Feedback Guild Battlegrounds Update 2023

[Yekk]

I did refer to the context. You want attrition gain during the night so leaders don’t have to hang around in the game 24/7. So, let your night crew play the game and lead their own stuff, why should they need to suffer because you have no leaders assigned from their time zones? Or, gasp, give rights to all your members, problem solved. However, for less attention needed overall, I like the thought of longer protection times for sectors. 6 hours would be ideal for me. Even 8 would be fine. Since not all sectors are taken at the same time, it should over time give everyone something to do, like it does now, but with less frequent need to keep checking.

It is more than a guild does not have a leader for that time. Nights are the longest shift as in most countries only 1 or 2 times zones exist. The game player in game population is at it lowest. If a break is needed during the day many can and do help but at night that number plummets leaving the map unwatched. It also makes for the best time for a rogue or warring guild to thrust out across the map.

That leads to massive burnout. My suggestion was at midnight, for locked tiles only, to add 4 or 5 hours to their unlock. Guilds could leave tiles unlocked or flip the full map just before midnight. Night crew would in most leagues just see less open tiles. It just adds another tool guilds could use as a strategy. I understand players play all day. My live guild has players in it from much of the world.

 

[Arch1e]

My suggestion was at midnight, for locked tiles only, to add 4 or 5 hours to their unlock

That would maybe make sense for guilds who have fewer people in the night time time zones. Depends on the world and the guild.

It just adds another tool guilds could use as a strategy.

Absolutely. And good on them for having worked it out.

 

[drakenridder]

I did refer to the context. You want attrition gain during the night so leaders don’t have to hang around in the game 24/7. So, let your night crew play the game and lead their own stuff, why should they need to suffer because you have no leaders assigned from their time zones? Or, gasp, give rights to all your members, problem solved. However, for less attention needed overall, I like the thought of longer protection times for sectors. 6 hours would be ideal for me. Even 8 would be fine. Since not all sectors are taken at the same time, it should over time give everyone something to do, like it does now, but with less frequent need to keep checking.

No need to make it personal. Playing on servers from other timezones is something different and does not refer to the context. Rather it's wishing for the game to bend and adapt best suited for players who've chosen to play on different servers than their timezones. The game shouldn't take playing on servers with a different timezone into account. Events won't start for someone from a different timezone earlier/later than those who are in the same timezone as the server they're playing at. Thus whatever server specific timely event takes place, would always be based off server time and won't bend or adapt for those who've chosen to play at a server in a different timezone.
Longer protection hours are contradictory to the wish to play at night. Those longer protection hours will lead to more exploitation of the protection buff. Effectively locking GbG at night times entirely. Higher attrition during nightly hours is a soft lock. Allowing to play at night but discouraging this. Practically higher attrition at nightly hours accomplish the same but allows players to still play GbG during those hours if they choose to do so.

 

[Arch1e]

No need to make it personal.

Was not my intention at all. Take ‘you’ as ‘one’ in this context. Apologies if you took it as me referring to you specifically. But I also would wish for longer protection overall, not just at night, just so we’re clear.

 

[Thunderdome]

There's only one little problem with that proposal, mates:

I only play during the night hours (since beta is in Germany) at 12 midnight to 3 am (my 6pm to 9pm local in the USA on a work day).

 

[Yekk]

There's only one little problem with that proposal, mates:

I only play during the night hours (since beta is in Germany) at 12 midnight to 3 am (my 6pm to 9pm local in the USA on a work day).

I am an hour farther west than you. The problem is burnout. Over the last 3 years my live world has had more than 20 leaders quit playing from burnout. A few more just toned their game down to casual. 26 times a year for 11 days each players do GBG. That is a full time job plus overtime. What is your suggestion?

 

[Owl II]

I am an hour farther west than you. The problem is burnout. Over the last 3 years my live world has had more than 20 leaders quit playing from burnout. A few more just toned their game down to casual. 26 times a year for 11 days each players do GBG. That is a full time job plus overtime. What is your suggestion?

I suggest stop bullying the players. If players are still needed by Inno. This can be implemented in different ways. But Inno don't want to

 

[Thunderdome]

I could easily say let's put the attrition increase during the German work time of about 8am to 5pm but that will probably tick off the other half of the world as well as those who play in their parent's basements (no jobbers).

However, I didn't say no to the extended lock time of each sector. In fact, that could be a tipping point where even the top guilds would have the brakes put on them in waiting until a sector opens after being taken away from another guild. Four hours is a bit short; I was thinking around six to eight hours to be sufficient.

 

[Yekk]

I suggest you stop bullying the players. If players are still needed by Inno. This can be implemented in different ways. But Inno don't want to

We just keep talking, suggesting, hoping that Inno comes to its senses.

 

[Owl II]

Huh? We are having a conversation with many suggestions. No offense was aimed or intended. His suggestions are just as important as yours. Inno can not fix a problem unless we talk and find common ground... How would you handle the burnout happening world wide caused by GBG?

I didn't mean the forum participants. Inno bullying the players, forcing them to monitor this map 24/7. And I also suggested more than once to increase the time of blocking provinces. No one reacted

 

[gingisham]

Suggestion: the buildings you place on sectors should not decrease attrition, only increase the score obtained by the guild. In this way, the problems with changing sectors every 4 hours would be reduced - they would no longer exist and those who use scripts would do so in a limited way. So the gbg will be a strategic game over 10 days. Leave attrition at 100% (200% with traps) so you encourage players to increase attack power and remove @chance@ from the game

 

[.Chris]

That buildings increase VP and amount of hits needed is too much.

A choice between more VP for your guild OR more attrition for your opponents has a better strategic value.

 

[Robirom]

RU - Nagah, the top 4 guild that has nothing to do with the Guild Battlefields. So what's the point of a championship if worthless guilds get to the top! Make a grid, increase the number of seasons in the championship to 10-12.

 

[Shelby GT500]

Can the Champions Tower be looted/plundered by neighbors?
I hope so...

 

[CrashBoom]

Can the Champions Tower be looted/plundered by neighbors?

the answer is in the announcement (the spoilers of the older tower)

"Can not be plundered"

 

[Shelby GT500]

the answer is in the announcement (the spoilers of the older tower)

"Can not be plundered"

the answer is in the announcement (the spoilers of the older tower)

"Can not be plundered"

Once again Inno benefits and favors the strongest guilds!!!!

 

[drakenridder]

But I also would wish for longer protection overall, not just at night, just so we’re clear.

Funny, no soft lock for the night, just longer hard locks to buff the lock exploit. At this point we could even asked for 336h protection. Skipping ahead of the 24h locks. Cause we don’t want just protection for the night, morning, noon or evening, or day round, just all season. That’s just the goal of longer locks anyways. So, let’s skip ahead to get straight down to the goal.

 

[alnigor57]

And removing the limit of 1000 league points won't solve the problem of the correct distribution of guilds? And each time the draw brings together teams with about the same number of league points. At the same time, it would be better to have a rule that guilds do not fight each other on two fields in a row.
Our picture is like this: 70 guilds with 1000 league points, 5 top guilds, and as a result, these guilds from the top 5 met with each other only twice during the entire championship. Our guild is in the top 10, but due to a lot of bad luck in the draw, we were only able to win the round once. As a result, we ended up in 22nd place in the ranking - it's frustrating. It is clear that you can lose in certain seasons, take 5-6 places and get weaker opponents, but we don't want that.
If we had seen real league points, with no limit of 1,000, then motivation would have risen.
On the other hand, more clashes of strong guilds means more waste of diamonds, i.e. it is in the interests of developers to make sure that strong guilds meet each other more often in the fields

 

[coolmite]

This August 29th change seems to be the biggest one that created the big ranking inbalance:

• Lastly, we are going to adjust the Championship ranking.
  • The first factor will no longer be the League Points you got and will get in your current Championship, but the League Points you currently have.

This is what allows yo-yo guilds to be in the top 10 while a guild that has six 2nd place finishes in 1000LP is ranked in the 20s. To me, it seems pretty clear that a team that picks up a victory in platinum and then comes up to L1000 where they are non-competitive should be ranked below the team that comes in 2nd against the top competition consistently.

 

[Pericles the Lion]

This August 29th change seems to be the biggest one that created the big ranking inbalance:

• Lastly, we are going to adjust the Championship ranking.
  • The first factor will no longer be the League Points you got and will get in your current Championship, but the League Points you currently have.

This is what allows yo-yo guilds to be in the top 10 while a guild that has six 2nd place finishes in 1000LP is ranked in the 20s. To me, it seems pretty clear that a team that picks up a victory in platinum and then comes up to L1000 where they are non-competitive should be ranked below the team that comes in 2nd against the top competition consistently.

Sorry, I don't understand why this is a problem. The standings were wiped clear at the beginning of the new Championship season. The guild with six 2nd place finishes earned 6000 fragments of the Tower of Champions and finished "in the 20's" last season. The yo-yo guild won in platinum, lost in diamond, earned no frags, and may have finished in the "top 10" but that was last season. All things considered, I rather be in the guild that got 6k frags than the one with a top 10 finish that got nothing tangible.