Feedback Guild Battlegrounds

[DeletedUser9522]

We were still debating the matter internally, as attrition and difficulty has still been in flux.

We will continue to keep an eye on attrition & difficulty, however at this point in time it seems unlikely to add a 4th round for negotiations.
The reason is that negotiations provide two advances (with a slightly increased chance to obtain a reward), and this is because it considers all other factors:

• Negotiations will always cost you precious goods, whereas battles may end up without any losses
• Negotiations always take quite some time (as opposed to auto-battles), which will be especially significant for high leagues, where provinces get focussed to be taken within minutes
• Experienced players have a good grasp on when a battle will be won (beforehand), whereas current negotiation setups sometimes fail

Also keep in mind that Guild Expededition negotiations may demand more than 6 options (as opposed to Battlegrounds), which makes the 4th round option quite necessary there.

Then maybe, if you get a 4th round for negotiation from tavern or somewhere else, it also changes the advance to 1 at the same time.
Then you can decide if you prefer 2 advances or the better chances of completing with 4 turns.

 

[Nessie]

Then maybe, if you get a 4th round for negotiation from tavern or somewhere else, it also changes the advance to 1 at the same time.
Then you can decide if you prefer 2 advances or the better chances of completing with 4 turns.

seems reasonable to me, would appreciate such an improvement

 

[fulopjeno]

Hi! Is that feasible to have the activity of guild members appear in the log on the left side?

 

[jovada]

When you have a battle that you are not gonna win and you negociate, you always have the same battle again preventing you to continue with battle and condamming you to go on with negotiations.
Why do you not move to the next battle ?????

 

[DeletedUser10047]

The prestige given on Beta after the end of a Battlegrounds season ranges roughly from 0 to 6000. This makes sense for beta given that GvG reset happens 3 times day. What about for the other servers where GvG reset only happens once a day. Will prestige from Battlegrounds be triple?

 

[Nessie]

When you have a battle that you are not gonna win and you negociate, you always have the same battle again preventing you to continue with battle and condamming you to go on with negotiations.
Why do you not move to the next battle ?????

I already asked many many pages ago that I'd like to have a different battle after a negotiation, of course this was not worth a comment from the devs

 

[Julian24]

I already asked many many pages ago that I'd like to have a different battle after a negotiation, of course this was not worth a comment from the devs

Almost nothing here is worth a comment from the devs. And this is normal. They have other things to do than writing here. For that we have the forum mods and Community Managers.

Btw. I would also prefer, that the units change after a won negotiation.

 

[BeeVee]

How many guilds will promote to a higher league at the end of a campaign?
How many guilds will drop down to a lower league at the end of a campaign?

 

[DeletedUser10047]

How many guilds will promote to a higher league at the end of a campaign?
How many guilds will drop down to a lower league at the end of a campaign?

It's probably still too early in the process of getting guilds sorted into leagues for any meaningful numbers to emerge, but as a point of reference: After last season, 11 guilds were demoted from gold to silver, while 75 guilds were promoted from silver to gold. I would expect that after the leagues get sorted, approximately the same number of guilds will get promoted/demoted.

 

[BeeVee]

Does this mean that it is not fixed number of guilds (for e.g. the top 2 / the last 2 ) that will promote/demote to a lower league ?

 

[CrashBoom]

Does this mean that it is not fixed number of guilds (for e.g. the top 2 / the last 2 ) that will promote/demote to a lower league ?

exactly

all teams who increases their MMR over a certain value go up
all teams who decreases their MMR below another value go down

it is even possible that the 2nd goes up and the 1st not

(before asked: the MMR is an internal value and you can't see it)

 

[housemouse]

Yes, which means that I hardly have any more goods now.
And I've never really had that.
If you go through 50 negotiations ... did somebody calculate how many things that are? Not to mention the failed attempts.
Because of easy. :-( Even with a 4th round for negotiations still way too expensive.
And what about the observatory now?
Can you delete it or?
Why do not you give it a nice boost at the harvest? For example, reset the abrasion! Or depending on the level further negotiation attempts?

 

[DeletedUser10047]

If you go through 50 negotiations ... did somebody calculate how many things that are?

Presuming that you use good negotiating strategies and that you always abort after three tries instead of using diamonds, it should cost a total of approximately 5000 goods to reach 50 successful encounters by negotiation. This will include about equal amounts of current age and previous age goods, or about 500 of each good.

This calculation uses an average of 20 goods for each successful negotiation including the expected failures. Over 194 successful negotiations, I had 105 failures for a total of 299 negotiations. With an average of 12 goods per negotiation, this works out to 18.5 goods used per successful negotiation. Therefore the calculation in the above paragraph is slightly conservative in the expected amount of goods needed for 50 successful negotiations. If the calculation were made with an average of 18.5 goods per successful negotiation, then a total of about 4500 goods would be needed for 50 successful negotiations.

However, as negotiation provides 2 advances while fighting only provides 1 advance, the expectation should be that a decent negotiator will only do half as many encounters as a decent fighter. If a decent fighter can do 50 successful fights, then a decent negotiator should be able to do 25 successful negotiations. At 20 goods per successful negotiation, that is about 1240 goods total or 124 of each current and previous era good.

 

[xivarmy]

I did 35 encounters a day by negotiation (enough to win a silver league province) while I was testing things out and my numbers were significantly lower. Granted I was using 10 diamonds to avoid failures most days because I was on short goods supply on beta and had handy free diamonds. I probably consumed about 1000 goods a day by my estimate (i had about 5000 previous era goods at the start, and now i have about 2000 after about 8 of those days without generating any significant amount of them. So about 3000 previous era goods used up over 8ish such days. Current era seemed more prominent to me than previous era so I think turning 375 previous into 1000 total is conservative).

It is probably worth it the more negotiations you do to be running some amount of diamond mines to cover 4th turn on later attempts (at x1 multiplier, just give up and try again, by x7 multiplier (35th negotiation) though 10 diamonds is saving you quite a lot of goods).

 

[DeletedUser10047]

I agree that occasional diamond usage could significantly lower the amount of goods used. But even there it is a trade-off between getting a few extra encounters versus using those diamonds to insta-complete a building (particularly a Palace).

 

[LastWarrior]

Good job I fight

 

[Ossum]

That just tells us who did how much and not who did actions on which specific sector. How are guild leaders actually expected to lead and direct the guild if we have no way of knowing who is actually doing what they asked of us?

I agree 100% with you on that. We need a event log like in GvG to show who has attacked and which sector they attacked!

 

[podkap1970]

I agree 100% with you on that. We need a event log like in GvG to show who has attacked and which sector they attacked!

well i'm happy this Battleground goes live tomorrow, so Inno will get lots of feedback, that we really need this log, maybe they work faster on it?
in GvG we have an event log too, it came a bit later after GvG got implemented no?, i forgot 6 years are a long time hehe

 

[DeletedUser9396]

Cross-world play for Battlegrounds is something we have considered in the beginning of the development.
In fact, some of our developers wanted to have this so strongly that they went the extra-mile to investigate its feasibility.
However, as it has been pointed out already, it's not that simple and it comes with a lot of potential edge-cases and risks (i.e. what happens if one game world goes offline accidentally?).

I wouldn't say it's comepletely off the table, but it won't happen in the near future, that's for sure.

Really happy the devs have given crossworld play a lot of thought. I had two ideas for cross-world GBG related play that would also take into account the fears expressed by some players that their less-developed guilds would get smashed by higher ones.

1) Shorten the current GBG season by two days. In those two days, at the end of the season, invite the top finisher from each island (or the top two finishers, etc) to compete in a cross-world island whose outcomes would NOT affect MMR but there would be more rewards, more resets of attrition at random intervals, and perhaps an AI guild. The AI guild could have a max number of players equal to the average of the players of all the invited guilds on that island. With randomly generated AI players who mirror random members of the invited guilds. And the AI guild's participation after the first hour would be no higher than the average participation of all the invited guilds in the previous hour.

2) Instead of inviting the top 1 (or 2, etc) guilds from each island to the two-day post-season play, invite the top 1 to 10 individual players from the whole island, regardless of guild and place between 50 and 100 of them at a time on a cross-world GBG-style island (players who manage to qualify on multiple worlds would find themselves on multiple islands only to avoid self-help). Plenty of rewards and resources to be fought for and won during those two days. Again, I would suggest multiple resets at random times. Instead of victory points, you could accrue the rewards based on which sectors you held. So some sectors grant fps per hour. Some units, others goods, etc.

The second idea acts as a special incentive to be a top player on any island. On the other hand, it is Guild battlegrounds, and the first idea allows a guild to go crossworld. I also like the AI guild. But honestly you could have an AI guild roaming the island in the second idea, too.

The concern over world outages, etc, is not eliminated here. But keeping crossworld play to two days reduces the risk considerably, and as I would make all cross-world play MMR neutral, no guild would be penalized even if they just decided not to participate.

 

[FrejaSP]

well i'm happy this Battleground goes live tomorrow, so Inno will get lots of feedback, that we really need this log, maybe they work faster on it?
in GvG we have an event log too, it came a bit later after GvG got implemented no?, i forgot 6 years are a long time hehe

Not sure about that log, you can see in the leaderboard who is active, that should be enough. I really don't like loging of who attacked which sector