Discussion Guild Battlegrounds Watchtower and Siege Camp Ability Re-balance

[Zuckerberg the Horrid]

I think thats an interessting point. So you mean, If there are 2 traps -90% on 1 Sector, surrounded by 7SC. 168% (66.6 cap)
It should result in 168% minus 90% from traps=78% decreased to cap 66.6?
Resulting in attacking with 66 cap instead of - 23%.

yes, that will cause the changes to not favor traps so greatly and resolve pretty much all my concerns...plus how often do you get 7SC next to a sector? not very...
but as is, with the camps reduction applying before the traps are checked, many of the competitive matches will be ugly. Nobody enjoys eating traps no mater how much they try to put up a front to the enemy to make it seem like they're just wasting their goods, it's demotivating. I've been in many seasons even with the current rules where two guilds swap the sector in front of our HQ with double traps on it (and I'm in one of the strongest guilds on my server, so I'm not complaining, they do that to keep us at bay and try to demote us - competitive reasons, not farming reasons) but I really don't like that this is tilted even more in favor of traps.
In competitive seasons that don't involve traps I still think this will be a disaster because attrition management is already so important, keeping people who're able to fight races up until the last hour before reset before they burn on the outside, I don't think any guild will last, it'll result in a lot more negotiating by people who don't enjoy negotiating just to make sure everything that unlocks gets taken even when they can't fight it, by the guilds who want to be super try-hards to get 1st. I guess they're the ones that should win but it makes negotiating vs fighting no longer a choice, or something you do lightly on non-free sectors to extend how long you can fight.

 

[Zuckerberg the Horrid]

This is the current map of beta diamond 975 (all guilds have 975, 1 has 982 and 1 has 1000)

This shows that 5 guilds are currently playing and the 2 others take 1 or 2 sectors.
In the past seasons even in this group 1 or 2 guilds controlled everything. (and of course if we could do the same we did)
So at first look this is an improvement to let participate more guilds.

Of course if you mesure activity only by 2 guilds locking everything and leaving sectors at 159/160 only to exploit this will appear as a mockery to you.

And maybe this map is only a coïncidence , but that is only a thing that the future will show us, but anyway i don't see how this will kill smaller players except if there only purpose to play the game is also exploiting.

to me your map looks like you have nobody on it that cares about winning, and so the change has encouraged more farming

 

[Owl II]

With this change - my expectation is that most of the large guild whales will actually hit a max attrition for the first time.
They will capture the full map early on day one like before, but then they will be done. So after 4 hours we small guilds will be able to make advances that we wouldn't have before.

I gave the calculations somewhere above. 28 provinces of 1-2-3 line is 160X28X3 = 13860 fights per day maximum. If you divide these fights by 80 (amount of players in the guild), it will be about 170 fights per participant. But the actual data is never equal to the calculated ones. More often it will be 160X14X5 = 11200 fights for guild per day. This will mean the same 170 fights per day for our guild of 65 players. We'll manage, I think. But if not, we have the opportunity to expand. I promise you won't be able to claim any part of these fights. Unless you become dominant But you will not dominate. The girl wrote ere above they had cases when they won races and broke into the center with high attrition. And they took away the available provinces. Now this will not happen. If an active, disciplined little guild can organize a breakthrough, then it still won't go any further. They will be killed and thrown back. The end of the story. Because you can do 100-200 fights at high attrition with the support of 4 camps. But you can't do that by getting an extra attrition point every 3 fights

 

[Owl II]

That is, this nerf is not enough to take strong guilds out of the game. You will need a lower cap. But it's enough to kill organized, disciplined, but small guilds. They won't want to play like vegetables. And they won't be able to play. like tops

 

[Donna a Macskabolond]

My idea for a better (and not too difficult) matchmaking system:

Actual problems:
- too much guilds in the top league
- active fighter guilds are matched with slow, sleepy, less active guilds
- nothing to fight for (this isn't the matchmaking system's problem, but I find worth mentioning it)

How to identify active, fighter guilds?
- have more strong players than the average
- have the necessary treasury for building
- higher overall activity
- number of players

These attributes will result in a higher average advance number/player than most guilds. If the guilds have problems any of the above 3 points it will result lower average advance/player. One more thing has impact on the advances what a guild can do in a season - the other guilds in the group. If not one of them bothers to take any sector than the guild can't have as much advances as it capable of.

So my suggestion to sort the guilds for matchmaking based on the advances/player of the previous season. Lets see how this should work out for two 1000LP groups:

Guild	Headcount	Advances in season	Average advances
Pink	74	155000	2094
Purple	55	125000	2272
Blue	35	42000	1200
Orange	12	2500	208
Light blue	66	4800	72
Yellow	27	31000	1148
Green	6	580	96
Red	41	15000	365

The bigger guilds has more potential fighting capacities, so this number should be multiplied with a number depends on the number of players.
The average guild size lets say is around 40 players, so the multiplier should be:

Number of players​	Multiplier​
70-80​	2​
50-70​	1,5​
30-50​	1​
10-30​	0,9​
1-10​	0,8​

It is necessary to push the active, higher headcount guilds above than the active medium or small size guilds. Of course, if we have numbers probably the multiplier needs some adjustment. So if we go back to the original example the modified advances will be:

Guild (Headcount)	Average advances	Modified advances
Pink (74)	2094	4188
Purple (55)	2272	3408
Blue (35)	1200	1200
Orange (12)	208	188
Light blue (66)	72	108
Yellow (27)	1148	1033
Green( (6)	96	77
Red (41)	365	365

Based on this calculation in the next season the guilds will be matched similar guilds in activity, strength and treasury, so it will result a fairer matchmaking. If seems necessary one more multiplier can be added based on the final placement in the group ( 3-4 should 1, above than this higher, 5-8 lower multiplier should be used) or the multiplier can be different in different leagues. I'm not sure if it is necessary, some experiment is needed

About the leage system:
- either @Juber suggestion for the soft cap and progressive leage point can be used ( higher league provides less and less LP for winning) or a new league system can be used - for example a dynamic one what Inno uses at event leagues.
- higher league means less guilds in a group (top league has 4 guilds in a group, lower leagues have 5,6,7,8) same as in @Juber suggestion
- a new league should be added for the top (crystal), same personal rewards as in diamond but a fix amount of prestige point should be added as rewards. For example: 1. place +2000 pp, 2. place 0 pp, 3. place -500 pp, 4. place -1500 pp. It will give a reason for the guilds to fight.
- HQ has 2 building slot where you can add fix SC, but price is high, about 50000 goods. Reason: this can't be lost, the price is paid once per season, make good use of it
- shorten the seasons. More rest time prevents burn outs and increases the activity during seasons. I think 6 days long season with 8 days rest make sense.

Thats it, more or less. A better matchmaking will give a chance for guilds to fight for similar guilds and will increase the satisfaction with GBG and activity in game. And no need to cap the siege camps

 

[DEADP00L]

How about the bigger platinum guilds that have 20 players that are newer to the game? How are those treasuries?

Here's the treasury in the early ages of my little 18-member guild that spends 1 in 2 GbGs as a spectator:

And for context, in the last 40 GbGs, we've been in the diamond league 37 times.

 

[Owl II]

- nothing to fight for (this isn't the matchmaking system's problem, but I find worth mentioning it)

This is the key problem of this whole construction. Guilds have nothing to fight for. This is where the "treatment" should start, in my opinion.

How to identify active, fighter guilds?
- have more strong players than the average
- have the necessary treasury for building
- higher overall activity
- number of players

Add here the presence of discipline, the use of schedules, a clear hierarchy: leader, officers, ordinary fighters. You won't be able to define all this as a parameter for matchmaking, but guilds with a big number of players, with a full treasury without clear leadership cannot compete with guilds who have all these things

uild	Headcount	Advances in season	Average advances
Pink	74	155000	2094
Purple	55	125000	2272
Blue	35	42000	1200
Orange	12	2500	208
Light blue	66	4800	72
Yellow	27	31000	1148
Green	6	580	96
Red	41	15000	365

Just the opposite: The reds are the strongest. You can see this in groups with LP below 1000. And then descending counterclockwise.

I put a like for an excellent (maybe not 100% unerring) analysis and an attempt to make a constructive suggestion.

 

[Donna a Macskabolond]

Add here the presence of discipline, the use of schedules, a clear hierarchy: leader, officers, ordinary fighters. You won't be able to define all this as a parameter for matchmaking, but guilds with a big number of players, with a full treasury without clear leadership cannot compete with guilds who have all these things

Yes, this is true, but the average advances include this attribute also. Without a good and effective leadership high number of advances quite impossible.

Just the opposite: The reds are the strongest. You can see this in groups with LP below 1000. And then descending counterclockwise.

This is just an example, with the actual matchmaking anything can happen.

I don't say this method is perfect, probably some adjustment would be necessary. If I had much more data I would be able to determine the best system for matchmaking ) adjust the different multiplier even add/remove some).

 

[jovada]

to me your map looks like you have nobody on it that cares about winning, and so the change has encouraged more farming

That is really contradictory and only because you want to be negative.

How can it encourage more farming when the attrition is restricted.
Are you saying more guilds having sectors on the map is only inspired by farming?

And before when a map was controlled by 2 guilds was there any who really cared about winning or only swapping with each other for farming.

 

[-Alin-]

Spoiler: Results

Restults from 30 june till today 10 july, 3259 fights.

I can survive with this, but I will have to stick to 270-300 fights/day and lower attrition everyday, I lost more units currently than I produced to achieve 120 attrition on weaker days and 149 in that "top" day ...

 

[Publius Cornelius Scipio]

I think there is a simple solution to reorder this caos - return to the previous system, but give the guilds the possibility to make a choice where to play. Now this is automatic and generates the problemes.
A guild can feel very good in Platinum, but not in Diamond, so let it play there. When the guild will be strong enough, it can always pass in Diamond.
This way you can obntain the balance, that all are talking about and will cost almost nothing to INNO.
This is a simple solution, that will make all happy. And will eliminate the envy

 

[HunZ95]

I think there is a simple solution to reorder this caos - return to the previous system, but give the guilds the possibility to make a choice where to play. Now this is automatic and generates the problemes.
A guild can feel very good in Platinum, but not in Diamond, so let it play there. When the guild will be strong enough, it can always pass in Diamond.
This way you can obntain the balance, that all are talking about and will cost almost nothing to INNO.
This is a simple solution, that will make all happy. And will eliminate the envy

But many players who support the change also regret the personal rewards of active players, so their problem is still not solved, and therefore the complaints continue.

 

[Publius Cornelius Scipio]

But many players who support the change also regret the personal rewards of active players, so their problem is still not solved, and therefore the complaints continue.Why

Why? If they play in a League, where they can make many fights and take much more rewards as now, where is the probleme?
If you are 50kg and without preparation, but you want to beat Anthony Joshua, is that possible an normal?
Everyone must fight where he can have good results. It`s simple. The wick guilds are wick also during this season. They don`t take much, but because the strong guilds also don`t take much does not make this change successeful.

 

[HunZ95]

Why? If they play in a League, where they can make many fights and take much more rewards as now, where is the probleme?
If you are 50kg and without preparation, but you want to beat Anthony Joshua, is that possible an normal?
Everyone must fight where he can have good results. It`s simple. The wick guilds are wick also during this season. They don`t take much, but because the strong guilds also don`t take much does not make this change successeful.

If you read back the comments, their primary problem is not that someone can't fight, but that some player fight a lot.
Even if you give them a chance, if they simply don't play, the reward doesn't come automatically, but the expectation is that those who play a lot don't get more either, because they think that's what balance means.

 

[jovada]

They don`t take much, but because the strong guilds also don`t take much does not make this change successeful.

It seems to me that in fact it is successfull if more guilds can be on the map with the change,

I think there is a simple solution to reorder this caos - return to the previous system, but give the guilds the possibility to make a choice where to play. Now this is automatic and generates the problemes.
A guild can feel very good in Platinum, but not in Diamond, so let it play there. When the guild will be strong enough, it can always pass in Diamond.
This way you can obntain the balance, that all are talking about and will cost almost nothing to INNO.
This is a simple solution, that will make all happy. And will eliminate the envy

That really is a simple solution and absurd to. There are real solutions for matchmaking you now.

Let guilds make a choice where they want to play hahaha, suddenly a lot of them will choose platinum you say , platinum will be ruled by the semi-strong guilds then , those who can't follow will choose to go to gold and then the very weak onces to copper?
Simple solution and will eliminate all the envy hahaha, perhaps giving 10 fp and 25 diamonds in every division then.

This really is no matchmaking.

 

[jovada]

If you read back the comments, their primary problem is not that someone can't fight, but that some player fight a lot.
Even if you give them a chance, if they simply don't play, the reward doesn't come automatically, but the expectation is that those who play a lot don't get more either, because they think that's what balance means.

What a wrong statement again.

You build up att/def you can afford more attrition and do more fights getting more rewards then the player that does'nt build up or only care to do a couple of fights, that is normal and only just.

but the expectation is that those who play a lot don't get more either, because they think that's what balance means.

No that is not the expectation at all, you spend time and do more fights you have more rewards, but not getting more rewards only by exploiting the 0 attrition.

 

[Yekk]

Here's the treasury in the early ages of my little 18-member guild that spends 1 in 2 GbGs as a spectator:
View attachment 8178
And for context, in the last 40 GbGs, we've been in the diamond league 37 times.

Then the match making system Donna a Macskabolond put up should really interest you. Quite the improvement on what was offered up in Juber's thread. I am guessing most of the 1K leagues were where you sat the season.

 

[HunZ95]

What a wrong statement again.

You build up att/def you can afford more attrition and do more fights getting more rewards then the player that does'nt build up or only care to do a couple of fights, that is normal and only just.

but the expectation is that those who play a lot don't get more either, because they think that's what balance means.

No that is not the expectation at all, you spend time and do more fights you have more rewards, but not getting more rewards only by exploiting the 0 attrition.

This has also been discussed countless times. Even if you have, say, 1500% more attack power like an average player
, you can only do max. 100-120 more battles. If this is a proportional value for you, then there is nothing to discuss further.

 

[Emberguard]

1500% more attack power like an average player
, you can only do max. 100-120 more battles

part of that lies in each additional point of attrition having a larger increase in enemy boosts from the previous point of attrition gain

 

[CrashBoom]

but the average players doesn't go to the max attrition he could beat

so it will be easily 200-300 battles you are making more than the average player