Discussion Guild Battlegrounds Watchtower and Siege Camp Ability Re-balance

[HunZ95]

By the way, I would also like to ask for feedback from a Forge team on what they think a top guild should do if after the changes, the GBG battles are also done after 10-15 minutes by the members of the guild. Possibly do they think that 10 minutes of GBG and a few minutes of GvG battles in the evening will be enough content for them in the future?

 

[conqueror9]

In my guild we are happy with this change and for sure we want it in live servers.

Positive things about this change:

- no more unlimited fights from top players and/or players with a lot of attack %, that means they are more vulnerable
- now each top abussive guilds must think well which sectors take and which not, allowing small or mid level guilds have more chances to have sectors near their bases because sectors near the HQ have low points. Top players can't do unlimited fights with no attrition anymore so the idea of steal a sector with low points near of the HQ of a small guild or mid level guild will become a low priority
- the usage of other buildings like traps, statues, fortress, etc. will become a more usual thing. building a fortress to increase the required amount of points to conquer a sector can now penalize the enemy!! before this change, building fortress only helped enemy guilds to do more free fights with due siege camps.
- now, the help of each member becomes more important than ever, before, only a few strong players were required to abusse the whole map thanks to siege camps
- now, more members of a guild will have the chance to do fights and earn rewards. before, strong and abussive players had all the fights for themselves and low/mid level members didn't have even the chance of do a decent amount of fights

Negative things about this change:
- we are going to drown due all the tears of those abussive toxic fighters who only want to have the whole mape filled up with siegecamps to do a lot of fights . . oh , . .wait a minute, that is a good thing! bring those oceans of tears! XD

why so many player mis-understand what is happening in GBG

In GBG-big Guild, it is a very good guild co-operation, no matter how top your guild are, it is never the determine factor, if your guild is top but without sufficient guild member to play in GBG, you are no good in GBG.
For example, with top guild, you just have 2 members to hit a sector. If there is a small guild with 10 member hitting a sector, The smallest guild is actually running at speed 5 times (10/2) than the top guild, smallest guild will win the sector.

Top guild has advantage of more player with higher % attack, Higher % attack just mean higher successful rate of hit. But that is meaningless in GBG. Nowaday, we, all know the mechanism of each age, in each age, player always find THE BEST SOLDIER to do the fight. If you fight with the BEST SOLDIER in your age, the enemy soldier in GBG is exactly the same type of soldier as your GE, the same kind of soldier you always have to face. Inno is quite fair about this. You only deal with the enemy soldier with reference to your age. Unlike PVP, you may face enemy soldier of enemy-player's age.
There is no particularly advantage of player with different % of attack, it only affect the successful rate which will be critical when your attri in GBG is very very high.

Regarding the "so call unlimited fighting", if you get a deeper thinking of the impact in a guild, it just means there is some UNUSED ATTRI of that guild. For those who do unlimited fighting , now, has threhold (maximum) which they want to dispose their un-used attri. In that same guild, for those player who do not get a chance to fight <as all possible fight is already done by other player in past GBG >, it is now, they have chance to use their NEVER-USED ATTRI in GBG.

The situation next to your Base (HQ), will not change. It is becos they want BATTLES, not your sector.

Placing traps, statue, fortress...as i say in previous post. It will result a feedback with traps and fortress .....as a punishment.

As i say in previous post, seigh camp, u can choose "not place", but never delete it, you will get a feedback if other find you delete sc. If you capture a sector with sc, it will help you to get more battles. Once your guild reach a good co-operation action with advance to capture sector with sc. Even 1 sector, you will find it is also a punishment for your guild with current adjustment. Suppose you can do more battles, but with current adjustment, you will get lesser battles.

 

[Devilsangel]

In my opinion it's all about the ranking junkies...same as it was with recurring quests cut. They didn't care about the possibility for endless goodies from reccuring quests before the junkies started using the quests for fights in Asteroid....and inno punished everyone saying it not what they intended way back when chateau was introduced....and instead of cutting fights from reccuring quests they cut the number of cancelations.
I personally do reach the limit whenever a new age comes out using my hands only and my guildies that drop all those GBs for me to us)) and to be fair I get frustrated when I hit the limit, but since it only happens once a year for a few weeks, I can deal)
Same here with GbG numerous amount of junkies come out and even get rewarded for their effort))
Fights between guilds even stop for the duration of a gbg season, just to grind more)

Fixed some typos)*

 

[DEADP00L]

but never delete it, you will get a feedback if other find you delete sc.

Here is a good proof of dictatorship on a GbG and which gives reason to Inno to modify them.
You have already said that you have worked hard to have a nice cash flow, what does it matter to you whether the others leave their camps or not?
You dictate how others should play with you and you don't understand that Inno is restricting you.... you really are a comedian, when's your next stand-up?

 

[jovada]

For example, with top guild, you just have 2 members to hit a sector. If there is a small guild with 10 member hitting a sector, The smallest guild is actually running at speed 5 times (10/2) than the top guild, smallest guild will win the sector.

What an example hahahahaha, Always saying topguildes are good organized and now suddenly they are only 2 against 5 weaklings hahaha, and if that really happens so what they take the sector 4h later anyway.

Regarding the "so call unlimited fighting", if you get a deeper thinking of the impact in a guild, it just means there is some UNUSED ATTRI of that guild. For those who do unlimited fighting , now, has threhold (maximum) which they want to dispose their un-used attri. In that same guild, for those player who do not get a chance to fight <as all possible fight is already done by other player in past GBG >, it is now, they have chance to use their NEVER-USED ATTRI in GBG.

So you basicaly admit that in the guild the so called topplayers let do the dirty work (first sector with full attrition) by other guildies and wait for the opportunity to play when camps are installed and letting again other guildies do the work when they have not a total of 5 camps to have 0 attrition. And at the end of the day after 800 à 1000 battles they still have attrition left. Woaw that really must be a topguild 4 or 5 greedy whales and other guildmates can have the crumbles.

Many of you use the negative argument that good fighters will leave their guilds to join topguilds, i tell you that the greedy are afraid to have more topfighters in the guild cause they have to split more fights hahaha.

 

[DEADP00L]

The two parties will never agree.
One repeats that some are too greedy.
The other responds that some are too jealous.
So stop looking for each other!

Because on arrival we do not give valid arguments for Innogames to make a decision concerning the viability of their attempt. Only their numbers will tell them if they were right or wrong.
Especially when many are threatening to quit the game and Inno will see if there is a real leak or not.

And in all cases, tell yourself that a single GbG will not allow you to make an effective return.

 

[conqueror9]

What an example hahahahaha, Always saying topguildes are good organized and now suddenly they are only 2 against 5 weaklings hahaha, and if that really happens so what they take the sector 4h later anyway.


So you basicaly admit that in the guild the so called topplayers let do the dirty work (first sector with full attrition) by other guildies and wait for the opportunity to play when camps are installed and letting again other guildies do the work when they have not a total of 5 camps to have 0 attrition. And at the end of the day after 800 à 1000 battles they still have attrition left. Woaw that really must be a topguild 4 or 5 greedy whales and other guildmates can have the crumbles.

Many of you use the negative argument that good fighters will leave their guilds to join topguilds, i tell you that the greedy are afraid to have more topfighters in the guild cause they have to split more fights hahaha.

what wrong with you...
2 vs 5... it is just example telling ...guild co-operation is the determination factor ... SPEED of capture a sector is determionate by amount of guild members rather the strength of guild member % attack !!

What wrong with you
it is A GUILD WAR. GUILD BATTLEGROUND, every guild try to get more battles by captureing more sector to advance to next sector with more battles. It is a BIG BETRAY OF GUILD if you are not working for the guild to capture sectors. After 4 hours, you can advance or get sector captured by other guild. Then after 4 hours, your guild going to re-capture lost sector. If you do not turn up in time to fight, it is your problem.
There is no one force other to stop and doing tons of battles alone. In fact, we only have BEGGING guidlmate to pop up in time to have battles. There is only SECTOR SHIELD DOWN and you are absent during battles.
Our guild has announce target sectors shield down and sometimes, annoucement is nearly 4 hours ago.
It sound to me, you do not know ...how to play GBG, possible you are in a guild with "not good" guild co-operation.

 

[CrashBoom]

it is A GUILD WAR.

actual now it is MORE war than before

before it was only to capture the sectors as often as possible
now it includes strategy: where do I "invest" my limited fights

I don't think Russia and the Ukraine are swapping sectors very often

Then after 4 hours, your guild going to re-capture lost sector. If you do not turn up in time to fight, it is your problem.

and why ?

because people want to make their thousands of attrition free fights

with this change the endless battles directly after 4 hours will stop

 

[CrashBoom]

Only their numbers will tell them if they were right or wrong.

but not the numbers of the poll

to get required numbers they need to test it on live
and especially check the number of used diamonds

Especially when many are threatening to quit the game and Inno will see if there is a real leak or not.

those can also only be checked on live:
are the players with 1000+ battles per day continuing fighting or boycott the GBG

 

[Amdira]

before it was only to capture the sectors as often as possible
now it includes strategy: where do I "invest" my limited fights

Finally we are going back to a strategy game

 

[Beta King]

with this change the endless battles directly after 4 hours will stop

Along with any chance of anyone willing to put the time in to catch up to the leader board. This will make FOE a game of seniority whomever has been here the longest and took advantage of the 2.5 years of stacking player points in GBG with free fights will forever be locked at the top with nobody to challenge them and they will only need to do minimal work to stay at the top. That's what putting a cap on growth possibilities will do. Explain to me how this is not correct? They might as well do away with the ranking system as it will mean nothing after this, maybe they can cut everyone down in every world to 100 million starting point and then this kneecapping will be a fair starting point. make everyones score reflect exactly what they have in their city only at the time of recalibration and remove any points earned from fights or otherwise. They can call it the great reset. Then i'm ok with this change.

 

[Ifmountain]

So overall, I do really love the idea...

But: Instead of making it complicated and hinder the weaker ones to achieve the same as the stronger ones... Limit the fights per day per player to 300 / 500 / 750... whatever suits inno the best. Everyone would have the same chance to grind, no matter what AP and Age the got / are in - grinding would simply stop at the limit and we could restart next day at 00:00 again with same same...

 

[CrashBoom]

So overall, I do really love the idea...

But: Instead of making it complicated and hinder the weaker ones to achieve the same as the stronger ones... Limit the fights per day per player to 300 / 500 / 750... whatever suits inno the best. Everyone would have the same chance to grind, no matter what AP and Age the got / are in - grinding would simply stop at the limit and we could restart next day at 00:00 again with same same...

so you want that players with lets say 100/100 attack boost get the same amount of fights than players with 2000/1500 ?

that will really make the 2000/1500 players more happy than the attrition cap

 

[DEADP00L]

That's what putting a cap on growth possibilities will do. Explain to me how this is not correct?

And regarding phone/tablet players not being able to play GvG, is that correct?
What do you recommend?

 

[Beta King]

So overall, I do really love the idea...

But: Instead of making it complicated and hinder the weaker ones to achieve the same as the stronger ones... Limit the fights per day per player to 300 / 500 / 750... whatever suits inno the best. Everyone would have the same chance to grind, no matter what AP and Age the got / are in - grinding would simply stop at the limit and we could restart next day at 00:00 again with same same...

Fine limit the fights to whatever they want with attrition then allow us to buy attrition reduction with diamonds in some way or another so that the fights are capped but can still be overcome.

 

[Beta King]

And regarding phone/tablet players not being able to play GvG, is that correct?
What do you recommend?

The 15 minutes of fighting per day in GVG isnt helping anyone climb the player point ranks in FOE. By the way anyone is allowed to log in on whatever they want so if you choose to only log in on your phone then that's your choice. Obviously everyone knows that you can only log into GVG with a PC so get one if you want to play GVG.

 

[DEADP00L]

The 15 minutes of fighting per day in GVG isnt helping anyone climb the player point ranks in FOE. By the way anyone is allowed to log in on whatever they want so if you choose to only log in on your phone then that's your choice.

Your answer shows that you really don't know the game well.
GvG is impossible to access from a phone or tablet.
The "old" players have (and continue to) create their score largely with the GvG for 10 years.

Once again, you know how to shout loudly to complain that someone is touching your toy AND you don't really care about the case of others.

As GvG is only accessible from a PC, I propose that GbG be accessible, as before, only from a phone.
Is it fairer for you?

 

[sirblu]

Here is a thought - Inno apparently wants to re-balance or level the playing field in GbG. So instead of capping the siege Camps at 66% why not just get rid of all the buildings - ALL of them and let us test it without any of them - full attrition for all, all of the time. This would certainly level the playing field. Allow us to test it first that way and then add back buildings it deems neceaasry instead of always hurting the little guild or new playler.

 

[Pericles the Lion]

Along with any chance of anyone willing to put the time in to catch up to the leader board. This will make FOE a game of seniority whomever has been here the longest and took advantage of the 2.5 years of stacking player points in GBG with free fights will forever be locked at the top with nobody to challenge them and they will only need to do minimal work to stay at the top. That's what putting a cap on growth possibilities will do. Explain to me how this is not correct? They might as well do away with the ranking system as it will mean nothing after this, maybe they can cut everyone down in every world to 100 million starting point and then this kneecapping will be a fair starting point. make everyones score reflect exactly what they have in their city only at the time of recalibration and remove any points earned from fights or otherwise. They can call it the great reset. Then i'm ok with this change.

I'm sorry to spoil your dream but the only way that a lower level player (say #8000 with 1MM points) was going to catchup with a higher ranked player (say #800 with 100MM points) is for the higher ranked player to quit playing. I'm #261 on my main world. Recently, my ranking score has been increasing about 1MM per day. Meanwhile, the top ranked players are advancing at 5X-10X my rate AND this is with GBG. The change to SCs won't make any difference. Lower ranked players will not be able to catch up to active high ranked players. Who would play a game where this was possible?

 

[lacsapgaah]

Fine limit the fights to whatever they want with attrition then allow us to buy attrition reduction with diamonds in some way or another so that the fights are capped but can still be overcome.

Why not give yourself the opportunity to buy with diamonds the first place in the ranking of players with 1,000,000,000 points ahead of the second?
This saves you from wasting time fighting without any risk of losing.
So you will have time to enjoy your free time and admire your ranking which seems to be the only thing that has value in your eyes.