Spoiler Further Guild Battlegrounds Changes

[ironsage]

to me it looks like we will have to build in our city siege camps and wachtowers to reduce attrection in gbg

 

[planetofthehumans2]

by negotiating


and negotiate

because for fighting there a almost a dozen GB and hundreds of event buildings to make it easier

but there is NO building that makes negotation easier
(Space Carrier doesn't make it easier, just gives rewards a few times)

so if only one part gets improved it mustn't be fighting AGAIN

For GBG there is literally nothing that can be done to improve negging - it will always be slower than fighting unless there was an auto neg or just pay goods for 1 fight like on the campaign map.

But I would love more neg GB for GEX/colonies like reduce good cost by N (must pay at least 1 good) up to say 50 goods per choice at level 100 or reduce one choice or extra attempts.

 

[Deleted User - 57457]

unless there was an auto neg

Too bad a similar feature was scrapped. They've tried once to put in some effort to make a semi-automatic neg. feature. It was dropped, though it had potential.

 

[beelzebob666]

first thing they should change in regards to negotiation are the animation times - if all that stuff was quasi instant negotiations could be 3 times faster

in regards to a true "autonegotiate" similar to the autobattle, they should just take the theoretical average costs for negotiating, slap a factor 1.5 or 2 on top and make it instant: "negotiate manually or pay a bribe (pay this amount of goods for instant finish)?"

 

[planetofthehumans2]

Too bad a similar feature was scrapped. They've tried once to put in some effort to make a semi-automatic neg. feature. It was dropped, though it had potential.

Yeah I remember that, it still took too much time and wasn't as much of a "guarentee" as autobattling 1) because the average negotiation on gbg does not have a good chance of success to succeed (5 options), 2) this makes negotiation on gbg difficult 3) there are no bonuses for negging like there are for battling to make the battle/neg easier

If it was just pay these random goods like on the continent map, it could change the whole dynamic of gbg and make goods producers even more valuable.

 

[Grzechu Junior]

negs should be worth 3 or 4 points instead of 2

Or worth 1 points for 4 goods, 2 points for 5 goods and 3-4 points for 6 goods

 

[Deleted User - 57457]

Yeah I remember that, it still took too much time and wasn't as much of a "guarentee" as autobattling 1) because the average negotiation on gbg does not have a good chance of success to succeed (5 options), 2) this makes negotiation on gbg difficult 3) there are no bonuses for negging like there are for battling to make the battle/neg easier

If it was just pay these random goods like on the continent map, it could change the whole dynamic of gbg and make goods producers even more valuable.

It was also flawed in that it at times chose the same good for several slots, while many other goods where an option. Negotiations deserve a buff of their own and some ideas and suggestions where made. Unfortunately no response from the devs or any signs of intentions to do something with it so far.

I agreed though I can imagine them charging diamonds in addition. For example pay 5 + 4 * X goods of each choice * 1.10
X goods = amount of goods each choice would’ve cost.
For example 10 for each choice and 10 different goods: 4 * 10 * 1.10 = 44 + 5 to bribe instead of negotiating. So, either risk the need to buy an additional turn and/or redo the negotiations or bribe with potentially higher costs.

 

[planetofthehumans2]

It was also flawed in that it at times chose the same good for several slots, while many other goods where an option. Negotiations deserve a buff of their own and some ideas and suggestions where made. Unfortunately no response from the devs or any signs of intentions to do something with it so far.

I agreed though I can imagine them charging diamonds in addition. For example pay 5 + 4 * X goods of each choice * 1.10
X goods = amount of goods each choice would’ve cost.
For example 10 for each choice and 10 different goods: 4 * 10 * 1.10 = 44 + 5 to bribe instead of negotiating. So, either risk the need to buy an additional turn and/or redo the negotiations or bribe with potentially higher costs.

The main point is that negging is way too slow for the pace of auto battling, it's not even an option. Even the auto neg was too slow and not accurate enough. This kind of suggestion would be ok for other times you would be negging like the japanese settlement or the colonies. It may make negging slightly faster, but it's nowhere near as fast as just clicking "auto battle" and being done with it.

 

[Deleted User - 57457]

The main point is that negging is way too slow for the pace of auto battling, it's not even an option. Even the auto neg was too slow and not accurate enough. This kind of suggestion would be ok for other times you would be negging like the japanese settlement or the colonies. It may make negging slightly faster, but it's nowhere near as fast as just clicking "auto battle" and being done with it.

Paying a predetermined bribe would kinda be on equal speeds as auto-battle. Assuming the confirmation for paying diamonds have been disabled during the usage. The downsides however are the costs of diamonds and potentially higher goods costs on average. Let's say 80 negotiations fully done with instant bribes, it would cost 400 on top of potentially higher average goods costs. This is just a quick example. Which could make it for MTG/Inno interesting to look into and have as a player as an quicker alternative of regular negotiations.

 

[beelzebob666]

cost 400 on top

The average cost for the bribe should be calculated on the assumption that the negotiation is restarted when not doable - higher goods cost, no diamonds

 

[Deleted User - 57457]

The average cost for the bribe should be calculated on the assumption that the negotiation is restarted when not doable - higher goods cost, no diamonds

My examples where based off a negotiation + 1 discounted extra turn but with all options used. Which are more costly on the goods end but cheaper on diamonds extra turns.
4 turns * Number of goods each option * 1,10
Which are higher costs + 10% additional costs. Though ofc it could tuned up from 1,1x multiplier to 2x. The diamonds costs are discounted for additional turns and for MTG/Inno for the potential missed diamonds spend on the additional turn. It's just an example though and it's up to MTG/Inno to decide whether or not to implement such a bribe alternative and if so, the formula for the bribe costs.

 

[planetofthehumans2]

Honestly, I don't think anybodys going to pay 400 diamonds for one negotiation even if that was the diamond cost of the goods required. If there is auto battle with no cost with diamonds, there should be a pay goods option with no diamond cost and no negging minigame because it's 1) often too difficult to solve in one try 2) takes too long. The negging just has to be eliminated to be able to compete in gbg.

Plus, goods cost different to attrition, so a sector when you have 0 attrition should be like 1 diamond because you'd only be spending like 20 goods (for example), versus a 100 attrition sector that could cost several hundred goods.

 

[Deleted User - 57457]

Honestly, I don't think anybodys going to pay 400 diamonds for one negotiation even if that was the diamond cost of the goods required. If there is auto battle with no cost with diamonds, there should be a pay goods option with no diamond cost and no negging minigame because it's 1) often too difficult to solve in one try 2) takes too long. The negging just has to be eliminated to be able to compete in gbg.

Plus, goods cost different to attrition, so a sector when you have 0 attrition should be like 1 diamond because you'd only be spending like 20 goods (for example), versus a 100 attrition sector that could cost several hundred goods.

The 400 diamonds example wasn’t for 1 bribed negotiation, it was for 80 bribed negotiations. In my example for instant negotiations (bribing), goods costs are vastly higher than it could’ve been assuming a successful manual negotiation. The diamonds costs added (5 diamonds) is actually a discount. Assuming the neg. would’ve taken at least 1 additional turn costing 10 diamonds. So, 80 bribed negotiations * 5 diamonds/bribe = 400 diamonds.

 

[ShadowPhoenixx95]

negs should be worth 3 or 4 points instead of 2

Or worth 1 points for 4 goods, 2 points for 5 goods and 3-4 points for 6 goods

Honestly, all I'd need from an actual goods producers PoV would be the ability to buy an extra GbG Neg Turn from the Tavern as we have it for GE, and maybe some rewards that are actually helpful for my playstyle, instead of being overlooked as with the GE5 rewards (forgotten temple giving no goods at all and the goods variant of the serpent chain beind the ONLY reward giving Goods at all, while taking 6 weeks to complete one (!) addition), or the announced 'Trader's Variant' of the Great Elephant, that i'm still searching for to the current day, and I'd be happy.

 

[davvcik0.01]

Negotiations won't ever be as quick as fighting, and it can't be changed, but it is the way how to reduce attrition income.
Nehotiation help (via GB or via any kind of event building) that would help:
1. "Kraken" - for certain number of negotiations there is chance to remove 1 nego option (works like the nego decreaser in GE5)
2. building that would reduce cost of negotiation (-1 good per lvl of GB eg, or -1good per event building, minimum prize would be 1 ... I am not sure this is possible to code with coins and supplies also beeing part of negotiations - or it might be unefected....)
3. building that would give slight chace of returning goods of succesfull negotiation - probably weakest way how to boost nego, many players might not even bother

IMO option 1 would be the way almost everyone would apriciate ... but I am affraid it fits mostly "no suggest" category as I can not see the way how to do this without GB... other options are just way of goods production ... and in that case, we already have CF that can produce ridiculous numbers of goods...

 

[ShadowPhoenixx95]

Like I said, give me the option to get a 4th turn, either via Tavern Boost or Via GB, thats all I'd need to be perfectly Happy. And it's nothing new to implement, since GE already has that feature, which is also proving that it isn't OP in any way.

Preferable Via Tavern boost though. Or make the GB 'Without Age' as ToR.

Option 1 would be too strong for GbG Environment - it's fitting for GE5 and its Negotiations with 10 Options, but would be too strong for GbG and its 4-6 Option Negotiations

Option 2 would make Attrition Levels kinda pointless for Negotiators, thus would also be too strong

 

[Grzechu Junior]

Like I said, give me the option to get a 4th turn, either via Tavern Boost or Via GB, thats all I'd need to be perfectly Happy. And it's nothing new to implement, since GE already has that feature, which is also proving that it isn't OP in any way.

it will not happen sadly. negs in GB - the 4th turn for 10 diax is mine for IG. i spend hundreads of diax for negs every session

 

[davvcik0.01]

Like I said, give me the option to get a 4th turn, either via Tavern Boost or Via GB, thats all I'd need to be perfectly Happy. And it's nothing new to implement, since GE already has that feature, which is also proving that it isn't OP in any way.

Preferable Via Tavern boost though. Or make the GB 'Without Age' as ToR.

Option 1 would be too strong for GbG Environment - it's fitting for GE5 and its Negotiations with 10 Options, but would be too strong for GbG and its 4-6 Option Negotiations

Option 2 would make Attrition Levels kinda pointless for Negotiators, thus would also be too strong

Option 1 or even option 2 imo might work if it would have limited amount of uses (10-20) ... so it would not reduce attrition completely
Time-limited tavern boost to add another attempt is fine ... it would not reduce attrition but it would significantly speed up negotiations for those who do not want to spend diamonds ... but at the end it works exactly loke option 1 I noticed ... doing 5way nego on 3 moves or 6way nego on 4 moves has almost identical chance of succes

+ I realy think making attrition less iportant for negotiators is the only way how negotiations might bo more used ... as it is simply too slow to compete with fighta and there is no way to change it, but make it "negate" attrition might be the way... even player who already spend attrition on fighting might be still doing negotiations later in the day (if the cost per tile would not be 20+goods...)

 

[Deleted User - 57457]

A limited X% chance for the 1st Y negotiations to gain an Z% refund, would be highly similar to Kraken/Virgo. For example when fighting with high attrition (170+) armies have 12.000% bonus. With Virgo/Kraken you can still beat a fight. With the described neg. counterpart it would be similar yet more risky. As you're paying upfront the costs and have no guaranteed the buff refunds Z% of the neg. costs. Thus attrition would remain a serious consideration.

Spoiler: Concept example

Concept example;
X% chance for the buff to kick in after completing negotiations
Y amount of 1st neg.
Z% of neg. costs are refunded

Lvl1
20% chance to get 10% of the negotiation costs refunded for the 1st 3 successful negotiations
Lvl10
38% chance to get 31% of the negotiation costs refunded, for the 1st 3 successful negotiations
Lvl40
62,85% chance to get 61% of the negotiations costs refunded, for the 1st successful 4 negotiations
Lvl80
69,45% chance to get 90% of the negotiations costs refunded, for the 1st successful 5 negotiations
Lvl180
70% chance to get 100% of the negotiations costs refunded for the 1st 6 successful negotiations

1st negotiations increased at levels:
1 -> 3 1st successful negotiations
18 -> 4 1st successful negotiations
45 -> 5 1st successful negotiations
180 -> 6 1st successful negotiations

Imho it would be quite well balanced this way. The costs to raise a hypothetical neg. GB to lvl180 is costly. With the concept there's always a risk the buff doesn't kick in and the costs are still for the player. Though for a neg. player it's interesting. As on average it saves 4 successful negotiations costs. In a highly similar fashion Virgo/Kraken significantly reduce losses for a fighting player. It would make the negotiating playstyle more equal to fighting play styles.
Another potential buff is an X% chance to get +1 turn in negotiations after the 1st turn. Imho best implication is similar to AO: low chance, no charges. AO gives sometimes a little better odds of winning a battle by causing bonus damage. An additional turn does not guaranteed a successful negotiation. However similar to AO it improves the odds.

Imho with the discussed buffs above, negotiations would be more comparable to fighting. While it's not a 1:1, there are quite a few parallels. For simplicity:

Fighting	neg. Counterpart	In game?
Himaji castle	Space carrier
AO	X% chance +1 turn after the 1st turn
Kraken/Virgo	X% chance 1st Y successful neg. Z% costs are refunded X% chance -1 1st Y option 6+ option neg.

% determined largely which battles can be won and which can't. Similarly goods production determines this for neg. players. Himaji castle provides a chance to get additional rewards for victorious battles. Space carrier does the same but for negotiations. AO improves with a low chance of happening the odds of winning a battle. A low chance for an additional turn would do the same for negotiations. Neither guaranteed a victory. Kraken/Virgo significantly improve the casualties of battles. A chance to recoup neg. costs could do the same. Similarly it can help with higher attrition to push a little further. However it's a bit weaker than Virgo/kraken since you must complete the neg. before it maybe happens. While the removal of a neg. option is more in parallel with kraken.

Would such buffs speed up neg? Probably situational but not as much as high %. However it would create a more diverse and equal playground for both play styles. Fighters have a lot of different good GB’s to choose from. Neg. players have few and none similar to AO, Virgo and Krakken.

 

[beelzebob666]

Selection kits for the classic GBG rewards were added - so some of the classic rewards might be replaced with those.
Also, the Watchtower seems to have two levels (and not only two optical variations), as an upgrade-kit was added for it