• Dear forum reader,
    To actively participate in our forum discussions or to start your own threads, in addition to your game account you need a forum account. You can     REGISTER HERE!
    Please ensure a translation in to English is provided if your post is not in English and to respect your fellow players when posting.

Feedback Guild Battlegrounds

DeletedUser9938

Guest
I guess the change is good to make the gap between high end players and average players smaller. But, on the other hand, after GbG was released i was so determined to push my attack power to 2000% or so, now there is no point anymore. Back to the original plan
 

HossamAly

Merchant
I have worked very hard to be able to beat 1750% enemy ever since I saw the initial announcement in June. I managed to do it after a lot of work on my attack. It's not easy and I can't do it for every enemy combination so it's not like a magical solution. The cost in troops almost always forces me to stop around 110 battles.

Now this change completely negates all my effort in the last months. Tough luck you're probably thinking, but my main concern is that this removes any incentive for working on one's attack bonus. The way attrition increases now means increasing your bonus by 100-200% will only allow you to do 3-4 more fights. GBG seemed to me like a great feature where a great challenge can be met after a lot of work, now it just seems like homework.

I'd also like to point out that the announcement wording here is very misleading if not outright wrong :

Greetings Beta,

From tomorrow, Tuesday 3rd December 2019, we are making changes to battle attrition to make it slightly easier going forward. This does not apply to the earliest levels, but you will notice the changes as you progress. Additionally, we've increased the maximum attrition level to compensate for the adjustment in the overall difficulty curve .

Your Forge of Empires Team Beta

Well it "make it slightly easier going forward" until it doesn't. At some point before attrition 90 it now increases steeper, not more slowly than before.
Also you didn't "increase" the maximum attrition. There's no maximum now altogether (not one that would be relevant to players anyway)
 

DeletedUser10047

Guest
What was driving fighters to higher and higher attack values before Battlegrounds came out?

And what if a new feature gets released next year that significantly favors strong fighters and you haven't been working to increase your attack?
 

xivarmy

Overlord
Perk Creator
dontwannaname said:
What was driving fighters to higher and higher attack values before Battlegrounds came out?

And what if a new feature gets released next year that significantly favors strong fighters and you haven't been working to increase your attack?
Click to expand...

Originally GvG - where higher boost was a driver not just to win the fights but to reduce the troop loss and increase the amount of fights one can sustain in the long term.

For a long time though, nothing important. Many players have long passed the point where further attack boost was saving them anything meaningful in GvG (that is their GvG capacity is limited by time they want to spend in it, not their city). It's actually why I quit for a time this past summer - it didn't feel like I was accomplishing anything meaningful with my city. Sure I can get more attack boost, I like attack boost. I can get more FP and level more buildings. But what did that attack boost do for me? What did I need those higher buildings for? Not a thing. I had often even lost the will to go through collecting my daily FP. I'd be logged in looking at my city and go ugh, screw this. I hadn't noticed the difference in what I do for a very long time and had lost my motivation to even try. When I came back to setup for GBG I had like 4 events worth of grand prizes unbuilt in inventory I found because I just hadn't cared to get them built.

As for 'what if a new feature gets released in the new year?' This IS the new feature. How long as it been since GE4 was released? 2.5 years ago. That was the last time there was a new reason to get stronger before this. And since that was a fixed number of fights a week, and the ability was there to bypass the hardest ones with goods there wasn't a lot of pressure on that one. It is highly unlikely we'll see anything new and more demanding after this for at least 2 more years and getting ready for a feature that may never come is not my idea of a good time.

There are people that just enjoy seeing their numbers go higher. Personally though I only enjoy seeing myself overcome challenges I previously could not. This requires two things: 1) something I can't currently do; 2) a reasonable path to get past that limitation. In absence of that, this game may as well be dead to me.

GBG has the potential to provide this for me - but it was hard enough to imagine a fighting path under the old balance (I had joked about deleting my traz for space on my mars world because negotiation seemed so obviously better) and I was relishing that fighting did seem an interesting (albeit probably still not ideal) alternative on my CE world to have a different experience. Under the changes on beta, it would no longer be an interesting alternative and I should chase sleigh builders in winter event and then move to TE to be setup to negotiate on 3/3 worlds I'm actively trying GBG on.
 

DeletedUser8743

Guest
HossamAly said:
I have worked very hard to be able to beat 1750% enemy ever since I saw the initial announcement in June. I managed to do it after a lot of work on my attack. It's not easy and I can't do it for every enemy combination so it's not like a magical solution. The cost in troops almost always forces me to stop around 110 battles.

Now this change completely negates all my effort in the last months. Tough luck you're probably thinking, but my main concern is that this removes any incentive for working on one's attack bonus. The way attrition increases now means increasing your bonus by 100-200% will only allow you to do 3-4 more fights. GBG seemed to me like a great feature where a great challenge can be met after a lot of work, now it just seems like homework.

I'd also like to point out that the announcement wording here is very misleading if not outright wrong :

Greetings Beta,

From tomorrow, Tuesday 3rd December 2019, we are making changes to battle attrition to make it slightly easier going forward. This does not apply to the earliest levels, but you will notice the changes as you progress. Additionally, we've increased the maximum attrition level to compensate for the adjustment in the overall difficulty curve .

Your Forge of Empires Team Beta

Well it "make it slightly easier going forward" until it doesn't. At some point before attrition 90 it now increases steeper, not more slowly than before.
Also you didn't "increase" the maximum attrition. There's no maximum now altogether (not one that would be relevant to players anyway)
Click to expand...
At least the INNO announcement discussed battle attrition changes, it made no mention of negotiation attrition changes at all. The negotiation changes are terrible. Pretty much kills anybody who isn't well established from doing much at all.
 
sirblu

sirblu

Baronet
What has happened to the attrition levels. I just logged on to play this weeks GbG and noticed they are now increasing at a more rapid rate. It was that attrition levels were"
Attrition level # Goods Coins/Sup
1-5 1 400
6-13 2 800
14-18 3 1200
19-23 4 1600

Now it is:
1-4 1 400
5-6 2 800
7 - ? 3 1200
I quit when it got to 3 goods- What was wrong with he way it was?
 

DeletedUser10091

Guest
The changes for negotiation seem sensible, given it's worth double what fighting is.

Really don't like the changes to battle attrition though, as others have mentioned, it's not exactly easy to fight at the current cap and certainly the current rule set have influenced the way I've played the game recently and where I have invested diamonds (e.g. on asylum for the big attack bost).

I asked on the live stream yesterday why it was necessary and the reason given was that GBG is not intended to be a play all day feature of the game.
It's a shame, because it is a "play all day" feature in other games. If we want to play all day, shouldn't that be down to the player not the developers?
 

Scorpion Elite

Farmer
the new friction system is unfair!!!
be 2 years that get events to upgrade boost powered ...for only 10 battle in gb?
this is a scam for those who have paid time and diamonds over the years!
1750 % of attrition already be a destination for many player, and allow you to play to improve!
but now it no longer makes sens!
ugly ugly ugly ugly ugly!!
 

qaccy

Emperor
Were this many people really hitting 80+ attrition daily that the new higher cap is a negative? Personally, I'm in the mass of people that can't do much more after the enemy gets to around 300% bonus so for those like me, this is definitely an improvement (and the group I'm in is probably a lot larger).

But unless siege camps get changed most players in the top leagues play with 0 attrition gain so it doesn't really matter what these numbers look like anyway.
 

Scorpion Elite

Farmer
qaccy said:
Were this many people really hitting 80+ attrition daily that the new higher cap is a negative? Personally, I'm in the mass of people that can't do much more after the enemy gets to around 300% bonus so for those like me, this is definitely an improvement (and the group I'm in is probably a lot larger).

But unless siege camps get changed most players in the top leagues play with 0 attrition gain so it doesn't really matter what these numbers look like anyway.
Click to expand...

then you can also stop growing your GE, it's not worth it for 10 more battles

it is also useless to do events where they give attack upgrades
 
Hiep Lin

Hiep Lin

Viceroy
GB should not allow a single player to take all the provinces in a day. It takes the effort of all players in the guild.
It is therefore normal that the strongest remain limited.
 

HossamAly

Merchant
hiep lin said:
GB should not allow a single player to take all the provinces in a day. It takes the effort of all players in the guild.
It is therefore normal that the strongest remain limited.
Click to expand...
IMO the strongest was already limited. At least the challenge was feasible. Beating 1750% even with the highest current bonus required a lot of effort and manual battles and it came at a huge cost of troops. No one can keep doing it. Even the strongest players aren't able "to take all provinces in a day". I'm lucky to take just 1 province a day at Gold league, even with beating 1750%.
What's happening now is not just limiting the strongest players, it's making a lot of work on city attack absolutely redundant.
 

DeletedUser9523

Guest
Guild Battlegrounds was not intended to be a feature that can be played all day.

There are two reasons for this:
1.) There are so many other things in the game already and we didn't want to make players feel required to invest too much time with this new feature.
2.) If it was possible for a player to play all day, it means that those players could contribute so much that all players with normal contribution amounts (let's say ~20 advances) would feel as if they are not contributing at all. Just imagine if someone who "broke" the 1750% attack penalty wall could go to 1000+ attrition. How would the small guild member who "only" contributed up to 20 attrition feel in comparison?

So this attrition change was two ensure two things:
1.) Keep a relative even ground between a low-end player and a high-end player, so that both can still make a difference for their guild - of course the high-end player should be able to contribute more to be rewarded for having a stronger city.
2.) Improve the balance between negotiations and fights, as we saw that negotiations were too attractive (compared to fights) in the lower and middle attrition levels.
 

Scorpion Elite

Farmer
The Envoy said:
Guild Battlegrounds was not intended to be a feature that can be played all day.

There are two reasons for this:
1.) There are so many other things in the game already and we didn't want to make players feel required to invest too much time with this new feature.
2.) If it was possible for a player to play all day, it means that those players could contribute so much that all players with normal contribution amounts (let's say ~20 advances) would feel as if they are not contributing at all. Just imagine if someone who "broke" the 1750% attack penalty wall could go to 1000+ attrition. How would the small guild member who "only" contributed up to 20 attrition feel in comparison?

So this attrition change was two ensure two things:
1.) Keep a relative even ground between a low-end player and a high-end player, so that both can still make a difference for their guild - of course the high-end player should be able to contribute more to be rewarded for having a stronger city.
2.) Improve the balance between negotiations and fights, as we saw that negotiations were too attractive (compared to fights) in the lower and middle attrition levels.
Click to expand...

in doing so, you bring a person who has been playing for years with another who has been playing for a few months.
if I am ahead of the game and have played for many years, I deserve to have the advantage
 

andreab

Farmer
The Envoy said:
Guild Battlegrounds was not intended to be a feature that can be played all day.

There are two reasons for this:
1.) There are so many other things in the game already and we didn't want to make players feel required to invest too much time with this new feature.
2.) If it was possible for a player to play all day, it means that those players could contribute so much that all players with normal contribution amounts (let's say ~20 advances) would feel as if they are not contributing at all. Just imagine if someone who "broke" the 1750% attack penalty wall could go to 1000+ attrition. How would the small guild member who "only" contributed up to 20 attrition feel in comparison?

So this attrition change was two ensure two things:
1.) Keep a relative even ground between a low-end player and a high-end player, so that both can still make a difference for their guild - of course the high-end player should be able to contribute more to be rewarded for having a stronger city.
2.) Improve the balance between negotiations and fights, as we saw that negotiations were too attractive (compared to fights) in the lower and middle attrition levels.
Click to expand...

what answer?
a new or low level player plays in the lower leagues.
top players play in diamond or platinum alloys so his answer is not suitable
if you have put shields every 4 hours it means that we can play at any time if you can afford it.
moreover those who pass the 1750% wall have huge losses so pirma or later the troops end up.
with this change you have only removed the goals from the top players and medi player by sticking the game and the results will soon have less diamond revenue because no one will invest anymore.
I have been playing live in my server for 7 years and I have an attack power of around 1500% and I have a lot of losses so this change is incomprehensible and it certainly doesn't stimulate me anymore to invest for the future
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top