Why are GA rewards "bad?"
Among the many constant GA complaints, I see a lot of "the rewards are bad." I don't really understand this, as they're always commonly needed gear and ability mats, so I'm a bit confused as to what t...
Forum Discussion
"Jarvind;c-1790040" wrote:
I've only lost two rounds since the event was introduced. One was by a single win - he had Traya and I didn't, and I couldn't get through her. In the other I lost by like 4-5 medals because the other guy just managed to squeak out a few more full health/prot bonuses.
Scouting your opponent helps, sure, but you have no way of knowing what they're going to put on defense and what they're going to leave themselves to attack with. Personally I've found that setting "generic" defenses works fine as most people tend to go way too heavy on defense and leave themselves too little to attack with.
Maybe the dynamic changes at higher GP? I'm at 2.8 million, roughly. But it honestly sounds to me like you're just spending far more time over-analyzing than necessary.
OK fine - lets assume it takes 5 minutes to set defenses. At higher GP levels in 3v3 that's setting 11 teams. That also means you need to attack 11 teams as well for a full clear. And if we also use your example of 2-3 minutes per battle that's 22-33 minutes of combat w/o any thought of what team to use and zero failures/retries. So lets split the difference on that and say combined that's 30 minutes total per opponent of setting defense (5) and combat (25). Times 3 is 1.5 hours of game time for the event. I spend MUCH less time than that auto'ing the daily challenges and GW over a full week. And overall that pays out 2x+ the rewards of a GA. The rewards to time investment is completely out of line. That's why they are bad.
And frankly, I think 1.5 hours is a pretty low estimate of the time required for most people in the 3M+ GA brackets.
