Feedback Guild Battlegrounds

[LastWarrior]

Lieutenent you wish lol

 

[Hiep Lin]

Have you an evidence for this? Because in my home world, where i have more then 500% attack boost, it will be impossible for me to defeat this army. But at the beginning it will be possible for me to negoitate at 100%, because i have more then 70000 mars good.

Some have more than 1,200%, here on beta.
That seems enough to beat 1,750 / 1750 (it's not me so I can not be sure)

 

[Jolene]

I do love the battleground, I never liked GvG but it is way to expensive and the rewards are to poor. I do negations and it can't be right, that it cost me more diamonds than I get back.
I would like to keep do my 64 encounters in GE together with battleground.
1. Let silver from the Inn work for Battleground too, that will make it less expensive in diamonds.
2. Slow the attrition down a little
3. Increase the rewards a little more

Ditto to everything she said

 

[xivarmy]

I think the most interesting part of Battlegrounds for me has been seeing my guild on live servers suddenly get a collective urge to build the Virgo Project. I tried telling them it's not really going to make much of a difference since fighting becomes impossible with or without it pretty quickly and negotiation can take you much further, but oh well. Maybe I have the wrong idea here.

I've got the same impression. The way attrition is working now there's three sensible strategies:

1) Just fight what you can for free. You might get a few more fights due to having really good GBs - but you'll probably not be going farther than 30 progress a day - and past 20 will be difficult already.

2) Fight what you can for free and maybe do a couple negotiations afterwards in a pinch.

3) Don't fight at all. Negotiate from the start. Rationale: You get 2 progress per attrition and thus get to enjoy more progress from the cheaper negotiations. i.e. if you compare the cost of doing 25 negotiations with doing your 30 'free' fights and then 10 negotiations both of which lead to 50 progress on the day, the cost is already very comparable by negotiating - and your attrition is only 25 instead of 40 at that point should you want to go further. You wind up wasting attrition by fighting.

I'm not sure what exactly the logic is in 2 progress per negotiation - perhaps race speed vs autobattlers? If so it should also be 2 attrition per negotiation so at least fighting first is indeed saving you goods.

 

[aragon82]

looking forward to hear from devs what we did wrong so far @The Envoy
finishing 2nd place behind the #1 in the highest rated league once again
....and another guild(pretty shure they did 1st on highest gold-league) has been promoted to platinum....but not us.

thinking about the infos you offered us so far about the hidden MMR: review the starting conditions!
we dont have any clue how this is possible without a missleading ranking before 1st GBG started

 

[DeletedUser9719]

hello
I do not always find the ranking point for league changes ?

personally I was happy to participate in this test
saw how many guilds were favored on the rewards and that some big players are not even victim of attrition

this is no longer of interest

 

[podkap1970]

looking forward to hear from devs what we did wrong so far @The Envoy
finishing 2nd place behind the #1 in the highest rated league once again
....and another guild(pretty shure they did 1st on highest gold-league) has been promoted to platinum....but not us.

thinking about the infos you offered us so far about the hidden MMR: review the starting conditions!
we dont have any clue how this is possible without a missleading ranking before 1st GBG started

Nvidia would say: It Just Works

sorry LK-guys, i don't know it either what went wrong

even i'm sure we see us again next thursday in the Platinum league together again

 

[Natalia1]

looking forward to hear from devs what we did wrong so far @The Envoy
finishing 2nd place behind the #1 in the highest rated league once again
....and another guild(pretty shure they did 1st on highest gold-league) has been promoted to platinum....but not us.

thinking about the infos you offered us so far about the hidden MMR: review the starting conditions!
we dont have any clue how this is possible without a missleading ranking before 1st GBG started

I agree, something is unclear about this "Initially assigned" MMR. We do very well in GE and GvG, and our members are all active. And yet...we did well on both BG rounds but did not get promoted to platinum league. What did you have us rated before the first GBG and why ???

 

[LastWarrior]

Its a suprise lol, I still think top one up bottom one down is fairer

 

[DeletedUser9523]

As was mentioned before, the initial MMR calculations were based on amount of members and activity (and success) within GE and GvG of the past two weeks (at the point of calculation).
This calculation could only be an approximation, but could never reflect the final rank of a guild. For that to be reflected, we simply need a few seasons so that the league system can sort itself naturally.

Spoiler: Side Note

The original approach would have been to just put all guilds in copper league and let itself get sorted from there, but that would have led to completely unfair battlegrounds for the majority of the community for several seasons.
By giving out MMR (and therefore higher league allocations) to all guilds, we will not have to wait so long for the required amount of "point-swelling" that is needed for stability in such a system.

@aragon82:
For your case, please keep in mind that it could have been that your guild wasn't rated very high within gold league (after initial placement), and that the gold league is the biggest one. Therefore, it requires more MMR gains / losses to move out of it.
But I am sure your guild won't take long to get to platinum league anymore.

---

For live worlds we can of course review the initial placement calculation again and make sure that it's more likely for powerful guilds to already start in platinum.

 

[beelzebob666]

For live worlds we can of course review the initial placement calculation again and make sure that it's more likely for powerful guilds to already start in platinum.

Maybe you could just set/round the MMR to the center of the respective league for the initial MMR on live. As the initial MMR is a pretty rough guess anyway that would help make the development of the league ranking feel more fair.

EDIT: If the initial MMR would be set close to the ranking up threshold for every guild in the respective league, that would allow guilds in the top 3 to quickly rank up in the next battleground already, while the guilds in the lower places are not demoted immediately after the first round...

example: assuming 3 is the threshold to be in platinum, gold guilds could all start out at 2.8, silver all at 1.8, bronze all at 0.8...

Also all leagues should be sufficiently filled from the start - especially as you intend to have a pretty even spread of 10/25/30/25/10 in the end. I think originally in the first battleground season there have only been two or three gold battlegrounds... that will only hinder a quick population of the higher leagues. So maybe you "estimate" the MMR according to your previous algorithm - that list gets sorted and the top 33% get set into gold with an MMR of 2.8, the middle 33% get set into Silver with 1.8 and the rest gets 0.8 in bronze... that would help with filling the top leagues quicker. You could even add the original MMR/100 to the respective new MMR (e.g.: 1.8 + 1.1/100 = 1.811) so the sorting of the guilds is kept...

 

[aragon82]

@aragon82:
For your case, please keep in mind that it could have been that your guild wasn't rated very high within gold league (after initial placement), and that the gold league is the biggest one. Therefore, it requires more MMR gains / losses to move out of it.
But I am sure your guild won't take long to get to platinum league anymore.

---

For live worlds we can of course review the initial placement calculation again and make sure that it's more likely for powerful guilds to already start in platinum.

We(Legendary Knigths) had both of the actual platinum-members(KYPIAPXOI, Dragonstar) in our first golden-league, so according to your informations we should at least had been ranked as 6th overall(hardest golden-league) MMR next to each other
#2 in rankings for quite a while, almost every week 1st in GE(besides the last, against Kyp, what else?!?), so 6th is quite unlikely...

We made 2nd spot two times in a row(hardest golden, one and only platinum), which should have given us a good amount of MMR until now
Not enough to not get overtaken?!? ...well... I really hope you think about this system twice before hitting life....

This is killing the motivation for me and other guild-members, getting the hardest, doing as good as possible and seeing no progress in comparison to the others.
You really should think about an extra GBG-Ranking or something else. The hidden blackbox is not what we asked for.

Looking forward to meet the same folks once again on thursday for another hard GBG-season!

 

[DeletedUser9761]

I read through the first 20 pages and decided to ask for a pointer to a specific page in this thread if it exists or an answer to the following question. How is the Ranking of individual players determined within your guild for GBG? Thank you.

 

[beelzebob666]

I read through the first 20

as the guild internal "ranking"/"member activity" was only added quite recently, you should have checked the last couple pages...

I have not read anything about it yet, but I would guess that the amount of progress contributed would be the first sorting condition. So (number of negotiations*2 + number of fights) would be the sorting parameter. But I can not check that as I am only in a one member guild...

 

[DeletedUser10047]

I would think that placing 2nd when in a promoted battlefield (gold league fighting against a platinum league guild) should have advanced MMR just as much as placing 1st in an unpromoted (gold only) battlefield.

 

[DeletedUser10047]

as the guild internal "ranking"/"member activity" was only added quite recently, you should have checked the last couple pages...

I have not read anything about it yet, but I would guess that the amount of progress contributed would be the first sorting condition. So (number of negotiations*2 + number of fights) would be the sorting parameter. But I can not check that as I am only in a one member guild...

Yes, even though advances are not shown in Member Activity, advances are the sort field. As @beelzebob666 said, advances = 2*Negotiations + Fights.

 

[Fenix]

I have played in this server for 76 days. I’m a young player (but in silver league), so from my point of view: I lose many unities and goods, and receive almost nothing. I have to compare this with the guilda expedition (GE). If you want players less developed to play, the awards should be equivalent to the GE. In GE I can play till difficulty level 3, in GB 6/7 combats and a few negotiations and I am done (please make possible to by an extra round in the tavern). In GE I receive a good personal awards, and in GB I gain nothing participating in it.

 

[beelzebob666]

I have played in this server for 76 days. I’m a young player (but in silver league), so from my point of view: I lose many unities and goods, and receive almost nothing. I have to compare this with the guilda expedition (GE). If you want players less developed to play, the awards should be equivalent to the GE. In GE I can play till difficulty level 3, in GB 6/7 combats and a few negotiations and I am done (please make possible to by an extra round in the tavern). In GE I receive a good personal awards, and in GB I gain nothing participating in it.

Allowing for an Extra Turn in the Tavern would be nice but it is not really needed and it also would not be in the interest of Inno.

I estimate the chances to get the negotiations right to be about 50%. Considering you get two times the advancements for it, that seems fair.

Also I would mainly do the negotiations in the beginning - you can do about 13 negotiations per day at quite acceptable costs (factor 1 or 2) and get 26 advancements for that - every fight you do in the beginning costs you one advancement in the end - but you save on some goods instead.

Regarding the rewards... Yeah, as said before, I also wished that the personal rewards were not (as much) league dependent. Same personal effort should get you same/similar personal rewards. But on the other hand - GbG is mainly a guild feature that helps the guild to progress.

 

[sirblu]

What is the criteria for moving up in leagues? The first GbG I came in 2nd place and moved up to silver league. This last time, I came in 2nd again and stayed in Silver and only the first place moved up. Is there a point or sector requirement for moving up in leagues?

 

[aragon82]

here you can read an explanation from the devs:
https://forum.beta.forgeofempires.c...-guild-battlegrounds.10852/page-32#post-88936