Ann-Christina
Farmer
But these players again want a lot of help from exactly these players.
-
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
knarre sbeat
Merchant
Wish i could count the days backwords, till the changes go live.
jovada
Regent
Do you read the forum or just filter what is possitive for you ?
On one of the first pages , NinjAlin already gave a new possible strategy , wich was countered by another strategy , the use of traps it was.
And maybe you forgot but initially GbG was ment with more strategy and several buildings to use in the strategy, only devs forgot that players find always the trick to exploit and made a mistake with the siegecamps , so now they will correct it , and maybe there are some other things to correct also like the 1000LP but hé it's a beginning.
Freela
Farmer
GBG was just about the only feature of Forge of Empires that wasn't 100% pre-programmed or else random.
Player creativity, strategizing and team work (not to mention spending) actually affected the outcome of GBG
Every other part of the game amounts to sitting in front of a slot machine pulling the lever over and over .
This new feature makes it just one more thing that can barely be affected at all by any kind of thinking.
Freela
Farmer
such touching faith in Inno's love and caring
Harley beta
Farmer
the whole thing is ill-conceived, Strong players have earned that they no longer know what to build. I'm one of them
But what about the weaker ones or do they start as they earn now and move somewhere if it doesn't work out for them?
strong players no longer enjoy it and don't play it. Weaker players will also stop playing, because it will no longer be an advantage for them to be more active.
GbG it's about people, not about the system ....
the purpose of this change is clear. Earn money
But what about the weaker ones or do they start as they earn now and move somewhere if it doesn't work out for them?
strong players no longer enjoy it and don't play it. Weaker players will also stop playing, because it will no longer be an advantage for them to be more active.
GbG it's about people, not about the system ....
the purpose of this change is clear. Earn money
Eleanor VII
Farmer
After pondering for a whole day, I really wish these new implementations could somehow be optional, for those who like or need a challenge, not compulsory for everyone...
PackCat
Squire
Well, that could have been easily resolved by setting hold times to 8, 16, or 24 hours if they did not want 24/7 activity.
All the current change is going to do, is grind down player resources... Goods, Diamonds for Negotiations, etc...
I notice that the decrease in the % of the camps has a huge influence on the chance of having or not having locations at the exit of HQ.
It can really become impossible to get out when in addition we have no location at the exit of HQ and weaker opponents (on paper) benefiting from many locations will develop faster.
It would therefore be necessary to review the randomness in the positions of the pitches in addition to the drop in the % of the camps.
It can really become impossible to get out when in addition we have no location at the exit of HQ and weaker opponents (on paper) benefiting from many locations will develop faster.
It would therefore be necessary to review the randomness in the positions of the pitches in addition to the drop in the % of the camps.
Demeter7
Squire
If you build up your military power you can fight longer with higher attrition. That challenge will keep you from getting bored. Build up your A/D boosts, etc.
Petrus1942
Farmer
Well having played a bit today as part of my smaller Beta guild who normally at most has 4 players fighting GbG at a time, I can say this change is absolutely horrible. I'm in HMA at 260/260 and I'm done for the day with 30 attrition after 1.5 sectors. That took me a grand sum of about 5 minutes. It wouldn't be so bad if Inno's version of 66.6% reduction wasn't more like "well, somewhere between 25% and 90% depending on your luck, but with a million samples it'll get to around 66.6%" but this is absolutely terrible. If Inno wants to reduce the number of eyeballs on the game and the amount of engagement with the game, congratulations they've nailed the formula - ironically at the same time as they're rolling out ads which require eyeballs and engagement to actually monetize.
Thunderdome
Emperor
Went and done spent all my rounds in the "new" GBg:
This was only at 43 attrition (the upper threshold for the moment). I get mine when I know I am losing more than half my lot in battle (sometimes having the last man still limping after winning the battle if I am froggy). This was at 3 SCs built by my guild as I was sleeping during the time it started. In less than 6 hours, I will return after reset to give it another go.
PS, Giving my regards to Asgard in having them on the same map as I am and the rest of the Misfit crew.
This was only at 43 attrition (the upper threshold for the moment). I get mine when I know I am losing more than half my lot in battle (sometimes having the last man still limping after winning the battle if I am froggy). This was at 3 SCs built by my guild as I was sleeping during the time it started. In less than 6 hours, I will return after reset to give it another go.
PS, Giving my regards to Asgard in having them on the same map as I am and the rest of the Misfit crew.
PackCat
Squire
It would make more sense to tie LP to VP. If one guild were to score 500K, they certainly deserve more of a boost than a measly +25 points over 2nd place finisher with <100K VP. Then it would also make more sense toward Prestige points to fight harder in GBG.
mcbluefire
Baronet
What an amazingly lame, late, and half-baked nerf hammer this change is. It will accomplish nothing desirable. This will not remove the dominance of the most powerful guilds on a map. It will not make it easier for little guilds to break out. It will not remove the 24/7 monitoring for GbG leaders to keep in relationship with their allied guilds for the season. All it will do is reduce the desire to deploy SCs, reduce the hits per day for players who enjoy GbG, and tick off those who enjoy GbG as it is now or are using GbG to quickly grow their cities. Thus there will be a new exodus of players and resentment from those who remain will darken the future for the game as new players will be be "poisoned by the griping from the veterans." Think that's not a thing, then consider why so many players sit in FE or before for years. This has happened in several games I've played in over the years and is akin to the "New Game Enhancements" of Star Wars Galaxies... and the story was the same in all those games - they never recovered.
Personally I think the answer lies in removing ALL the GbG buildings as they are what made it about guild treasury and diamonds and not about guilds just having a good all out war with each other. Granted it would be all about number of guild members and the percentage of which are active and the amount of their attack boosts....but really shouldn't that matter more than the ability of the guild to provide "free hits and mega rewards" to players with minimal attack boost? Don't get me wrong, multiple guilds could still work together, but they'd attrition out so quickly that at some point in the day smaller guilds would be able to come out and do some damage until the next day.
Regardless, too late and too much of a pendulum swing. Gonna bash a bunch of heads and make a bunch of enemies all in one update.
Personally I think the answer lies in removing ALL the GbG buildings as they are what made it about guild treasury and diamonds and not about guilds just having a good all out war with each other. Granted it would be all about number of guild members and the percentage of which are active and the amount of their attack boosts....but really shouldn't that matter more than the ability of the guild to provide "free hits and mega rewards" to players with minimal attack boost? Don't get me wrong, multiple guilds could still work together, but they'd attrition out so quickly that at some point in the day smaller guilds would be able to come out and do some damage until the next day.
Regardless, too late and too much of a pendulum swing. Gonna bash a bunch of heads and make a bunch of enemies all in one update.
that was one of my most recent suggestions for changes to GBG
HunZ95
Squire
you really don't understand the point, because you wasn't in a top guild yet. you don't improve the attack power primarily to be able to attack by 2-3 more, the amount is so small that it's not even worth it.
Boo...
Baronet
If you remove all the buildings on the GBG, weak guilds will not become stronger
Catness
Farmer
I personally don't like this change. Of course, large guilds with many players and goods have been able to completely dominate the map and other guilds then had problems progressing. But I don't think that will change, because the requirements have increased for everyone, including the weaker guilds.
So if you have players with good attack and defense power and enough goods in the cash register, you will now continue to expand the sectors as much as possible and be ahead of the weaker guild.
This reduces my incentive to fight. The possibility of good profits (FPs, kits etc). decreases tremendously.
The incentive to build buildings will also decrease, because it is no longer of any use. Thus, fewer guild goods are required. Is that in the spirit of FoE?
Please undo this change!
So if you have players with good attack and defense power and enough goods in the cash register, you will now continue to expand the sectors as much as possible and be ahead of the weaker guild.
This reduces my incentive to fight. The possibility of good profits (FPs, kits etc). decreases tremendously.
The incentive to build buildings will also decrease, because it is no longer of any use. Thus, fewer guild goods are required. Is that in the spirit of FoE?
Please undo this change!