Discussion Guild Battlegrounds Watchtower and Siege Camp Ability Re-balance

[Owl II]

Only Inno sees the composition of those who voted. Are you Inno? Show us from what you have drawn these conclusions. . I told from the beginning this vote is a farce. They will do as they see fit, regardless of the results of the vote. And they'll come up with a reason why they did it, don't worry

 

[-Alin-]

Approx. how long did it take to complete 300 battles?

20-25 minutes for me till 120 atrition, and few several more going for easy fights till 130-140 atrition and done for the day.
So maximum 50m-one hour doing the fights, searching for easy combos after 120 atrition including manual fighting.

 

[Knight Roland]

proposal: scrap this change, because it makes all the guild good LB’s meaningless, and do it this way instead to limit the FP farming:

double or triple the amount of building slots per sector and at the same time reduce the effects of buildings by half or by a factor of 3.

For example: sector X1X would have 6 building slots instead of 3. and each siege camp would only provide 12% attrition reduction instead of 24%

That way obsis, atomiums and ai cores would become very desirable and everyone would want to level them as high as they could

 

[Amdira]

20-25 minutes for me till 120 atrition, and few several more going for easy fights till 130-140 atrition and done for the day.
So maximum 50m-one hour doing the fights, searching for easy combos after 120 atrition including manual fighting.

So it's almost like in times before GbG although I only hardly can remember how we spent our time without
I've always tried to see both sides and sometimes I've even defended Inno, but now I lost all my trust into Inno, sry. I'm just tired of being patronized like a child and being told what's good for me and what's not. If that is what Inno wants maybe it's really time to look for another game. Inno won't care as I haven't bougt a single diamond in my 4.5 years and maybe some ppl will miss me for a week or two or not. Whatever.

 

[CrashBoom]

proposal: scrap this change, because it makes all the guild good LB’s meaningless, and do it this way instead to limit the FP farming:

double or triple the amount of building slots per sector and at the same time reduce the effects of buildings by half or by a factor of 3.

For example: sector X1X would have 6 building slots instead of 3. and each siege camp would only provide 12% attrition reduction instead of 24%

That way obsis, atomiums and ai cores would become very desirable and everyone would want to level them as high as they could

wouldn't that be the same as:
make all buildings 3 time more expensive

 

[Knight Roland]

wouldn't that be the same as:
make all buildings 3 time more expensive

this would also limit FP farming and make guildgoods GB‘s more meaningful rather than meaningless.

and at the same time leave costs for traps etc as it is, then those would become more meaningful too.

Only increase the costs for siege camps and watchtowers

 

[ArklurBeta]

wouldn't that be the same as:
make all buildings 3 time more expensive

Not exactly, because if the diamond cost is the same, that's 2x more yacht for Inno.

 

[Amdira]

I would rather suggest (as done earlier) to increase the diamond costs for instant building. As it seems one of the reasons for this "balance" is the fact, that there are too many diamonds being collected through gbg and Inno is missing some customers - Most of the "bad boys or girls" farming are just instant building SCs for themselves without announcing it for the rest of the guild and farming some sectors alone or together with other big farmers.

 

[HunZ95]

20-25 minutes for me till 120 atrition, and few several more going for easy fights till 130-140 atrition and done for the day.
So maximum 50m-one hour doing the fights, searching for easy combos after 120 atrition including manual fighting.

Not too much time.
I approx. can fight until 105 atrition, so it would take even less time.
This sounds very boring in the long run, and it's likely that guild communities will feel more flat as well, as they'll have much less time to meet in-game and not much to do together.

 

[PackCat]

but its SO good for those little guilds. See the one on the right that cant even take the 4 tier stuff next to its HQ in 3 days!!!

Part of the problem is the weaker Guilds have no strategy. They either scatter their battles among several sectors, filling them only half, instead of completing one, -OR- they attack a sector with no camps, when a 4 camp sector is sitting next to it with low attrition.

It seems "they" are the farmers, or just grazers who have no interest with interacting with the other Guilds.
They complain when you overpower and capture a sector they have been hitting on for hours with no closings.

 

[PackCat]

OMG, you do not understand Inno....

It is not the 1st time Inno do things like that. Inno cannot afford a "NO" that result the effort they spend in design office with months of works go to BIN. They can put your "NO" to "bin", not the design work as they are paid to do the design.

It took 3 months and 2000 cups of coffee to come up with the idea, and ONLY 5 mins to make a change to the values in a function.
Changing values/formulas does not take a lot of effort and even with mistakes, you can tweak it in under 30 minutes for the desired effect.
It took longer to compile the code than to make the change.

Since WE are the beta testers, our time does not count toward implementation.

 

[Owl II]

It took 3 months and 2000 cups of coffee to come up with the idea, and ONLY 5 mins to make a change to the values in a function

Development does not exist without coffee

 

[conqueror9]

I do not think my english is good enough to fully understand the following statement :

"The chance to not increase attrition level when advancing into an adjacent province starts with 24%. The total max is 66%. The total more buildings with this skill adjacent to one province the less effective a single building becomes"

The front (1st) part is clear
the later part "The total more buildings with this skill adjacent to one province the less effective a single building becomes", does it means
3rd seigh camp (sc) is 66.6%
the 4th sc is not counted, and 66.6% will be further reduced
the 5th sc or more are also not counted, and that 66.6% is further reduced"

The 1st part is quite clear. 66.6% is the maximum .....there is no need to write the next statement becos the max is 66.6%. The 2nd part is additional statement that try to say something different from the 1st part.

any 1 help me to understand ...why there is 2nd statement (which should not exists in current adjustment ).....

 

[BrisaMarisa]

"one of the reasons for this "balance" is the fact, that there are too many diamonds being collected through gbg"
reduce % of winning diamond, easy! but do not touch GBG

 

[Pericles the Lion]

No traps, only camps and noone is deleting them, we let them for everyone and viceversa.

Several of your opposing Guilds are not making an effort to capture sectors in the third ring. I don't think that this is a consequence of the SC change, these sectors would have had no SC protection before the change. These other Guilds seem uninterested in participating, period. To some degree, this same thing happens almost every season in my live worlds. Some play, some don't try.

 

[BrisaMarisa]

Me too, I STRONGLY OPPOSE this proposed change as many other! All my town is built for the actuale way of playing...

 

[Pericles the Lion]

what a stupid change. the voting is clear: two thirds of the player base dont want it

Uh, no. Two-thirds of the contributors to this thread don't want it. This is a very, very small subset of the player base.

 

[Amdira]

The most disturbing sentence in the announcement is still this one:

"In addition, it was something often remarked upon by our communities and players, who participated in Guild Battlegrounds. We even had this same suggestion polled on different occasions, with players voting overwhelmingly for a change to the Watchtower and Siege camp ability formula."

There have been lots of suggestions, but I cannot remember this one neither having voted for or against this - maybe someone can show me the original pls.

 

[Publius Cornelius Scipio]

what a stupid change. the voting is clear: two thirds of the player base dont want it

Very stupid, indeed

 

[Publius Cornelius Scipio]

The most disturbing sentence in the announcement is still this one:

"In addition, it was something often remarked upon by our communities and players, who participated in Guild Battlegrounds. We even had this same suggestion polled on different occasions, with players voting overwhelmingly for a change to the Watchtower and Siege camp ability formula."

There have been lots of suggestions, but I cannot remember this one neither having voted for or against this - maybe someone can show me the original pls.

I also have never read about