Emberguard
Emperor
It’s not meant to be “judged” or shown, only passed along
-
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.
Discussion Guild Battlegrounds Watchtower and Siege Camp Ability Re-balance
- Thread starter Juber
- Start date
Beta King
Viceroy
That's a good idea let the move up to diamond if we win platinum be a choice(like has been suggested in this thread) and also allow the farming in platinum to continue unimpeded and we should be good
Pericles the Lion
Emperor
Yeah, you "should be good" right up to the point where your top fighters in D1K bail out to join guilds in Platinum so they can be a big fish in a smaller pond while fighting way more than the 200-250 fights per day that they will get in Diamond.
Thunderdome
Emperor
Would be funny to watch.Yeah, you "should be good" right up to the point where your top fighters in D1K bail out to join guilds in Platinum so they can be a big fish in a smaller pond while fighting way more than the 200-250 fights per day that they will get in Diamond.
mcbluefire
Baronet
Ah, I see now! Rejected ideas are what Inno works on and Forwarded are what is left in queue until all the rejected ideas are attempted. Good business plan since the voting on ideas is not a proper sample of players and thus should be treated as the inverse of the result! I'm with the team now.
(Yes, that was a facetious tone)
Kev-
Farmer
The guys that say its a bad idea and vote No are not a representative sample allegedly so the poll will not be acted on despite the clear vote against the Nerf. But equally that must mean then the same can be said for the counter so WTF are Inno playing at if they're going to ignore all viewpoints as unrepresentative regardless?
Kronan
Viceroy
@Kev- Forget the POLL. It's misleading you (and others). Talk to INNO in a post directly here in this forum; it's not a vote oriented issue. They are reading all these posts, and have gotten very good at distilling salient/cogent points on this issue.
The POLL is a distraction, they've said it directly to all of us. They could remove it with no loss of informational fidelity.
The POLL is a distraction, they've said it directly to all of us. They could remove it with no loss of informational fidelity.
jovada
Regent
Look at the first poll, juber said here he introduced the poll on demand (guess who asked for it the pro or the contra)
Last edited:
Kerstin1972
Farmer
I am against the Guild Battlegrounds Watchtower and Siege Camp Ability Re-balance. The new system keeps small family guilds being slowed down and large guilds that are strong in battle (strong in members) have an even greater advantage! I hope this new Guild Battlegrounds...Re-balance will not be introduced on the live servers!!! LG Kerstin1972
jovada
Regent
You forget it's a chance to have 66.6% if you are unlucky it could be less and if you are lucky it could be higher , but mostly of the time it's around 66%
Yekk
Regent
You are partly right. It represents only the most active players, the ones that spent real money on diamonds to build their cities, those most active in GBG. It ignores those that do not do GBG, those that do not spend real money. The poll is indicative of how live will respond.
On Inno is good at distilling points. LOL...what adjustments to the nerf have you seen? None...
Pericles the Lion
Emperor
They could very easily distill the 3,413 posts on this thread and come up with exactly nothing, of substance, that would prompt them to change course. There is very little data and precious few facts. In their place are opinions and predictions. Case on point, your first paragraph. The poll does not represent only those "most active in GBG" (you are here) and it does not "ignore" non-diamond spenders (I bought one $39.99 pack two years ago and have been F2P ever since).
Beta King
Viceroy
Yes will be announced some time next week that its coming to live servers the following GBG season! Its about time to get some real testing!
Kommodor
Merchant
how nerf is an axiom ...
make a custom building (for an event or a certain achievement) the first 20-25 battles after harvesting are free battles (and so that attempts accumulate during the off-season)
make an individual building (for an event or a certain achievement) +9% less chance to get attrition...
make an individual building (for an event or a certain achievement) +1 point to capture the sectors of your guild
and more......
make a custom building (for an event or a certain achievement) the first 20-25 battles after harvesting are free battles (and so that attempts accumulate during the off-season)
make an individual building (for an event or a certain achievement) +9% less chance to get attrition...
make an individual building (for an event or a certain achievement) +1 point to capture the sectors of your guild
and more......
blueskydwg
Steward
Sort of - I kept track of my daily attrition rate and my daily fights in seasons 1, 2, and now 4. I missed 3 because the map was moving so slowly that I had little opportunity to fight.
Most of my fights in the tracked season were in 3 SC or higher support (maybe a few 2 SC - but I didn't usually have to resort to those - and was still able to max out each day).
My attrition per cents were:
Season 1 = 57.3
Season 2 = 58.5
Season 4 partial = 57.0
Based on those results, I'd say the 66.6% is on the mark.
blueskydwg
Steward
And a quick update on todays results
74 attrition - 197 fights = 62.44%
All fights were totally supported - so a little off the expected 66.6% but certainly within the margin of error.
74 attrition - 197 fights = 62.44%
All fights were totally supported - so a little off the expected 66.6% but certainly within the margin of error.
mcbluefire
Baronet
Thank you for the data collection, @blueskydwg . Granted those results would be considered anecdotal, but I think they will apply pretty well (+/-10%) across most player's experiences. The RNG margin of error provides for results anywhere from 0%-100% attrition reduction. Sadly, however, 57-62.4% is exactly the problem with the RNG approach to obtaining attrition. If they are going to implement this awful nerf it needs to be 1 attrition for every 3 hits (with full SC support) otherwise there is no reason to build the SCs past 3 and really not that much past 2 as the attrition chance is basically the same thanks to RNG.
As it stands today (in live) 3 siege camps provides a 72% reduction and that rarely results in little attrition (1 attrition in 3 or 4 hits), typically results in attrition every other hit, and often results in attrition every hit. That's why 4 SCs+ are what players hunt for first, then hit 3 or lower. Even if the cap was put at 72% for 4 siege camps the game play will still be miserable for players who enjoyed getting very low attrition before (mostly free, with the 3 SC or lower hits required to keep sectors flipping as a smaller portion of the meal). In my guild we attempt to share at 5-15 attrition each per flip session with those able to take higher attrition eating more as needed.
I still see the largest issue being newer players with low attack boosts who will suddenly go from a guild that supported them on getting zero attrition hits most every day (100+) to finding themselves getting just over double their attrition max per day WITH FULL SC support. They will be sitting at 10-30 hits a day and find themselves stuck in the long track to get attack boost enough to hit 80 or more attrition years down the road. Thinking this through again, however, it does make it more apparent to the player attempting to get ahead quickly to focus on events getting 40K or more diamonds before each event with an attack boost reward building and ensuring they get 3 or more of those buildings. Perhaps this is the sustainability that had been somewhat reduced when players realized they could farm GbG for FP to quickly raise attack boost GBs? Maybe not as GBs only make up a small portion of attack boost for the attack focused player. They bring 250% attack (offense & defense) with all four in place at L80. Since players need 1000+ that puts the FP investment into attack boost at 25% with 75%+ coming from events/GE/Waterfall GbG map already.
Likely the excess FP earned from farming is only used to get a solid base attack boost (Attack GBs to L10) and then Arc & CF focus. Of course, that's just one playstyle out of many.
| 1 Siege Camp | 2 Siege Camps | 3 Siege Camps | 4 Siege Camps |
|---|---|---|---|
| 24% | 42% | 56% | 66.6% Cap Reached |
As it stands today (in live) 3 siege camps provides a 72% reduction and that rarely results in little attrition (1 attrition in 3 or 4 hits), typically results in attrition every other hit, and often results in attrition every hit. That's why 4 SCs+ are what players hunt for first, then hit 3 or lower. Even if the cap was put at 72% for 4 siege camps the game play will still be miserable for players who enjoyed getting very low attrition before (mostly free, with the 3 SC or lower hits required to keep sectors flipping as a smaller portion of the meal). In my guild we attempt to share at 5-15 attrition each per flip session with those able to take higher attrition eating more as needed.
I still see the largest issue being newer players with low attack boosts who will suddenly go from a guild that supported them on getting zero attrition hits most every day (100+) to finding themselves getting just over double their attrition max per day WITH FULL SC support. They will be sitting at 10-30 hits a day and find themselves stuck in the long track to get attack boost enough to hit 80 or more attrition years down the road. Thinking this through again, however, it does make it more apparent to the player attempting to get ahead quickly to focus on events getting 40K or more diamonds before each event with an attack boost reward building and ensuring they get 3 or more of those buildings. Perhaps this is the sustainability that had been somewhat reduced when players realized they could farm GbG for FP to quickly raise attack boost GBs? Maybe not as GBs only make up a small portion of attack boost for the attack focused player. They bring 250% attack (offense & defense) with all four in place at L80. Since players need 1000+ that puts the FP investment into attack boost at 25% with 75%+ coming from events/GE/Waterfall GbG map already.
Likely the excess FP earned from farming is only used to get a solid base attack boost (Attack GBs to L10) and then Arc & CF focus. Of course, that's just one playstyle out of many.
Ready Player 1
Farmer
It's amusing that some of you think there is such a thing as "live server testing". The only thing that would make inno change course once and if this is introduced on live servers would be if they noticed a decline in revenue.