Feedback Guild Battlegrounds

[Logain Sedai]

Attrition: At the moment attrition increases att/def by 2% then 5% then 20% so after about 30/40 fights you will need to wait 24 hours for attrition to reset. However I believe this also needs to work for negotiations too or players can just fight 30 times then start negotiating 100 more times. (this negates the whole purpose behind the attrition mechanics) Negotiating attrition can be done by increasing the goods required until it gets too expensive then they too would then wait 24 hours for the reset of attrition.

Is this confirmed? Where is this stated please? I can't find it
So what you mean is that for the first 10 battles it increases by 2% after every battle, then 5% for the next 10 battles, then 20% for the 10 after? So battle 31 would have 270% att/def? Wouldn't that be a bit much?

I thought it was by 5% steps (from what I remember from the Facebook live a couple of days ago).

 

[DeletedUser9523]

1. I would like a 14 day cycle instead of 10 days. 13 days of actual gameplay, and 1 day off to rest, organize a new round, evaluate on previous round.

So far it was our plan anyway to have a 14 day cycle so that players can have a clear schedule.
So battlegrounds would last for about 10 days, and then there would be a few days of rest to let you (and your resources) recuperate and give everyone in the guild a chance to see the final results of the previous battleground!

2. Negotiation. I assume the goods would come from Treasury.

The negotiation mini-game, as in Guild Expeditions, would require your own goods.
Treasury goods are used to build province buildings. And only members with specific guild roles may build these!

3. Speaking of that special building. Will this automatically follow player age? Maybe it would be worth considering letting it stay the age in which it was built, and be upgradebale using Reno-kits or One-up-kit? That would give diverse guilds age-wise a chance of generating goods in most ages for use in GvG.

The new building that everyone can get and upgrade by participating in Battlegrounds will work like all of these buildings. When you build it, it will be of your age. So by default you might have to use a One-Up-Kit or Renovation-Kit, but if you use an Upgrade-Kit (to get this building to the next level), it will automatically advance to your current age.

Feedback for Inno (continued):
5. Troops/goods - Players struggle each week to do GE because their cities are not designed to make troops and goods. And now they will need troops and goods (they do not have) to also do BGs?

Even if they understand BGs mechanics and have additional time to invest in it - many of them will be simply too poor to participate.

This is one of the reasons why we are currently looking into extending attrition to also work for negotiations.
If that would be the case, then a "rich" guild member can trade some goods to the "poor" members. Then they could finish some cheap negotiations and contribute before their attrition ramps up.

Is this confirmed? Where is this stated please? I can't find it
So what you mean is that for the first 10 battles it increases by 2% after every battle, then 5% for the next 10 battles, then 20% for the 10 after? So battle 31 would have 270% att/def? Wouldn't that be a bit much?

I might be wrong, but I think I mentioned this in the last Live Q&A on facebook:
The idea of attrition was also to get low and high players on a more even playing field to ultimately make sure that the contributions of low player stay relevant!
For this to work, attrition increases in a rather exponential manner.

For example, the first battles increase attrition by 2% per step, until attrition has reached a total of 10%. Then it would increase by 5% until it reached 50%.
Then there'd be 10% steps until 100%, and ultimately it just keeps increasing by 20%.

With this system, a new player should be able to make about five battle-contributions quite safely each day. And a high player would have to stop after about 30 to 40 contributions.

-----------

Thank you for all the suggestions and feedback so far!
Keep it up, I will make sure to show up regularly to provide answers.

 

[softly explorer]

For example, the first battles increase attrition by 2% per step, until attrition has reached a total of 10%. Then it would increase by 5% until it reached 50%.
Then there'd be 10% steps until 100%, and ultimately it just keeps increasing by 20%.

That sounds great ! If I understand correctly :the very first battle of a new "day" always start with ZERO attrition ?

I'm still more excited about this new upcoming Guild Battlegrounds than I'm for GvG, even if you fix all instabilities in GvG, I don't touch GvG never again if GBG is my cup of tea ;-)

 

[DeletedUser9523]

That sounds great ! If I understand correctly :the very first battle of a new "day" always start with ZERO attrition ?

Correct, each day attrition gets back to 0%, regardless of how high you have pushed it the day before!

 

[HossamAly]

For example, the first battles increase attrition by 2% per step, until attrition has reached a total of 10%. Then it would increase by 5% until it reached 50%.
Then there'd be 10% steps until 100%, and ultimately it just keeps increasing by 20%.

With this system, a new player should be able to make about five battle-contributions quite safely each day. And a high player would have to stop after about 30 to 40 contributions.

Thank you for your answer! This is a lot steeper than I imagined to be honest. I completely agree with the idea that new player should be made relevant by limiting how much a high player can do in comparison, but I would argue the increase should be a bit less steep, while keeping the ratio of high/new player contribution the same.

If the idea is to draw GvG fighters to this new feature, then it needs to be comparable in terms of numbers of fights. High players can do 100-200 fights in GvG on a good day easily, it would be great if they can do 60-80 in this new feature (meaning that a new player would be able to do 10 instead of 5)

 

[DeletedUser9523]

If the idea is to draw GvG fighters to this new feature, then it needs to be comparable in terms of numbers of fights. High players can do 100-200 fights in GvG on a good day easily, it would be great if they can do 60-80 in this new feature (meaning that a new player would be able to do 10 instead of 5)

This question heavily depends on how much time the new feature should be able to "demand" from players.
What I have read throughout the forums is that some players fear that the game ultimately demands too much activity if you look at everything FoE has to offer - once Battlegrounds are released.

Allowing for even more battles would be disappointing for those players who'd rather want a PvP feature that is less demanding. So we really need to find a sweetspot!

Also keep in mind that we have a large share of Mobile players and Battlegrounds will be the first large-scale PvP feature within FoE for them.
Actions that can be done quickly on browser usually take a bit more time on Mobile (due to the way you do your inputs), so if battlegrounds would allow for the same scope of total battles as the existing GvG, it might be too demanding to do this on Mobile.

Edit: Also, the goal of Battlegrounds is not to replicate the same feeling that GvG provides and to make all GvG players necessarily move over to the new feature. The Battlegrounds feature should have its own identity. And every player should simply pick the features that are according to his/her taste!

 

[softly explorer]

I forgot to ask :
would there also battles with "two waves" ?

PS :
I think I gonna like GBG more and more !
I hate GvG because of mostly too many battles ! Boring ...
Just a few battles a day on GBG is great !

And I hope "reset" time do not have too much to do with GBG ? I rather like I can just simply choose when (time of day) I do a few battles !
Reset time is mostly NEVER a good time for me

 

[DeletedUser7951]

Correct, each day attrition gets back to 0%, regardless of how high you have pushed it the day before!

So, when does a day start ? And how important would it be to take what one can early on ?
For GvG it's all about reset time, one of the biggest killers of the entire concept.
For GE it's the first guild to 120% - EDIT : 133%

 

[DeletedUser]

For GE it's the first guild to 120%

133%

 

[DeletedUser9523]

I forgot to ask :
would there also battles with "two waves" ?

After each battle, the next army setup that you will face within Battlegrounds will be randomly selected from a pool of potential setups. Maybe a few of those setups will be two-wave battles, but we will see.
Ultimately, an unfortunate setup of defense armies should not lock out a new player who is simply not able to solve a two-wave battle.

I think I gonna like GBG more and more !

That's great to hear!

And I hope "reset" time do not have too much to do with GBG ? I rather like I can just simply choose when (time of day) I do a few battles !
Reset time is mostly NEVER a good time for me

For GvG it's all about reset time, one of the biggest killers of the entire concept.

The idea of the reset of attrition is that YOU decide at what time during the day you "use up" your available buffer for attrition.
Personally I don't think it's strategically the best option to always use up all your available battles for that day right after the attrition reset was happening.
In some situations, it may be even better to wait for a later time during the day to see what the enemy has done - and then strike back to be in a better position than before.

If we see that issues arise with a fixed daily reset, we can still come up with alternatives (i.e. during beta stage).

So, when does a day start ?

The exact point in time for the attrition reset is not decided on yet.

And how important would it be to take what one can early on ?

Of course the earlier you can obtain provinces, the earlier they start generating victory points for your guild. But overall the answer shouldn't be so simple.
Let's assume this scenario:
Your guild wants to take a specific province, but you also know that another guild will push for it on that same day.
You let the enemy guild take it and even let them build province buildings on it. Then (after the usual conquest lock-down timer), your guild uses all they got (since they "saved up" their attrition) to take that province quickly.
The other guild may have generated a few extra points for the time being, but they also built all those sweet province buildings that might now benefit YOUR guild instead (given they were not destroyed)! So the enemy was so nice to pay all those treasury goods for you.

So, like I said, the idea is to make it feel more strategical and not "too obvious".

 

[DeletedUser9523]

Oh, another thing to consider about the daily reset is this:
In GvG, the daily reset is such an important time because the results of one moment decide about the whole outcome.

In Battlegrounds, we measure the total performance over a course of 10 days, and victory points are awarded each hour.
This degree of granularity should make a single point in time less important.

But again, if we see issues arise with this (or too strong concerns from you guys), we can totally think about this aspect further. The only reason that kinda kept me from adding something about it to the concept as of yet, is that it would add complexity. And if we can avoid adding unnecessary complexity, that would be great.

 

[softly explorer]

I can imagine that the reset time have to be "set" the same for everyone ... (not like the Daily Challenges, which can be changed) ... but like you mentioned the tactical moves a guild can make reset time isn't that important like in GvG ...

 

[DeletedUser]

In GvG reset time is "all or nothing", the attrition does not work that way - if enemy will use his attrition in 5 min after "0" hour, that will not stop you from doing your battles on the same sector, because it would not be shielded.

 

[Ian Santa Claus]

I'm very much looking forward to this new feature.
A cooperative guild feature that every member of a guild can contribute fairly equally to, whether pc or mobile, early age or advanced, fighter or farmer sounds really good.
I like the attrition feature. I'm one of the big guns in my guild with the over 600% attack bonus, and I'll be very happy that the "little guys" in the guild will be able to make a much more significant contribution. In GvG they can only contribute about 2% of the amount of fights that we big guns do which makes them feel superfluous and puts them off taking part. This gets round that problem in a similar way to the GE scoring system.
I do have a concern with how the guilds are matched up against each other.
Yes the league system will put high performing guilds against other high performing guilds, but a guild of ten players who are all very active will very rarely be able to outperform a guild of 80 even if only a quarter of that larger guild participate.
In GE my guild of 14 players know that we can get gold every week by all putting in the effort to do 64 encounters each. Will battlegrounds create a situation where no amount of effort on our part will be able to overcome sheer weight of numbers from an 80 member guild of half hearted players?

 

[1BFA]

From FB Q&A: "When matching guilds each guild is given base points". How are these base points calculated. Will it ever happen a one man guild in a diamond league end up with 80 players diamond league? or a guild with full of low age players and guild with high ranking be matched (both are in diamond league).

 

[1BFA]

......
If that would be the case, then a "rich" guild member can trade some goods to the "poor" members. Then they could finish some cheap negotiations and contribute before their attrition ramps up.
.....

It is very easy to acquire hundred's of thousands of Iron/EMA goods. what would stop a guild from loading up with lower age players and feed them with ton of goods? I'm hoping Bronze age players are excluded from GBg

 

[DeletedUser]

I'm very much looking forward to this new feature.
A cooperative guild feature that every member of a guild can contribute fairly equally to, whether pc or mobile, early age or advanced, fighter or farmer sounds really good.
I like the attrition feature. I'm one of the big guns in my guild with the over 600% attack bonus, and I'll be very happy that the "little guys" in the guild will be able to make a much more significant contribution. In GvG they can only contribute about 2% of the amount of fights that we big guns do which makes them feel superfluous and puts them off taking part. This gets round that problem in a similar way to the GE scoring system.
I do have a concern with how the guilds are matched up against each other.
Yes the league system will put high performing guilds against other high performing guilds, but a guild of ten players who are all very active will very rarely be able to outperform a guild of 80 even if only a quarter of that larger guild participate.
In GE my guild of 14 players know that we can get gold every week by all putting in the effort to do 64 encounters each. Will battlegrounds create a situation where no amount of effort on our part will be able to overcome sheer weight of numbers from an 80 member guild of half hearted players?

Exactly my concern.

 

[DeletedUser9523]

From FB Q&A: "When matching guilds each guild is given base points". How are these base points calculated. Will it ever happen a one man guild in a diamond league end up with 80 players diamond league? or a guild with full of low age players and guild with high ranking be matched (both are in diamond league).

The league system should generally take care of this. Guilds that perform very strong consistently will work their way into the Diamond league. In this case, it doesn't matter if it's a guild that consists of 80 semi-active members or 10 "big cannons". Each league will only hold guilds of similar strength by naturally considering all factors!
In the current concept, it's all based around performance. But sure: having more members that contribute to Battlegrounds will increase the odds of getting to higher leagues.

However, if players keep bringing "member count" up as an issue in this concept, we will look into possible changes so that the amount of members doesn't become too much of a advantage. But again, solutions like this will increase the complexity of the feature, something that should be avoided as much as it's feasible.

It is very easy to acquire hundred's of thousands of Iron/EMA goods. what would stop a guild from loading up with lower age players and feed them with ton of goods? I'm hoping Bronze age players are excluded from GBg

If we assume that we can make attrition work for negotiations as well, then these lower aged players would be affected by this soft-cap. So even they would be limited by the amount of negotiations that they can perform each day.

As for the unlocking of the feature: we are currently thinking of unlocking Battlegrounds in Iron Age or Early Middle Age (so definitely not in Bronze Age).

From FB Q&A: "When matching guilds each guild is given base points". How are these base points calculated.

In the FB Q&A I explained that "under the hood", we will track a specific value for each guild called "Matchmaking Rating" (MMR).
This value increases the higher your guild's placement is at the end of a battleground, and it decreases when your guild is at the lower end. The further you are at either end, the stronger the adjustment.
And if your guild is in the middle of the placements (i.e. you ranked #3 out of 5 guilds), there will be no adjustment.
To not inflate / break this MMR value, it has an upper and lower limit.

We then map the MMR value to a specific league, which is what will be visible to you in the guild overview and so on.

 

[DeletedUser9982]

While you discuss your new concept, that i will try when it comes out AN THEN GIVE A PROPER FEEDBACK:

I can tell you 20 things that are going wrong with FoE, but it would be a waste of time.
But.. This is beyond anything else!

When you (Inno) have the arrogance, to stand in front of us, and announce MARS AGE, with GBs that are NERFED...
HAVE A LOOK AT YOURSELFS MAN!!

From a pointless GT from artic to Mars now, GE with level 4 STILL as a f...ing bonus level for the last 3 years that for many of us, its finished in 20 minutes!
GvG? GvDisaster!
And now.. This??
Are you going to change the GBs bonus, or are you just going to BS us???

I dont think you care!
We are not just players, let me tell you that!
We are costumers as well!
Wait.. wait.. wait..
Im going to flip right now!
DEVs, must do FoE as a part-time job, not be paid enough to dedicate 100% to Inno??

HUGE LACK OF COMUNICATION, between comunity manager and DEVs

Im seriously starting to struggle right now, to stay in this forum and give any form of feedback!
NO ONE CARES!

 

[1BFA]

Can a guild destroy their own province buildings?

Is there a concept of releasing a province?

If a province is 99% taken and the hour is up. Will the province go back to 0 at reset and the guild is forced to take it all over again. (Trying to figure out if guilds can exploit by blocking other guilds or just exchange provinces between friends.)