered your weakness, and designed a defense to exploit it.

Always assume they will clear you. The higher you go, the more likely this is. It’s extremely rare I don’t clear with a full defence set. You were banking on blocking him. Rookie error. Work on ships.

Is putting no defense in GAC actually a better strategy?

35 Replies

perfidius44
Seasoned Newcomer
3 years ago
"Notthatguyfrombefore;c-2412367" wrote:
"BubbaFett;c-2412363" wrote:
"el_mago;c-2412362" wrote:
"Ghost666;c-2412338" wrote:
"BubbaFett;c-2412229" wrote:
"yolkywareagle;c-2412209" wrote:
"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2411964" wrote:
"yolkywareagle;c-2411961" wrote:
"Notthatguyfrombefore;c-2411661" wrote:
Yeah. Fleets only defence won’t work if you cant clear their fleets.

I believe it would if I used undersized squads. i only used wampacron on the last battle, and that gave me a few more.

How exactly? Your opponent got 59 for every squad you didn't place. How are you outperforming that with Wampa? ... you aren't

Correct me if i’m wrong, but they get banners from full health full protection first round and stuff, but not undersized squad banners

They get undersize as well... The full load I believe, which makes sense since they beat it with nothing

Just to be sure...playing with no defense gives the opponent a score that cannot be matched even if you win all attacks with only one attacker...?

If you don't set a defense, your opponent will get the maximum banners for every squad where you do not place a defense.

It is my understanding that you can match that if you also beat a squad for max banners. You would do that by winning with one character and having full protection and health.

As an aside, you win the "I set no character defense" strategy by setting an unbeatable ship defense; but you, yourself, must also be able to clear their ships.

Exactly which, in my opinion, makes it less of a strategy and more of a lazy gamble :)

Unless you have deliberately invested in your own fleets to put yourself in a position to make it work without it being a ‘gamble’.

Except there is a better strategy if you want to do that: put the weakest characters in your roster on those defense slots. They can’t do worse than no team at all and will very likely do better.
That’s why it’s not inappropriate to call this strategy ‘lazy’, because with a little more effort it will be similar but more effective.
notthatguybefore
Seasoned Ace
3 years ago
"Starslayer;c-2412381" wrote:
"Notthatguyfrombefore;c-2412367" wrote:
"BubbaFett;c-2412363" wrote:
"el_mago;c-2412362" wrote:
"Ghost666;c-2412338" wrote:
"BubbaFett;c-2412229" wrote:
"yolkywareagle;c-2412209" wrote:
"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2411964" wrote:
"yolkywareagle;c-2411961" wrote:
"Notthatguyfrombefore;c-2411661" wrote:
Yeah. Fleets only defence won’t work if you cant clear their fleets.

I believe it would if I used undersized squads. i only used wampacron on the last battle, and that gave me a few more.

How exactly? Your opponent got 59 for every squad you didn't place. How are you outperforming that with Wampa? ... you aren't

Correct me if i’m wrong, but they get banners from full health full protection first round and stuff, but not undersized squad banners

They get undersize as well... The full load I believe, which makes sense since they beat it with nothing

Just to be sure...playing with no defense gives the opponent a score that cannot be matched even if you win all attacks with only one attacker...?

If you don't set a defense, your opponent will get the maximum banners for every squad where you do not place a defense.

It is my understanding that you can match that if you also beat a squad for max banners. You would do that by winning with one character and having full protection and health.

As an aside, you win the "I set no character defense" strategy by setting an unbeatable ship defense; but you, yourself, must also be able to clear their ships.

Exactly which, in my opinion, makes it less of a strategy and more of a lazy gamble :)

Unless you have deliberately invested in your own fleets to put yourself in a position to make it work without it being a ‘gamble’.

Except there is a better strategy if you want to do that: put the weakest characters in your roster on those defense slots. They can’t do worse than no team at all and will very likely do better.
That’s why it’s not inappropriate to call this strategy ‘lazy’, because with a little more effort it will be similar but more effective.

Oh I agree on that point. Putting weaker squads which might steal the odd banner by denting your opponents teams protection could make the difference between win or lose.
Screerider
Seasoned Ace
3 years ago
At what point does a defense full of easily cleared teams go from "lazy" to "going full offense"? (Assuming the ships zone is still the "hard to clear" variety, per this discussion)
perfidius44
Seasoned Newcomer
3 years ago
"Screerider;c-2412391" wrote:
At what point does a defense full of easily cleared teams go from "lazy" to "going full offense"? (Assuming the ships zone is still the "hard to clear" variety, per this discussion)

When you take the time to select weak defenses and place them on the board.
I wanted to express that ‘putting no defense in GAC’ is not a good strategy, to directly answer OP. You just offer your opponent max undersized banners for every empty slot.
However, going full offense on ground with a strong fleet to hold the sky is one strategy among others.
Screerider
Seasoned Ace
3 years ago
At least if you place teams on Defense once, you can just leave them there every time. Going "No Defense" would vary from opponent to opponent depending on their ships, so you'd have to remove teams, re-add them, remove them, re-adding them, etc. Sounds like work.

Forum Discussion

Is putting no defense in GAC actually a better strategy?

35 Replies

About SWGOH General Discussion

Community Highlights

Weekly Shipment Request

Kit Reveal: Morgan Elsbeth

Recent Discussions

Character Kit Concept: Yord Fandar

Low Bonus drops

Cheating and Appeals Process

Web store refund that I didn’t issue

Territory Battle review period