• 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 Championship Update

Its a farcry from the heyday inno once had a few years ago. There were enough active people on the server where a few totally full guilds were competitive with each other in gbg. Not the case anymore, you may have 100 "good" players, most of them on the top guild and the remaining 20 dispersed on other guilds trying to fight for their lives with the remaining less active players who can't be glued to a computer 24/7.

A lot of people straight up left the game after GVG was taken down. A lot of people slowly left over time from all the changes inno's been making to the game. I've heard if they go through with these QI changes that a few people from my guild will leave the game for good.

Cutting the amount of people that can be in a guild only puts a bandaid over a fatal wound.

They really should look into stricter botting protocol.

One of my guildmates on live suggests that the gbg sessions actually be shorter because the 24/7 fighting/proctoring/ext is very stressful for guild leadership. Maybe that would help with the guild placements as the turnover would be faster?
 

Olddude

Merchant
This round of the Battle Ground was won by a guild that had never won it before.

Only 2 guild went undefeated. One guild won 5 Rounds.

Seven guilds went 3 and 3 so it seem that things are evening out.

I feel a little sorry for Dragonstar who got matched 3 times against the eventual winner and lost all three times. Each of these round were very competitive with the VPs being low for both guilds.

27 guilds won at least one round of the battle ground. On average a guild has a less than 50% chance to win a round.

The average number of winning round was 2.3 rounds on this battle ground hardy a domination by a few guilds

I really do not know what you can do with close to 100 guilds in Diamond league there will be inequities. Considering the results I think this round was actually quite good.

You could create an elite league but I just do not think that would be fair...Perhaps the final round of each championship could be matched down the rankings 1-8 9-16 17-24 all the way down. I hope to see some creative solutions.
 
Last edited:

Deleted User - 279081

Guest
insult noted... my US 22 guild is a friends and family guild having no real chance of placing first. Unlike your main we do not bot
If you feel insulted by what I said then that's on you. I guess that my comment hit the mark.
 

Yekk

Regent
Its a farcry from the heyday inno once had a few years ago. There were enough active people on the server where a few totally full guilds were competitive with each other in gbg. Not the case anymore, you may have 100 "good" players, most of them on the top guild and the remaining 20 dispersed on other guilds trying to fight for their lives with the remaining less active players who can't be glued to a computer 24/7.

A lot of people straight up left the game after GVG was taken down. A lot of people slowly left over time from all the changes inno's been making to the game. I've heard if they go through with these QI changes that a few people from my guild will leave the game for good.

Cutting the amount of people that can be in a guild only puts a bandaid over a fatal wound.

They really should look into stricter botting protocol.

One of my guildmates on live suggests that the gbg sessions actually be shorter because the 24/7 fighting/proctoring/ext is very stressful for guild leadership. Maybe that would help with the guild placements as the turnover would be faster?
Exactly, yours is one way but lets say the maps are reduced in size by 2/3's and the numbers of players allowed per team taken to 25+ -. That triples the number of teams. From there use the system Football/soccer uses. Take Germany which has many divisions, 13, ranging from rank amateur to champion quality.

The best teams always float to the top. Guilds each new league could move players up or down with 3-4 teams per guild max. It is a simple system. Winners still win but see a much more competitive league at the top "premier" league. Much less of the one top guild letting weaker guilds have a farm tile just to see fights.

Smaller guilds could be given the option of 3 levels of play. A premier level, a friends and family level, or a hobby level. Rewards just as in football given by the level your team plays at.
 

Deleted User - 279081

Guest
Exactly, yours is one way but lets say the maps are reduced in size by 2/3's and the numbers of players allowed per team taken to 25+ -. That triples the number of teams. From there use the system Football/soccer uses. Take Germany which has many divisions, 13, ranging from rank amateur to champion quality.

The best teams always float to the top. Guilds each new league could move players up or down with 3-4 teams per guild max. It is a simple system. Winners still win but see a much more competitive league at the top "premier" league. Much less of the one top guild letting weaker guilds have a farm tile just to see fights.

Smaller guilds could be given the option of 3 levels of play. A premier level, a friends and family level, or a hobby level. Rewards just as in football given by the level your team plays at.
Let me see if I understand. Each guild divides their members into 3 "teams". Basically a "varsity team", a "JV team", and a "prep team". These three teams compete against the Varsity/JV/Prep teams of other guilds. Correct?

If so, how will this suggestion accomplish anything? It is quite possible that the Prep team on most top guilds will be stronger than the Varsity teams on many second tier guilds. The perceived problem with matchmaking will just get pushed down to the "team level" instead of being at the guild level.
 

Olddude

Merchant
Lets say that the maximum number of players in a guild is reduced to 40 players for the sake of ease. We would not put the top 40 players in one guild and the bottom 40 players in another. We would put every even number player in one guild and every odd numbered player in another and now we have two top guilds...
 
Last edited:

Yekk

Regent
Let me see if I understand. Each guild divides their members into 3 "teams". Basically a "varsity team", a "JV team", and a "prep team". These three teams compete against the Varsity/JV/Prep teams of other guilds. Correct?

If so, how will this suggestion accomplish anything? It is quite possible that the Prep team on most top guilds will be stronger than the Varsity teams on many second tier guilds. The perceived problem with matchmaking will just get pushed down to the "team level" instead of being at the guild level.
All three could be in the premier league with the best rewards but would not stay there unless they stayed competitive. Smart guilds would aim for the best rewards they actually could qualify for and that help their guild best. The upside is the best guilds see better leagues and weaker guilds do not get stuffed. Inno sees the problem, read their post. I just put up a suggestion. What is yours?

"Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people." E Roosevelt
 

Yekk

Regent
Lets say that the maximum number of players in a guild is reduced to 40 players for the sake of ease. We would not put the top 40 players in one guild and the bottom 40 players in another. We would put every even number player in one guild and every odd numbered player in another and now we have two top guilds...
Why reduce the guild size? London has 17 pro level football teams. Manchester 9. Ranging from premier to their regional teams. Adjust rewards enough to keep the best wanting to play in the highest level. The best players will want to be on "teams" that play premier, league one or 2
 

Deleted User - 279081

Guest
All three could be in the premier league with the best rewards but would not stay there unless they stayed competitive. Smart guilds would aim for the best rewards they actually could qualify for and that help their guild best. The upside is the best guilds see better leagues and weaker guilds do not get stuffed. Inno sees the problem, read their post. I just put up a suggestion. What is yours?

"Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people." E Roosevelt
Your suggestion is like a cake that's half baked. If "all three could be in the premier league" then the reverse is also true (i.e. none have to be). This being the case, the second tier guilds decide to have three "prep teams", some of which beat up on the other prep teams. This solves nothing.

My suggestion is the same as it has always been. Get stronger, either by better coaching or better recruiting, and don't expect INNO to lower the bar so that your guild can compete better.
 

Yekk

Regent
Your suggestion is like a cake that's half baked. If "all three could be in the premier league" then the reverse is also true (i.e. none have to be). This being the case, the second tier guilds decide to have three "prep teams", some of which beat up on the other prep teams. This solves nothing.

My suggestion is the same as it has always been. Get stronger, either by better coaching or better recruiting, and don't expect INNO to lower the bar so that your guild can compete better.
My suggestion mirrors real life solutions, yes all three could be lower/entry but that works for leveling guilds and the rewards could aim to that.
Inno again sees the problem, your guilds from strongest to weakest do too. Again this is not aimed to get my live guild a better chance at first. It does not want that. Inno gets little to no real money from unhappy players, from unequal leagues. Players will not pay to be unhappy.

"Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people." E Roosevelt
 

Deleted User - 279081

Guest
My suggestion mirrors real life solutions, yes all three could be lower/entry but that works for leveling guilds and the rewards could aim to that.
Inno again sees the problem, your guilds from strongest to weakest do too. Again this is not aimed to get my live guild a better chance at first. It does not want that. Inno gets little to no real money from unhappy players, from unequal leagues. Players will not pay to be unhappy.

"Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people." E Roosevelt
I'm discussing your idea. It would appear that you are taking my observations personally. That's on you.
 
Exactly, yours is one way but lets say the maps are reduced in size by 2/3's and the numbers of players allowed per team taken to 25+ -. That triples the number of teams. From there use the system Football/soccer uses. Take Germany which has many divisions, 13, ranging from rank amateur to champion quality.

The best teams always float to the top. Guilds each new league could move players up or down with 3-4 teams per guild max. It is a simple system. Winners still win but see a much more competitive league at the top "premier" league. Much less of the one top guild letting weaker guilds have a farm tile just to see fights.

Smaller guilds could be given the option of 3 levels of play. A premier level, a friends and family level, or a hobby level. Rewards just as in football given by the level your team plays at.
The amount of work this would take, you're pretty much designing a whole new system.

Although I have suggested in the past to place the top few guilds in their own "championship" round by themselves. Doesn't make sense to have 8 guilds at the top altogether simply because there are not 8 guilds who are able to compete with each other. Or a tournament style where each guild that loses gets kicked out of the championship round and back down to diamond - forcing the top 2 to battle it out for the title by the end. I think a lot of people in the top guilds would like this option, the prestige!

I've also suggested before not to force guilds to move up just because they won copper/silver/ext rounds. Allow them to choose to stay in plat league, the cons of staying is not as good of prices but it'd be better than getting beached all season in diamond? Then we can truly have people who want to be in diamond leauge. There's probably too many levels as you say, although I still might add one more perhaps the "championship" leauge on top of the choices you gave just because the jump from friends/family to premier might not be enough for guilds who can participate but just not compete with the top guild. Or maybe it'd make sense, who knows.
 
insult noted... my US 22 guild is a friends and family guild having no real chance of placing first. Unlike your main we do not bot
A friendly guild has no chance to compete agains a highly competitive guild on the same map.
GbG seems to be a competitive feature by design.

Every guild can compete if they are willing to be compatitive and cull less competitive players. The attagement of the leader is fundamental.
Introducing a 100-200 battle minimum is not enough. I am in a guild that did just that and I was willing to go with it even if I hate the GbG feature of the game. But it was not enough for the competitive members, since it wasn't enough to win (victory must be use effectively and doing just the minimum is not usually enough to win the map).
End result: the more competitive players left and moved to more competitive guild(s).

If you prefer a more frendly guild, like me, you need to realize that you have no chance to get the championship prize. You might get some fragment but not enough in one championship (probably useless fragment). You can still get personal prizes by fighting unlocked provinces.

Suggestion: one single guild CANNOT lock you out, but two working togheter can. If you are fighting the second, save your guild goods, and build only the best building on your base province only.

----------------------------

Reducing the guild sizes resolve nothing.
Splitting best fighter in 2 forced smaller guild solve nothing. Because player can move to the "stronger" guild.

There are many way to create good grouping out in other cometition. Inno just need to do their research, paying attention to pick a solution that apply a corresponding situation (GbG allow intentionally dropping down to avoid strong guild and still get the full prize when winning).

If Inno wanted to avoid guild from dropping out of Diamond league to get the fragment by winning a lower league (or a new guild fighting to get to diamond league), Inno chould give only a fraction of the fragment for winning a lower league (example: 100% of the value in Diamond and only 60% on Platinum, and the following league 40%, 20%, 10%, 0%).
Fixing the guild matches is still a must: for both servers with a lot of active guilds and for servers without.
 

Yekk

Regent
A friendly guild has no chance to compete agains a highly competitive guild on the same map.
GbG seems to be a competitive feature by design.

Every guild can compete if they are willing to be compatitive and cull less competitive players. The attagement of the leader is fundamental.
Introducing a 100-200 battle minimum is not enough. I am in a guild that did just that and I was willing to go with it even if I hate the GbG feature of the game. But it was not enough for the competitive members, since it wasn't enough to win (victory must be use effectively and doing just the minimum is not usually enough to win the map).
End result: the more competitive players left and moved to more competitive guild(s).

If you prefer a more frendly guild, like me, you need to realize that you have no chance to get the championship prize. You might get some fragment but not enough in one championship (probably useless fragment). You can still get personal prizes by fighting unlocked provinces.

Suggestion: one single guild CANNOT lock you out, but two working togheter can. If you are fighting the second, save your guild goods, and build only the best building on your base province only.

----------------------------

Reducing the guild sizes resolve nothing.
Splitting best fighter in 2 forced smaller guild solve nothing. Because player can move to the "stronger" guild.

There are many way to create good grouping out in other cometition. Inno just need to do their research, paying attention to pick a solution that apply a corresponding situation (GbG allow intentionally dropping down to avoid strong guild and still get the full prize when winning).

If Inno wanted to avoid guild from dropping out of Diamond league to get the fragment by winning a lower league (or a new guild fighting to get to diamond league), Inno chould give only a fraction of the fragment for winning a lower league (example: 100% of the value in Diamond and only 60% on Platinum, and the following league 40%, 20%, 10%, 0%).
Fixing the guild matches is still a must: for both servers with a lot of active guilds and for servers without.
On live we, my guild, have the level one building for almost every season and hopefully next league we get this one. On beta my guild has almost all level 2 GBG buildings. I understand how to play, how to get players to play. Friends and family does not mean weaklings. We also are to strong to place fifth allowing a move down. The buildings are earned. As I told the guy from US19 this is not about my guild but all the others forced to play in a division they will be stuffed in. My idea reduces that reality. I am completely against reducing guild size. Treasuries and threads matter.
 

Thunderdome

Emperor
The way I see of matching is in racing.

You have the Formula 1 Racing. You have the Stock Car (NASCAR) Racing. You have the Rally Car Racing.

You're placed into one of those circuits dependent on the type of car you have. You can't bring a rally car to a formula 1 or NASCAR race unless you sabotage the other cars so yours will win.

That's what Inno is doing with this match up. They put in an F1 in with the NASCAR drivers. That F1 will lap 3 times before those cars can complete a lap. In short, the top guild will clean house in taking in all the tiles to secure the most VPs. When other guilds start taking some of those tiles back, they are able to until that top guild takes them all again. Why? That top guild always has the highest attrition value while the other guilds might just start to see those values.

So why didn't Inno put all the top guilds together and let them duke it out? I've seen this in many games of the past where matching is always that big dog versus a puppy only because the big dog cries when they get their rear end handed to them by another big dog. Else, we would see each championship, the top guilds matched with each other while the other guilds were matched on how they are placed in rankings. And this will go on until someone drops down and a new guild goes in their place.
 

Yekk

Regent
The way I see of matching is in racing.

You have the Formula 1 Racing. You have the Stock Car (NASCAR) Racing. You have the Rally Car Racing.

You're placed into one of those circuits dependent on the type of car you have. You can't bring a rally car to a formula 1 or NASCAR race unless you sabotage the other cars so yours will win.

That's what Inno is doing with this match up. They put in an F1 in with the NASCAR drivers. That F1 will lap 3 times before those cars can complete a lap. In short, the top guild will clean house in taking in all the tiles to secure the most VPs. When other guilds start taking some of those tiles back, they are able to until that top guild takes them all again. Why? That top guild always has the highest attrition value while the other guilds might just start to see those values.

So why didn't Inno put all the top guilds together and let them duke it out? I've seen this in many games of the past where matching is always that big dog versus a puppy only because the big dog cries when they get their rear end handed to them by another big dog. Else, we would see each championship, the top guilds matched with each other while the other guilds were matched on how they are placed in rankings. And this will go on until someone drops down and a new guild goes in their place.
If the same 8 guilds fought each league the placing would not change first place would go to one guild and 6th, 7th, and 8th would always end in that placing. Those last guilds would flounder and first to third would pick up their strongest remnants. Something we have all already seen. Random draws helped a bit as the better 6th, 7th, and 8 can get weaker opponents and actually win enough frags to get the season building is some seasons.
 

AGranolaBar

Marquis
I feel the same as most comments. Again an offering for top 100 players and nothing to entice for the rest. How enjoyable will the game be when the smaller guilds die off one by one and the top players are left here alone? Just food for thought
 

Deleted User - 279081

Guest
What's the use of yet another Championship? You are catering to just a few. Most players will never win any of these supposed to be great rewards.
Because any player that has enough determination can be one of the few that are on a Championship team.
 
Top