Discussion Guild Battlegrounds Watchtower and Siege Camp Ability Re-balance

[Amdira]

let's say 300

Whatever - guess I will rather raise my St. Marc's and buy FPs with coins now than be frustrated after 50 fights in my Prog city - for my OF city with 1-woman-guild it won't make any difference as I don't build any SCs there.

 

[PackCat]

I was thinking about the proposed changes to GBG in beta, and INNO has the balancing measures out of context for how to make it more fair to everyone.

Instead of capping the attrition levels, they would be better served to make sector and camp acquisition more expensive, similar to GVG. (FE and lower ages) The more sectors and camps you have, the more costly to build. It would cost more for a Guild that owns over half the map, compared to a Guild with 1 or 2 sectors.
This would create a more balanced approach.

Do I like this idea? No, but it would achieve what they are looking for without punishing the entire world.

Perspective from a Sr. Software Engineer

 

[conqueror9]

From my experience of playing GBG

There is only 1 and only 1 unfair issue, guild with super few members can go Diamond League, sometimes it make the GBG super quiet
I do suggest, just making 1 or 2 of those "super few member guild" if present in diamond league GBG, they will have _ve point that will drive then away from diamond league

GBG does peform a very good Guild 's work. You get nothing if your guild do not move ( no fighting ).
You will always have sector next to your headquarter be a farming ground to get treasures

If you need to go further from nearly sector next to head-quarter, it require a group of guild members co-operation. If any guild cannot go further, it just means your guild still need a lot of improvement and co-operation That is fully comply with GUILD B G's super basic requirement.

we have been in GBG with other 7 guild with member less than 10. It is just a super quiet GBG. We nearly end up with no fighting. Even with a lot of member and diamonds ready, we get nothing as no other guild come to get sector from our guild. To get something back, we have to give sector out so that we can get something back by re-conquer that sector.

Personaly, we have map turn to our color. Next Day, map change to completley new color. I am happy as it means we have a lot of battles to do. I do feel other good GBG-guild, will have the same feeling, no one like the GBG map stay the same color as his color till end of GBG. We , all, welcome other guild to get sector from us.

Last GBG, we have around 3 other medium to large size guild with us. The GBG has change to complex color each day. 4 guilds ( including my guild ) has actually perform a lot of interaction to exchange sector. We all know "how to play GBG". There is a lot of Guild co-operation in advance, defense, startegy shown by 4 individual guilds... of course, I think all 4 guild spend diamond and guild-co-operation to that GBG. we ( 4 guild ) end up remain in diamond league.

Weaker and without co-operation end-up with -ve point. I do not care whether they get de-grade to next league or not.

I just want to point , GBG require a lot of guild-strategy and "use of diamond", that is fully comply with Guild-war in term of strategy. That is also comply with Inno's wish that player does spend diamond to get advantage.

I do agree there is on-going adjustment in GBG to improve and to make GBG more fair

However, I do not agree any adjustment that favor any guild who has no "guild-member co-operation" and "no guild strategy" and just want to share "something that other guild who have spend tons of diamond and guild member effort".

if your guild want something, just join together and perform a GUILD's action ( co-operation, planning, goal ...etc) and ready to spend diamond < you should not blame anything vs some guild who spend diamond to get advantage>. This is a game, you can choose not spend diamond, but you should not ask the "EQUAL and FAIR" comparing with those spend diamond. You should not ask "EQUAL and FAIR" compare with those guild who perform a high level of guild-member co-operation and action.

"EQUAL and FAIR" is only exists with both party doing the same thing.

 

[DEADP00L]

Please stop with your argument that there will be less spending on diamonds!
That's not your problem and if you're being honest, the bigger diamond spenders in GbG were earning more diamonds from endless battles.
The decrease in diamond consumption will be compensated by the decrease in diamond earnings, this will not affect sales and as I have already said, it is not OUR problem!

 

[CrashBoom]

You will always have sector next to your headquarter be a farming ground to get treasures

that is a lie

always would mean ALWAYS

but after the mean enemy guild 1 took it you don't have that sector for 4 hours
and then the other mean guild takes it in a few minutes and it is blocked again for 4 hours

so your "always" is only a few minutes

 

[DEADP00L]

Yes Crashboom, but that's not OUR problem!
I prefer that we test this new version that we bring constructive remarks than to go in all directions, without having tested.

By dint of saying anything and everything, we lose sight of the relevant remarks.
As much as I can understand that some are not going to binge as much as they used to, but they caused this situation.
As much as it is important to know if Inno plans to nerf the traps as well because it risks truly destroying the GbGs.

 

[PackCat]

What i see in this:
- Inno continues with the idea to stop battle farmers, now limiting the number of battles in de GB. Instead of to change that the better way to go up is fighting.
- Inno continues without giving us the information of how works siedge camps vs traps. We know that 4 siedge camps make useless traps. But with this change? 4 siedges vs 2 traps = 66'6% no attrition; 33'4% 2 of attrition?
- Now, we only see and build siedge camps. Tomorrow, we will see more traps, fortress... But carefull with the trap lovers.

I do not see any benefit in this change. At least speed limit laws make sense because they save lives.
A drunk driver is more likely to survive at lower speeds?

All stick and NO carrot. The weak Guilds are still weak. They will not magically get better.
I think they should outlaw the word "Balanced" because INNO does not understand what the word means.
There is no Up-side to this change, only a Down-side.
If INNO thinks revenue sucks now, just wait until this change goes to live servers.
They will be out of business in a year and Michael Zillmer will not be happy about that.

 

[Treyna]

Please stop with your argument that there will be less spending on diamonds!
That's not your problem and if you're being honest, the bigger diamond spenders in GbG were earning more diamonds from endless battles.
The decrease in diamond consumption will be compensated by the decrease in diamond earnings, this will not affect sales and as I have already said, it is not OUR problem!

I think this will take away the reason to spend diamonds on events for most of the diamond spenders because there will be no point for them to go for.

 

[DEADP00L]

I think this will take away the reason to spend diamonds on events for most of the diamond spenders because there will be no point for them to go for.

And what will you have to do with it?
Unless you are a shareholder at Innogames, that's not your problem!
If the winnings of Innogames are more important to you than your pleasure in playing, you are on the wrong topic!

 

[Thunderbummy]

Disappointed - hugely. Surprised - not in the least. Aside from wealthy players who simply buy their way through the game, progress is very much matched to effort. Time and again we have seen Inno respond to the bleating of essentially lazy players who are jealous of the benefits gained by those who invest huge amounts of time and effort into their game play. GvG is very much a case in point with numerous changes made to frustrate those who worked very hard at achieving a large number of battles each day. Result, I stopped playing GVG.
Everyone, except the diamond moguls, starts here at the same level. We all have exactly the same opportunities to progress, to develop and implement strategies that we hope will deliver a gaming environment that we enjoy and want to keep playing year after year. To be a top 500 player in any realm takes massive time and effort but success, in addition to rewards brings satisfaction. Some of the changes over recent years have lead me to drop many realms - I used to play in 12 cities - now down to 5. My diamond spend has dropped accordingly. I have never been a "whale" but I used to regularly buy diamond packs to support an enjoyable game experience. Now - not so much. I have to say that if the proposed changes are implemented, it will save my two premier live server guild members a small fortune in diamonds but will also seriously dampen our enthusiasm for GBG.
So Inno, it is up to you - if you want to pander to those who want everything for nothing - go ahead but prepare for a loss of income. Most of us only spend money to enjoy ourselves - take that away and the money stops.

 

[CrashBoom]

I think this will take away the reason to spend diamonds on events for most of the diamond spenders because there will be no point for them to go for.

I don't get it

why should players that already have 1000+ attack boost and making 1000+ fights a day with 0 attrition need more attack boost now ?

 

[PackCat]

This change was way overdue... And honestly, they should have done it shortly after it became apparent that players would exploit the feature instead of truly competing with each other.

The outrage of the exploiters now only is so "big" because this change comes so late

The outrage is that INNO has not announced what the counter-balancing is. This punishes good Guilds only and does nothing to improve lazy bad poor Guilds. With balance, there must be a ying and a yang.

A better idea would be to make sectors more cost prohibitive like in GVG. Whereas the more sectors you conquer, the more you pay for buildings. The problem would take care of itself and the sucky Guilds would see no difference in their abilities or lack of participation.

It would also be beneficial to break up the leagues... as any Guild less than average can still stay in Diamond, and Diamond League should mean something, such as top 10 Guilds in a world. This would also matchup Guilds of more equal abilities instead of being 1 great Guild vs. 7 other Guilds with little activity in GBG. Until INNO can compel competition, this change is not going to encourage that. If anything this function will go idle and players would eventually find a life outside of FOE.

 

[Treyna]

And what will you have to do with it?
Unless you are a shareholder at Innogames, that's not your problem!
If the winnings of Innogames are more important to you than your pleasure in playing, you are on the wrong topic!

The important for me in a game is to have a goal and something to have thinking on it. For me, it will take away the goal and there will be nothing to improve for my city.

 

[Leichenhaft]

It doesn't seem fair for newer players that start playing the game, they'll never catch up this way. You could implement something that only slows down the really advanced guilds/players
Also it would be a good idea to add a new GB to the game. One that has a bonus related to GbG, like how the Temple of Relics is related to GE.
This new GB could give a player +% to not get an increase in attrition. Lets say that this GB at level 80, added to the already capped 66.6%, could give you a total of 80 or 90%?

 

[CrashBoom]

It doesn't seem fair for newer players that start playing the game, they'll never catch up this way. You could implement something that only slows down the older players progress.
Also it would be a good idea to add a new GB to the game. One that has a bonus related to GbG, like how the Temple of Relics is related to GE.
This new GB could give a player +% to not get an increase in attrition. Lets say that this GB at level 80, added to the already capped 66.6%, could give you a total of 80 or 90%?

how will you ever catch up to the old players who are now making 1000+ fights a day ?

there are already players out with 1 million fights in total
do you really believe you can ever cath up that even with the old siege camps ?

and btw: would you play a game where new players can catch up the ones playing for 10 years

 

[CrashBoom]

The important for me in a game is to have a goal and something to have thinking on it.

and isn't there an attrition cap of 150

so your goal could be to beat the enemy at attrition 150 and then do unlimited fights again

 

[Leichenhaft]

how will you ever catch up to the old players who are now making 1000+ fights a day ?

there are already players out with 1 million fights in total
do you really believe you can ever cath up that even with the old siege camps ?

and btw: would you play a game where new players can catch up the ones playing for 10 years

No, that s crazy, there shouldnt be a way to catch up to someone who s been playing for 10 years, but really seems impossible to even remotely catch up. Like you said, an advanced player will have 1k+ fights a day maybe, and that's too much in my opinion. They should make the game in a way that you progress slower when you are so advanced. Kinda like the Arc until 80 u get 1% per level, after 80 you get only 0.1% per level.

 

[Treyna]

I don't get it

why should players that already have 1000+ attack boost and making 1000+ fights a day with 0 attrition need more attack boost now ?

Now you have something to boost your city for. If they take this away, what will you go for? I don't see any reason.

 

[Treyna]

and isn't there an attrition cap of 150

so your goal could be to beat the enemy at attrition 150 and then do unlimited fights again

My main goal is to beat myself. I don't reach 150 yet

 

[knarre sbeat]

It sounds like alot of People are unhappy with the Change, so nothing new here.
GBG since its introduction is the most commented section in the Forum.
People screaming for a Change and other People arguing with the git gud lines.

Im looking forward to those changes.
Id like to see if it helps the not so active Players get more fights done in GBG.
The last 2 years showed me that it is hard to find the turn off switch for greed.
if i could fight 1000 fights with no attrition, i would.
Resulting in no fights left for whoever will join 10 minutes after me.
Yes im looking forward to it for the benefit of all, not just for me or a few.