Feedback Guild Battlegrounds: Optimization of the starting time

[Demeter7]

I prefer to start 8 hours after the other guilds of an equivalent level to mine, than to delay the start of a GbG to remain blocked for 11 days.

That's a good point.

The starting time might not be as important if the guilds were more evenly matched, so that there is a chance to get on the map later.
RIght now if you delay, sometimes the first guilds to start already have the mapped locked down and continue to lock every 4 hours.

 

[Kronan]

conceptually, it's the right design idea, folks (study queuing theory, and you'll know why...). Glad it has been live reported, studied and this solution is being tried. Easier to eat something in small bites, than all at once (balance a resource rush, with micro-staggered time starts that remain fair to all).

Well done and thanks, Inno.

 

[Demeter7]

No matter how hard you try - guilds that "want" to have the same conditions will never compare to guilds that work to have an advantage. a jackal can never be compared to a lion or a hare.

Some hares do not want to be lions. They just want to have fun playing with other hares.

 

[Mailia]

Maybe change the start time to evening, as long as it is changing? I know it is difficult to accommodate different time zones, but I am pretty certain the majority of those who work or go to school are not available at the current time.
And on the west coast the current starting time is 5 AM. That is kind of nuts.

8pm is GvG reset.... I'd just play 4-8 hrs later (I think that'd be 9am-1pm for you)

 

[Hiep Lin]

. Right now there is an unfair advantage to guilds who have more people available in the early morning.

I'm not sure about that.
Guilds at 1000 lp just want to fight as much as possible without worrying about the outcome because they stay at 1000 lp.
Gold and platinum guilds do not invade the map in 2 hours, those that start in the evening are not penalized.
There must be rare groups around 900 lp that will be affected, if one loses places because of the start time, the next time it will have weaker opponents and it will win. In any case these guilds go up, down, up, down, up, down, up, down, ...
The start time can only have an anecdotal effect.

 

[xivarmy]

I'm not sure about that.
Guilds at 1000 lp just want to fight as much as possible without worrying about the outcome because they stay at 1000 lp.
Gold and platinum guilds do not invade the map in 2 hours, those that start in the evening are not penalized.
There must be rare groups around 900 lp that will be affected, if one loses places because of the start time, the next time it will have weaker opponents and it will win. In any case these guilds go up, down, up, down, up, down, up, down, ...
The start time can only have an anecdotal effect.

On my older servers around 900 LP is often as dead as around 500 LP these days There might be a guild that races to take the whole map, but they usually don't have someone strong enough to swap with them and keep you locked down, so really I find the "best" time to put your energy in (if you care) is within 4 hours of reset so that you have fresh attrition to build on your first day's gains.

 

[Juber]

I have now received some answers. Some might be already clear now, as it is already in effect, but I want to share them anyways.

Will there be an indication on when the round starts exactly?

Yes. It will display a timer. Once it reaches 0, your Battleground begins.

Will the hourly point distribution and daily attrition reset also be delayed?

No, they are not affected. They will still be at the same time as always.

Will the end time also be extended by the time you had to wait?

No, it will also stay the same.

Does it affect the matchmaking in any way?

No, the matchmaking happens at the usual time, however some guilds just have to wait a bit longer to improve the overall performance.

If you have more questions, don't hesitate to ask

 

[Emberguard]

Thankyou for the clarification Juber

 

[Sibel]

I am not sure, if this is the best solution. Why not having different starting/ending times on different worlds? A starts at 8:00, B starts at 8:05, ...
No one would have to wait 10 minutes, everyone could be prepared. No one would have a tiny disadvantage of 10 min less GbG.

 

[CrashBoom]

I am not sure, if this is the best solution. Why not having different starting/ending times on different worlds? A starts at 8:00, B starts at 8:05, ...
No one would have to wait 10 minutes, everyone could be prepared. No one would have a tiny disadvantage of 10 min less GbG.

wouldn't change anything to the server performance

different worlds are on different servers

 

[The Lady Ann]

It seems that it would be more fair to match guilds who can all play at the same time. Right now there is an unfair advantage to guilds who have more people available in the early morning.

to really be successful (in a war setting not the stupid swap farming) especially in EN you need a cross mix of players from every time zone my old guild did that and we were unbeaten for 16 months till another guild realised you need a massive treasury and fighters across all the time zones

 

[LastWarrior]

Tell me some guilds on the same GbG season will not start before the better guilds?

 

[Fire Witch]

Tell me some guilds on the same GbG season will not start before the better guilds?

All guilds matched together in a season (so all guilds on the same map) start at the same time.

 

[ArklurBeta]

I am not sure, if this is the best solution. Why not having different starting/ending times on different worlds? A starts at 8:00, B starts at 8:05, ...
No one would have to wait 10 minutes, everyone could be prepared. No one would have a tiny disadvantage of 10 min less GbG.

As far as I know, each server is a...different server, so one server doesn't really affect the performance of another. The performance issue comes from within a server, on the same server, that's why Inno tries to improve performance by delaying some of the match-ups.

I'm curious what the results will be. Even though the "peak" of the rush hour will be lower, but the time frame of it will be longer. The worst performance will be better, but the performance overall, for a longer period of time will be worse compared to how it works now.
Hopefully the image above will explain what I'm talking about. The header row represents time (on purpose I don't want to name them, 1m, or 30...let's say just unit of time), the data rows represents activity...it can be "number of players playing", but in general, just representing activity, the higher the number the more stress is on the server, obviously. To simply things, I assumed guilds to be equal.

After 10 units of time, currently the "index of performance" is already down to 20, while with the new change, will be 65.
Then again, the highest peak is 120 now, but will be 110 after (with the numbers above) and also the time frame of that performance will be much shorter (currently 2 units of time, with the change 1 unit of time).

Hope it makes sense .

 

[Kommodor]

if you refused to nerf the battlegrounds - RETURN the fields as they were before!!!

 

[LastWarrior]

thx

 

[mcbluefire]

I have now received some answers. Some might be already clear now, as it is already in effect, but I want to share them anyways.

Yes. It will display a timer. Once it reaches 0, your Battleground begins.

How far in advance will this timer show? Will it be there on Monday morning after GbG shutsdown showing the next starting time exactly when it will be or is it randomly done right when GbG starts at 8am and then shows a queue timer until it actually unlocks?

The later is not conducive to folks trying to help with GbG start during a work break.

 

[mcbluefire]

As far as I know, each server is a...different server, so one server doesn't really affect the performance of another. The performance issue comes from within a server, on the same server, that's why Inno tries to improve performance by delaying some of the match-ups.

I'm curious what the results will be. Even though the "peak" of the rush hour will be lower, but the time frame of it will be longer. The worst performance will be better, but the performance overall, for a longer period of time will be worse compared to how it works now.View attachment 9296
Hopefully the image above will explain what I'm talking about. The header row represents time (on purpose I don't want to name them, 1m, or 30...let's say just unit of time), the data rows represents activity...it can be "number of players playing", but in general, just representing activity, the higher the number the more stress is on the server, obviously. To simply things, I assumed guilds to be equal.

After 10 units of time, currently the "index of performance" is already down to 20, while with the new change, will be 65.
Then again, the highest peak is 120 now, but will be 110 after (with the numbers above) and also the time frame of that performance will be much shorter (currently 2 units of time, with the change 1 unit of time).

Hope it makes sense .

Aye, but for all we know each world is possibly just another app pool on one (or a few) server(s).