CrashBoom
Legend
I doubt that forum moderators can talk to the developers
the person which has the job to pass the feedback to them is Juber
-
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
the person which has the job to pass the feedback to them is Juber
One thing that I did not understand (it is possible that my level of English is too low):
Many say they are disappointed to have invested so much in a city optimized for attack and that this update will destroy all their work.
But to do thousands of daily fights with zero attrition, you don't need to have a strong attack.
In addition, it is precisely with an attrition that can no longer be zero over thousands of fights that the attack % will become even more important.
So unless I misunderstood everything, you haven't wasted your time optimizing your cities to fight more.
Many say they are disappointed to have invested so much in a city optimized for attack and that this update will destroy all their work.
But to do thousands of daily fights with zero attrition, you don't need to have a strong attack.
In addition, it is precisely with an attrition that can no longer be zero over thousands of fights that the attack % will become even more important.
So unless I misunderstood everything, you haven't wasted your time optimizing your cities to fight more.
Beta King
Viceroy
The reason someone would take atk from 1500% to 2000% is to be faster at fighting since you can kill opponent before taking too much damage so you can do more battles faster without changing troops. With the nerf speed wont matter much since there will be a set maximum amount of fights that can be done so the difference between 1500 and 2000% is minimal maybe an extra 50 fights possibly less and that wont produce many FPs so it makes more sense to add FP event blds rather than the attack hence the goal post have been moved to hurt all the players that played the game strategically based on the mechanics provided for the last 2.5 yrs and spent their money/diamonds accordingly only for it to mean nothing. Yes some atk will be good to have obviously but those that have 2000%+ atk will end up with far less FPs at the end of the day than the average person that logs in once a day for 10 minutes and collects only FP producers that they have planted not worrying about GBG. It will turn the game int a city collection farming game and no need to worry about the fighting aspect. 10 minutes per day and a good global 1.9+ thread to win, you wont even need a guild at that point.
Beta King
Viceroy
I think it would be nice if someone that has good atk in beta to provide the daily FPs they are bringing in each day and also provide the amount of tiles in their city they are using to boost atk and we might be able to math out if it is even worth doing GBG after nerf or better to scrap all atk/def buildings and put down only FP producers and keep the ones that do both obviously. This change might be a complete paradigm shift that make GBG lose viability.
Mathematically, doing 50 more fights out of a total of 200 dailies is huge! This represents a 25% increase.
It is certain that it is much less what you are accustomed to, but you have to know how to adapt in any strategy game.
Beta King
Viceroy
50 is certainly just a guess as i haven't tested these numbers with the proposed SC change and don't have a viable city in beta to try but someone with the amount of atk could disconnect a portion of their atk capabilities from a road and fight to max then reattach and fight some more and provided actual data. If this hits live there will be many players doing these studies.
Amdira
Baronet
Pirate's Hideout gives you a 40% chance for 40 FPs - thus with a BG, which brings profit to other buildings, too - just look out for a second or 3r hideout
Donna a Macskabolond
Merchant
The biggest misunderstanding probably here the number of 0 attrition fights. Most of the guilds don't build more than 4 SC for a sector (at least on my live server and especially in my guild) because every guild try to optimize the fight/guild goods cost rate. We are a 45 ppl guild, usually we have 80-100k fights all together in a very good season, but probably not more than 10% is a true 0 attrition fights. About half the sectors or more less than 4 SC.
The top fighters do about 5-8000 fights in a season and about 25% of the guild do less than 500. And not because there is nothing to fight for but because the GBG isn't obligatory for every guildmates and some of them not really interested in fighting.
When we had guildmates who just waited for the 0 attrition fights we adviced an other guild for them.
This is strictly the guilds own business how to handle this type of players, no need to "help" the guilds solve this situation
With max 200 fights/day most of these players won't even open the GBG map because for a medium sized guild it will be a total waste of time. The cities will be rebuilt - there will be more fp producing building and less att/def. 200 fights means about 300 fp/day which can be achived easily if we change the city structure. This is why the last 2.5 years citybuilding efforts is wasted.
jovada
Regent
The difference is i reach around 130% attrition doiing the last fights manuel and beta around an 100% attrition you have also to have luck what army comes first at the end , you can be stuck at 125 and some other times with easier opponent reach 135
the diff is 30 fights if you play with full attrition , so playing with 2 or 3 camps gives you easyly a surplus of 50 fights
the diff is 30 fights if you play with full attrition , so playing with 2 or 3 camps gives you easyly a surplus of 50 fights
Attachments
Last edited:
Owl II
Emperor
You can conduct this experiment easily in the living world. Once we studied this issue. We came to the conclusion that the higher the attack, the greater the step to reach the next level. Example: you hit with an attack of +500% to attrition 60. Then you need 800% to reach 70. 1500% - to reach 80. 2300% to reach 90 and so on. The numbers are conditional. And of course we are not talking about the limit of possibilities (what the Ninjalin did).
Regarding FP: who like to grow FP in their garden are doing it now, did it before GBG and will do it regardless of any changes. Those who mine FP professionally are more likely to switch to investing in GB in all available threads, sniping and so on. Because Arc is the best garden for the FP. But the point of GBG is not in the extraction of FP nevertheless. The point is a team game. You can't grow it in the garden
On my direct world, I only have 1188/855 in attack and I reach 100 daily attrition in auto combat, 120 in manual.
Perhaps you do not take into account the compositions to be used or just the orangery.
How many I see not knowing how to harvest their kraken at the right time.
Harvesting everything in a rush without thinking is not strategic as you would like to think.
ArklurBeta
Baronet
I assume you are using higher ages units, e.g. in PE using OF units, otherwise, with that stat, I highly doubt you can get to 100 attrition using auto battles, and even get to 120 with manuals (although, with manual battles, if you a very selective, looking for those easy fights...it's possible to push your attrition relatively high, though never understood the point doing so).
Pericles the Lion
Emperor
Sorry, this doesn't seem to make sense. Your guild has 45 members and averages 80-100k fights per season. That's 2000 fights per member per season or 200 fights per day. Using your numbers, the top players average 500-800 per day, the low players fewer than 50 per day. But, the majority of your guildmates are averaging a number much closer to the 200 max that you refer to. I'm not seeing how the SC/WT is going to affect them to the point where they will begin rebuilding cities. It certainly won't affect the lower participants. Of course, the top hitters will bear the brunt of the changes but I think INNO is well aware of this.The biggest misunderstanding probably here the number of 0 attrition fights. Most of the guilds don't build more than 4 SC for a sector (at least on my live server and especially in my guild) because every guild try to optimize the fight/guild goods cost rate. We are a 45 ppl guild, usually we have 80-100k fights all together in a very good season, but probably not more than 10% is a true 0 attrition fights. About half the sectors or more less than 4 SC.
The top fighters do about 5-8000 fights in a season and about 25% of the guild do less than 500. And not because there is nothing to fight for but because the GBG isn't obligatory for every guildmates and some of them not really interested in fighting.
When we had guildmates who just waited for the 0 attrition fights we adviced an other guild for them.
This is strictly the guilds own business how to handle this type of players, no need to "help" the guilds solve this situation
With max 200 fights/day most of these players won't even open the GBG map because for a medium sized guild it will be a total waste of time. The cities will be rebuilt - there will be more fp producing building and less att/def. 200 fights means about 300 fp/day which can be achived easily if we change the city structure. This is why the last 2.5 years citybuilding efforts is wasted.
No !
Pericles the Lion
Emperor
I'm not doubting, just curious. What era are you in? I'm in SAM with 1751/1115 and can auto to 75-80 but that's it.
That is indeed an argument I've had with "pure attack" builders a few times before - that at some point trying to hit higher and higher attrition via boost was simply "not worth it" - that it wasn't really increasing their abilities in a significant way compared to what they were doing anyways. This is especially true when much of your fights come from attrition-free fights.
It doesn't even take much experimentation - you can just grab the defense values at various attritions off the wiki and plot them. Depending on your era situation and how you want to the win the battle (full auto 1 army/full auto custom army/semi auto/manual), you roughly will need a percentage of the defense value as your attack and/or defense value to get the same result at a higher attrition - there's a small deviation from this where if the "bonus attack" was a significant component (for/against) at lower attrition, it's less significant at higher attrition and you may need a slightly lower/higher % of the defending boost penalty the higher you want to go to - and you should add 100% to the boost value (yours and theirs) for the proper comparison. And since the defense values accelerate (0 attrition = 0 boost, 50 attrition = 527%, 100 attrition = 2221%, 150 attrition = 12000%), so will your boost need to to go up another 10 attrition.
Last edited:
I'm in FUTUR !
So you're probably cherrypicking a little to get to that 100 by auto (avoiding armies with too many defending hover tanks). I've personally never been a huge fan of FE because of that necessity