Rejected Guild attrition list

[Grzechu Junior]

Reason

So the commanders of GB will know how much power guild have in diffrent time. Depending of ppl online, their attrition and capability. Also knowing who is avoiding "hard" sector, or not doing everything (only for top of the top guilds)

Details

The simple list - same as how many fights or negotations pps did, showing actual attrition
OR
at least, shot attrition the person ended the day.

Balance

0 impact

Abuse Prevention

0 impact - only guilds with abusvie chief will suffer, but the solution is simple - change leader or change guilds so the sick mad chief will be alone.

Summary

It will make easier to know which player is doing 100% of they power, and how much power does the guild have for example at 20:00, 10:00 etc.
In the second version - just to know who is doing 100% and who is doing only "light" sectors.

Have you looked to see if this has already been suggested?

Didnt see

Hello there again.
Simple idea - add the actual status of members attrition.
It would help the commanders of GB to decide if we fight or no for "hard" sectors etc.

Also knowing who is avoiding "hard" sector, or not doing everything (only for top of the top guilds)

 

[Pericles the Lion]

Yes and we have only a minimum of 750 points for a GB toournament which is in my opinion kinda low. We are the best guild in GB on our server so i know what i am doing
And i am using foe helper etc, but many players dont know what it is <mobile> and sometimes they dont believie this tools, that we are lyings. Have such list implementend in games will help a lot to deal with parasites in guilds. Many was already caught and kicked, but maybe a few left

and the point is - i value more the 100 points with 0 camps, than 1000 with 4 camps - but both are neccesary. Thats why, i would like every memeber to finish day with like 75 attrition. So i know they are not only hitting for free fights, but care for guild outcome.

You seem interested in getting all of your members pulling on the oars at "ramming speed". I am pretty sure that your top hitters would be happy carrying the burden for many of the players that prefer fighting less as long as the guild ends the season in one of the top 4 spots (assuming that your guild is D1K). Heck, I'll happily do my minimum (e.g. 750), "adopt" ten members, and do their quota as well. That way, everybody's happy!

 

[Grzechu Junior]

happily do my minimum (e.g. 750)

every session we kick the worst one

that prefer fighting less as long as the guild ends the season in one of the top 4 spots

No, we are only glad with 1st place and we have not lost since march 2022. Having constant war sessions since september

 

[Pericles the Lion]

every session we kick the worst one

No, we are only glad with 1st place and we have not lost since march 2022. Having constant war sessions since september

Good for you but definitely not my cup of tea. Anyway, now I understand better why you want an attrition counter.

 

[Silly Beaver]

Yes and we have only a minimum of 750 points for a GB toournament which is in my opinion kinda low. We are the best guild in GB on our server so i know what i am doing
And i am using foe helper etc, but many players dont know what it is <mobile> and sometimes they dont believie this tools, that we are lyings. Have such list implementend in games will help a lot to deal with parasites in guilds. Many was already caught and kicked, but maybe a few left

and the point is - i value more the 100 points with 0 camps, than 1000 with 4 camps - but both are neccesary. Thats why, i would like every memeber to finish day with like 75 attrition. So i know they are not only hitting for free fights, but care for guild outcome.

75 attrition is quite the goal. I assume that your guild made up of 100% players that are at 80 or more on their CCZ, they have an 80-140 traz and a combined total of 20-40 checkmate square/rotunda/carousel and have an A/D of 850-1000.

On a good season in "U" world I can hit between 2100-2600 fights with an A/D of 681/555, 80 CCZ and a 45 traz. That is how I interpolated my numbers above. But I can only get to 52-58 attrition before I lose all my fighters on each encounter.

I fight everyday and reap the rewards. But if everyone was forced to meet a goal of, ( lets take you example) 75, once your map is occupied how do you
1: keep hitting 75 when the top guilds collude with each other to minimize turnovers and placement of obstacles?
2: keep getting the rewards when you now split the pot with everyone now that they have to fight to a minimum ?
RL happens sometimes.

I vote no for an attrition monitor.

 

[Grzechu Junior]

once your map is occupied how do you

map is nver occupied by one guild. Have you been fighting in top GB guild?
during chess, or zebra of course there is no limit cuz thosetournaments are for players.
in war torunaments - there is always a lote of sector in 1 hour...

2: keep getting the rewards when you now split the pot with everyone now that they have to fight to a minimum ?

Well, 70 ppl in my guild are doing 1000 fights at least (avarage) last 10 - 750-1000

During a war session its EASY to get 100 attrion. Even 1-2 hour is enough. Just like now. its 0:40 in my country and i have already 35 attrioton (war session - top 4 GB guilds on one map XD) and since midnight 30 memebers where fighting with me.
So 75 its easy to get. Just you have to log offten not just once.

and again. This idea is usefull only in like 5-8 guilds on server. Rest is just playing and doing weird stuff. Only top of top guilds would use it

 

[Emberguard]

Well if they are saying " i have too much attrition" they can lie

And how do you know how much attrition they can take, the amount of troops available to use, and amount of goods in inventory?

Attrition is meaningless if they're running low on resources even on low attrition. If you have the resources to 100% max out your attrition every single day and not run out of inventory, great. Not everyone is going to have that sort of inventory. You will have members that would only be able to do their max attrition every so often.

What are you going to do if a player hits a high attrition, and then the next day lowers it due to consuming too many troops / goods to push the same numbers they did the day prior?

If anything all this idea would do is make people avoid doing more attrition so they then don't get forced by their leaders to maintain a higher attrition rate when the leader goes "but yesterday you did a higher attrition number"

What about when a player ages up and finds that particular age can't reach the same amount of attrition? Are you going to be more lenient?

 

[ArklurBeta]

If anything all this idea would do is make people avoid doing more attrition so they then don't get forced by their leaders to maintain a higher attrition rate when the leader goes "but yesterday you did a higher attrition number"

If a member can't communicate this matter with the leadership then the problem is bigger than being able to see how much attrition the members have.

I can get somewhat *easily* to...~110, but if I decide to put some extra effort, and with the right circumstances, I can get higher (e.g. many sectors open, therefore I can pick the easy ones), I don't know, 125-130? Probably even to 150, but without negs...not too realistic. Now, if I do that, and leadership goes "that's your daily goal then", and won't understand that's not how it works, then leadership is simply "wrong", to say at least.

Similarly, if in 1 round I can do 10k fights, doesn't mean I can and/or want to do always, and it would be ridiculous to expect it to be some sort of "minimum" for the individual.

I get that it can be somewhat abused if rights are in the wrong hands, but it can be a very useful tool in the right hands. I think it would be rather a positive thing than a negative thing. Once I put this idea in the US thread, years ago, that idea got downvoted to hell, people complained about similar reasons. At that time, I didn't really understand why and I still don't really see the big deal of it.

What about when a player ages up and finds that particular age can't reach the same amount of attrition? Are you going to be more lenient?

Yes, it should be pretty straightforward for people in charge to make decisions based on the circumstances. Again, if someone gets punished for not being able to get to X attrition based on their previous day/round(s), then probably it's better to leave the guild because leadership is incompetent.

 

[Grzechu Junior]

What are you going to do if a player hits a high attrition, and then the next day lowers it due to consuming too many troops / goods to push the same numbers they did the day prior?

its their foult. Good can be gain from guild. Simple ask and he will have thousands of goods to negotatiate. Or guiold will build for him few lvl of alcatraz. Happens often.

What about when a player ages up and finds that particular age can't reach the same amount of attrition? Are you going to be more lenient?

For example? xD

I dont know why you assure that "atrtition minimum" is the purpose of this idea. This idea is only for this, when it is 20:00, or 23:00 and i se people with 10-20 attriotin. So what the heck theywere doing all day?
One day is ok, some party, wokr anything, but if the same exists for like 10 days in a raw - this memeber has guild in ass.

And well you get 150 attriotion in EVERY AGE - you know negotations?
and after Futer Era, you can have 75 attrition in every age. Only arctic and ocean are hard, but its 60 with fight and then negotiations.

I get that it can be somewhat abused if rights are in the wrong hands, but it can be a very useful tool in the right hands. I think it would be rather a positive thing than a negative thing. Once I put this idea in the US thread, years ago, that idea got downvoted to hell, people complained about similar reasons. At that time, I didn't really understand why, and I still don't really see the big deal out of it.

<3 same happened in polish forum.
And 100% agree, in bad hands the guild will be a terror one - but players CAN CHANGE GUILD. If the leader is stupid - just leave him. Many will follow.

Yes, it should be pretty straightforward for people in charge to make decisions based on the circumstances

exactly

 

[Emberguard]

I dont know why you assure that "atrtition minimum" is the purpose of this idea.

This idea is only for this, when it is 20:00, or 23:00 and i se people with 10-20 attriotin. So what the heck theywere doing all day?

If there’s no minimum, why would you care at 20:00 or 23:00 if they’re at 10-20 attrition?

 

[Grzechu Junior]

If there’s no minimum, why would you care at 20:00 or 23:00 if they’re at 10-20 attrition?

Becouse they have guild in ass? and it means that they were not fighting
or they were only doing free sector
and in war session, coming only once per day is a bit to low for my guild (or he comes one per day for the worst sector and have 100 attriotion, than ok)
just in war session the NUMBERS of players matter so the atrition is split.

when we have 4 TOP guild on one map. Every sector is Race, so the numbers are important.

 

[DEADP00L]

I would prefer that all individual winnings earned from fighting in GbG be put into a "common pot" and distributed at the end of GbG equally between each guild member.
This will enhance teamwork, both for those typing without camps and those taking advantage of camps.
After all it is the GUILD Battle Ground and not the SOLO Battle ground.

 

[Grzechu Junior]

I would prefer that all individual winnings earned from fighting in GbG be put into a "common pot" and distributed at the end of GbG equally between each guild member.
This will enhance teamwork, both for those typing without camps and those taking advantage of camps.
After all it is the GUILD Battle Ground and not the SOLO Battle ground.

its another problem that winning tournmanet is only for "fame" and "glory"
indeed no rewards worth fighting

 

[Pericles the Lion]

I would prefer that all individual winnings earned from fighting in GbG be put into a "common pot" and distributed at the end of GbG equally between each guild member.
This will enhance teamwork, both for those typing without camps and those taking advantage of camps.
After all it is the GUILD Battle Ground and not the SOLO Battle ground.

So, you think that dividing up the spoils "equally" will enhance teamwork? I think not. There's already been a lot of whining about equally dividing up the frags of SoH and Elephant. I can only imagine what would happen when more valuable items are involved. The existing system works just fine. Set minimums (or not), hold players accountable (or not), and rewards are earned based on individual contributions.

 

[Emberguard]

Becouse they have guild in ass? and it means that they were not fighting
or they were only doing free sector
and in war session, coming only once per day is a bit to low for my guild (or he comes one per day for the worst sector and have 100 attriotion, than ok)
just in war session the NUMBERS of players matter so the atrition is split.

when we have 4 TOP guild on one map. Every sector is Race, so the numbers are important.

If the numbers are important, and you expect them to be coming on multiple times a day, and you’re saying 10-20 is too low, then it’s a bit rich to say there’s no minimum or that the idea has nothing to do with setting a minimum. You have a minimum if you consider any amount too low, and your own reply says you’d be using the tool to monitor the numbers

 

[Grzechu Junior]

if you consider any amount too low, and your own reply says you’d be using the tool to monitor the numbers

yea but my personal minimum will depend on diffrent circumstances.
It hard to set one stable minimum for every session while disccusion attrition.
one sesion is with the biggest enemy so we would like attriotion 80
other session is light and 50 will be ok etc.

i just want to how much every person comit to guild.
number of day fight
they attrition

i will check when they were in 1,9 for exemple etc and kick them if they have guild in ass

 

[Grzechu Junior]

No more votes?

 

[planetofthehumans2]

I actually would prefer this over # battles fought, but if you didn't come at this idea as "to boot inactive members who have guild in ass" you probably would have got more votes.

 

[Grzechu Junior]

I actually would prefer this over # battles fought, but if you didn't come at this idea as "to boot inactive members who have guild in ass" you probably would have got more votes.

yea so again weak players just dont want their leader to know that they are doing nothing? xD what a wonderful world

you do nothing - wait for conseqences, nevertheless, if your leader has in ass the outcome of GB, this idea is not for them. This idea is really for 5, max 10 guild on each server. Rest is just pretending to play (and nothing wrong it in, not everyone need to be hardcore player) But those players and those guild does not need such features becasue they dont care if they win or lose

 

[Pericles the Lion]

yea so again weak players just dont want their leader to know that they are doing nothing? xD what a wonderful world

you do nothing - wait for conseqences, nevertheless, if your leader has in ass the outcome of GB, this idea is not for them. This idea is really for 5, max 10 guild on each server. Rest is just pretending to play (and nothing wrong it in, not everyone need to be hardcore player) But those players and those guild does not need such features becasue they dont care if they win or lose

You know, the thing that I can't figure out is why you feel that you need this tool. You've already said that your guild is and has been #1 on your server and that you routinely kick the lowest performer at the end of every season. This being the case there seems little need for this added "big brother" instrument. Maybe you just have your guildies send you a screenshot of their attrition every night and boot the ones that don't meet your expectations.

 

[Emberguard]

yea so again weak players just dont want their leader to know that they are doing nothing? xD what a wonderful world

The leaders already know who's doing nothing...... there's already a counter of fights per season

However, it is well known that people respond far better to enthusiasm to do a task than they do to nagging. Micro-management kills enthusiasm in good employees, no reason to think that'd be different in a game