"SnipSnipGone;85337" wrote:
The Upper Echelon has us fighting each other and wasting resources that could put one of US at the top of the heap. Instead, each battle should maximize each Lower Echelon squad's potential and collectively we can topple the Upper Echelon.
The old Oliver Queen gambit--sacrifice your weakest to give everyone else a better chance to ring the bell.
How?
Run your weakest leaderless DEFENSE squad from the approved roster so that we in the Lower Echelon minimize each combat's battle debits and our strongest squads can maximize their return.
Working together, the lower precincts can throw off this tyranny! We can whip poor Will.
- luv, Mol Fulkrom
heheh
He kind of has a point unless I'm missing something.
As an example: the top 25 people in a shard use 48k power teams because they have them. The majority of other players in the shard use 26k power teams because they can't compete at the top ranks. Now the majority of players have opponents that they can beat, even at high ranks.
Each of the players would be "piggy backing" off of the ones just ahead of them. This kind of eliminates that celling you as a weaker player, where you can no longer earn points due to not being able to win battles at a certain point. Players with deeper rosters may benefit more from being able to use more crap teams, but that may be made up for & then some by the other effect.
I'm neither supporting nor disparaging this strategy btw, those are just my thoughts on it's viability.
