Discussion Guild Battlegrounds Watchtower and Siege Camp Ability Re-balance

[woodchuck321]

1) "But muh guild treasury"

ok, great, you built a treasury, good job. GbG still exists, you'll still need to build siege camps, just the map will move a little slower. Big deal. Also, GvG still exists and is super fun anyway, go give that a try.

2) "But muh free forge points"

the game existed for almost a decade before free forge points became a thing and it will exist long after. also, GbG still exists, the rewards will just be lower - something to do daily, not something to grind constantly. for all but the top players, this will change little.

e.g. i cap at about 70-80 attrition in FE and i typically don't do more than 200 battles a day anyway, so this literally doesn't reduce my rewards at all

for the folks who do 5000-10000 battles per season, then yeah, this will drastically reduce your rewards. is this change "fair" to you? no, maybe not, but it is balanced

3) "But the new players, how will they catch up?"

they wouldn't catch up now anyway... because all the high players were grinding 10k battles a season... so they were moving faster than all the new players, even if they focused GbG, because a new player can't do 10k battles a season...

 

[mintbunnies]

I like how you outright say this change doesn't affect you so you're cool with it. You can stop there.

You will be affected even if you don't think you would be. Do you think your guild will continue to build 4 camps so you can get 66% attrition? It just isn't sustainable.

With 1 camp maybe you could get 100 fights per day. If you're fine with it then great. But there's really no point in increasing your attack bonus any more. Why bother spending money for the new event buildings to increase your max attrition lets say 3 points? That's like 4 more fights per day.

What does a 1000 attack bonus give you that a 500 attack bonus doesn't? Like 30 more fights in GBG per day?

 

[Anette.]

1) "But muh guild treasury"

ok, great, you built a treasury, good job. GbG still exists, you'll still need to build siege camps, just the map will move a little slower. Big deal. Also, GvG still exists and is super fun anyway, go give that a try.

2) "But muh free forge points"

the game existed for almost a decade before free forge points became a thing and it will exist long after. also, GbG still exists, the rewards will just be lower - something to do daily, not something to grind constantly. for all but the top players, this will change little.

e.g. i cap at about 70-80 attrition in FE and i typically don't do more than 200 battles a day anyway, so this literally doesn't reduce my rewards at all

for the folks who do 5000-10000 battles per season, then yeah, this will drastically reduce your rewards. is this change "fair" to you? no, maybe not, but it is balanced

3) "But the new players, how will they catch up?"

they wouldn't catch up now anyway... because all the high players were grinding 10k battles a season... so they were moving faster than all the new players, even if they focused GbG, because a new player can't do 10k battles a season...

"But muh it doesn't affect me, so I will act like a moron to people that are affected."

 

[Pericles the Lion]

another factor to consider, this would cause a massive shift in which age is best to aim for, already it's massive for players to be in ages like Industrial and aquire advanced age troops to fight in GBG only disadvantage is they can't quite fight to the volume of fights that someone who has progressed further in the game and filled there city with attack buildings can, with the limiting of this proposal in number of fights that is feasible in a day, will mean the advantage of the lower age/advanced troops game play will be rediculous, no point having any new ages anymore and for those that have already gone past being able to use this game style they may as well rip their city down and start again or just stop playing as I'm sure many would.

Sorry, I disagree. I got 4 Hover Tanks when I was in Indy, which was very cool. However, even with att/def boost of 598/356 I could only get in about 20 battles before retiring the HTs. Even with zero attrition and big boosts every unit will take at least one chit of damage when hit. Not wanting to lose 4 unattached HTs I pulled them out when they got to 4-5 chits. Sure, they decimated everything but it was not that big of an advantage given the limited number of HTs that are available to early age players. I actually got in more battles using same age troops and quickly aged up to FE to regain use of my AO.

 

[King Flush]

so yes 80%-90% of players it may not be too detrimental, but the 10%-20% that it will hit are the ones who dedicate themselves to the game (in time sometimes in money), seems fair! I think not, just make it so everyone is on even level, why even bother trying? what is there to achieve or strive for?

the worrying thing is as the majority are not of the elite % this will probably get passed through.

 

[Pericles the Lion]

You will be affected even if you don't think you would be. Do you think your guild will continue to build 4 camps so you can get 66% attrition? It just isn't sustainable.

I know that my guild will build camps to get to 66.6% wherever it's possible. We're doing it now...nothing's changed there.

 

[King Flush]

Sorry, I disagree. I got 4 Hover Tanks when I was in Indy, which was very cool. However, even with att/def boost of 598/356 I could only get in about 20 battles before retiring the HTs. Even with zero attrition and big boosts every unit will take at least one chit of damage when hit. Not wanting to lose 4 unattached HTs I pulled them out when they got to 4-5 chits. Sure, they decimated everything but it was not that big of an advantage given the limited number of HTs that are available to early age players. I actually got in more battles using same age troops and quickly aged up to FE to regain use of my AO.

with my stats 1400+/1100+ I can't fight anywhere near the attrition levels that I know some of my guildmates do with advanced age troops and they can get a hell of a lot more fights in that what you suggested you got so unsure as to how your numbers were so low but I'm telling you now it will make this gamestyle much more advantageous than it is currently

 

[Yekk]

You still need to build enough Camps/Watchtowers to get any attrition reduction at all you know? ^^
Of course it will not be 100% reduction anymore, but 66.6% is worth the 4 Camps in my eyes.

You will see a mass exodus from the game... we explained this to you in your completely misthought thread on how to fix GBG... you did not listen

Don't forget we told you so

 

[DEADP00L]

so yes 80%-90% of players it may not be too detrimental, but the 10%-20% that it will hit are the ones who dedicate themselves to the game (in time sometimes in money), seems fair!

Because you know numbers better than Innogames?
They need to know better what it can bring them or lose.

To say that they will earn less diamonds is as accurate as saying that the fire is wet. Big hitters in GbG earned more diamonds than they spent!

And if this measure is inadmissible for you, it remains (until proven otherwise in real tests) more interesting for a majority of players. So we're not going to complain for once that Inno thinks of the majority rather than a minority that thinks of itself as the center of the world.

I laugh because I note all those who announce that they will leave the game and that we will still see complaining in 6 months on this forum! I can cite them wisely! ^^

 

[King Flush]

Because you know numbers better than Innogames?
They need to know better what it can bring them or lose.

To say that they will earn less diamonds is as accurate as saying that the fire is wet. Big hitters in GbG earned more diamonds than they spent!

And if this measure is inadmissible for you, it remains (until proven otherwise in real tests) more interesting for a majority of players. So we're not going to complain for once that Inno thinks of the majority rather than a minority that thinks of itself as the center of the world.

I laugh because I note all those who announce that they will leave the game and that we will still see complaining in 6 months on this forum! I can cite them wisely! ^^

time will tell, wouldn't be first time a company makes a grave error

 

[Arwaren]

As I understood correctly, the formula now looks like this:
1 - (1 - 0.24) ^ n, where n is the number of siege camps.
What if there was no limit?

1​ Siege Camp	2​ Siege Camps	3​ Siege Camps	4​ Siege Camps	5​ Siege Camps	6​ Siege Camps	7​ Siege Camps	8​ Siege Camps	9​ Siege Camps	10​ Siege Camps
24%	42,24%	56,1%	66,64%	74,64%	80,73%	85,35%	88,87%	91,54%	93,57%

Now let's look at the costs that have to be spent and how the percentages increase

3000 Goods	6000 Goods	9000 Goods	12000 Goods	15000 Goods	18000 Goods	21000 Goods	24000 Goods	27000 Goods	30000 Goods
24%	18,24%	13,86%	10,54%	8%	6,09%	4,62%	3,52%	2,67%	2,03%

As for me the limit should be increased to 85%. Above this value the percentage increases are very small. If someone wants to spend so much goods it should not be so punished.

And so you have realized a little too late that there should be no situation where there is a 100% chance of no attrition.

 

[beelzebob666]

time will tell, wouldn't be first time a company makes a grave error

Well, if there is a reason for the game to go to shambles this likely it is not.

As a main culprit for such happening I see the power creep in event buildings. Nowadays I have goods galore and more FP than I need - there is no real goal left in the game - besides maybe a delusive first place on the guild ranking.

 

[woodchuck321]

I like how you outright say this change doesn't affect you so you're cool with it. You can stop there.

regardless of who personally benefits, i'm looking at how this will affect the game as a whole, from a game balance perspective; 0 attrition fighting was unbalanced for resource and point gain. this will change the way that the game is played, and i'm responding the more obviously nonsensical claims i'm seeing, like "guild treasury will be useless" and "this will hurt new players." of course the people who are grinding out high battle counts will be negatively affected, but those are typically the only ones hurt, and they're the only ones complaining; everyone else (the vast majority of players) will benefit or be unaffected

You will be affected even if you don't think you would be. Do you think your guild will continue to build 4 camps so you can get 66% attrition? It just isn't sustainable.

yes, most guilds will, because as people have mentioned before, what else is there to spend the treasury on? GvG & GbG, and that's about it.

With 1 camp maybe you could get 100 fights per day. If you're fine with it then great. But there's really no point in increasing your attack bonus any more. Why bother spending money for the new event buildings to increase your max attrition lets say 3 points? That's like 4 more fights per day.

What does a 1000 attack bonus give you that a 500 attack bonus doesn't? Like 30 more fights in GBG per day?

several things:

1) GE is still a part of the game that lots of guilds care about. I couldn't auto GE4 until I got about 750% attack, and I couldn't fight it at all except with Advance Age units and manual fighting until about 400%. Also, attack strength still matters in GvG - I (FE) can fight SAJM in AA map using FE units - albeit with heavy losses, but even being able to fight AA in such a low age is huge.

2) You're right. Attack bonus will become less relevant. Just like when GbG got added, everyone shifted from producing passive FP with their city (either directly, or producing goods to sell for fp) to attack bonus buildings. You'll want high enough attack bonus to take advantage of a reasonable maximum in GbG - something like a few hundred daily battles, which will be a desirable trait which guilds will start to look for - but gameplay in general would shift back to more balanced cities.

 

[King Flush]

Well, if there is a reason for the game to go to shambles this likely it is not.

As a main culprit for such happening I see the power creep in event buildings. Nowadays I have goods galore and more FP than I need - there is no real goal left in the game - besides maybe a delusive first place on the guild ranking.

think there is a very high chance that if implemented this could be a reason for vast amount of players to stop playing but as I say time will tell I just hope it's not put to the test.

 

[Keres]

I am leaving the game if you that, you will only have the GvG guys left, who play 5 minutes a day and never buy any diamonds.

 

[Kranyar the Mysterious]

Well, if there is a reason for the game to go to shambles this likely it is not.

As a main culprit for such happening I see the power creep in event buildings. Nowadays I have goods galore and more FP than I need - there is no real goal left in the game - besides maybe a delusive first place on the guild ranking.

And that is at the crux of the problem. For many players and guilds the game now is GBG, and GBG is the game.

 

[Yekk]

I don't see any reason not to stack attack moving forward. Now your a/d will really mean something)
During swaps attrition never really reaches your limit, so players with low ad have the same number of possible fights as those who spend either time or diamonds (be it time on developing farms or money buying them), making their cities as efficient as possible.

Attack mean a lot right now. One shot kills are the only way to stop defense army crit hits from happening in the higher ages. Keen Eye mixed with a 66% SC max is a recipe for players to stop playing GBG. I notice trapping has not been changed. Someone did not stop and think on what traps can do now that SC's are limited. It is quite a real possibility that a guild could make the battlefield unplayable for most guilds in most leagues.

 

[beelzebob666]

vast amount of players

Who should that be?

For many players and guilds the game now is GBG, and GBG is the game.

Yeah, and in that regard the change helps, as GBG is about the guild again and not about farming

 

[DEADP00L]

By dint of abusing flags at 159/160 and sharing a map between 2 guilds while totally blocking 6 other guilds, that's what the big hitters got!
And now it's them who are crying and threatening to leave, believing (with their crystal ball) that the game will lose activity?
While I think that by restricting what was abusing fights without attrition, to the detriment of others, all of this will allow other guilds to do more fights and maybe spend more resources and diamonds on setting up camps than they weren't even using by blocking.

 

[TheTomatoMan]

By dint of abusing flags at 159/160 and sharing a map between 2 guilds while totally blocking 6 other guilds, that's what the big hitters got!
And now it's them who are crying and threatening to leave, believing (with their crystal ball) that the game will lose activity?
While I think that by restricting what was abusing fights without attrition, to the detriment of others, all of this will allow other guilds to do more fights and maybe spend more resources and diamonds on setting up camps than they weren't even using by blocking.

Don't be gullible please, you should know that the massive guilds will still dominate, albeit with more difficulty, and to the detriment of the "big hitters", but they will still dominate, and the big fighting guilds will still outperform the small, inexpirienced ones.