Discussion Guild Battlegrounds Watchtower and Siege Camp Ability Re-balance

[King Flush]

So regarding the CONS of this balancing, what are your ideas?
Because you spend more time criticizing those who don't think like you but I haven't seen any ideas proposed yet.
Inno said he wanted a rebalancing, so it's out of the question to just go back to the old version. Propose things to replace this nerf for discussion, but please stop your useless attacks on other people.

of course my input has been more on the cons than providing differing ideas as this thread is about this nerf proposal, so those against, it is their duty to shoot it down, if another thread was created for proposed other ideas then I'd happily input to that, I've demonstrated how as far as personal rewards go that GBG is not out of balance at all other than it takes more time to get the same rewards than other means so maybe could look to increase personal rewards? that could be one idea? I've said that I am in agreement that the league structure is what needs attention but have also said that there's so many variations on how you could go with that it would have made more sense to go - right this nerf obviously is a bad idea everyone wants the matching looked at let's discuss proposals for that, there's no point doing that on this thread.

So my proposal, scrap the nerf, look at how the league and matchings work

there you go my proposals.

 

[DEADP00L]

So you are the ambassador of the AGAINST?
I stupidly thought that in several heads there were more than in one.

And even if I agree with you that the matchmaling must be reviewed, not proposing or discussing a possible MMR without any precision is as useful as yelling for nothing.

 

[-Alin-]

So, anything related to GbG, a change or something, a third round of testing because the other 2 were useless, or we will again know things 5 minutes before the next GbG round?

Pathetic InnoGames, Pathetic.

 

[King Flush]

So you are the ambassador of the AGAINST?
I stupidly thought that in several heads there were more than in one.

And even if I agree with you that the matchmaling must be reviewed, not proposing or discussing a possible MMR without any precision is as useful as yelling for nothing.

'ambassador' I'm just someone who sees all the damage it will do and voiced my opinion, that's all I can do. I'm hardly alone many others have done the same and many more that have silently voted against, I strongly feel that a lot of the minority that have voted yes to this won't feel the same after a number of months of it being implemented.

 

[conqueror9]

This is what happens now on one of our RL worlds in a 1000LP league

Turqoise and yellow don't like each other so they fight.
Because they fight it gives opportunity to other guilds to jump in and conquer sectors.

If they liked each other the map would be half with flags and blocking every other guild.
This is a proof that swapping is for the only purpose of farming.

why do u play...play for what
do u get something that is very big that u have beat others...

player are not a fool...
player find more interesting reward in GBG by farming and get advantage from Inno
player and guild get stronger by farming , not by beating other guild
To get more farming, they do swapping becos player are not stupid

as I say in other post, it is not a game between players
it always a game that player to beat game-developer ( Inno )
winning another player(or guild) is not a primary fun, winning game developer (the biggest one in the game) are more interesting
whenever game developer push some new features
player more prefer to get more from new features

no matter how GBG change, farming will not stop unless there is no treasure
if there is no treasure, there is no reason for player to spend time to play GBG

please be Wise player to get more from game developer, do not just follow game developer thinking...
this is beta world, game developer wants you to find bug /issue f new features
the current topic is actually a issue of GBG

 

[conqueror9]

So regarding the CONS of this balancing, what are your ideas?
Because you spend more time criticizing those who don't think like you but I haven't seen any ideas proposed yet.
Inno said he wanted a rebalancing, so it's out of the question to just go back to the old version. Propose things to replace this nerf for discussion, but please stop your useless attacks on other people.

no any idea proposed ?????
I have I have suggest several times in previous post...

re-group GBG guilds according to their amount of total ( battles+ negotiation )
that is more "total" vs more "total", few "total" vs few "total"

more "total" will find more interesting as more guild come foreward to get something they want and try their best to keep their league

few "total" will no longer be corner as they are not facing "more total" any more and then they all get more chance to advances

so all guilds inside a GBG are similar in guild co-operation

of course, more " more total" will be high in league ( diamond) as they play heavily
lowest "total" will be lowest in league and they still get chance to promoto as they have un-limited battles ( equal strength enemy-guild ) , when they have sufficient "total", they will join next level of GBG by playing with another similar "total"

p.s. there is no need to set limit of sc and capped sc at 66.6% as sc is built and diamond if player need to do it, current adjustment to capped sc to 66.6% is already lead to "reduction of amount of sc" and "reducation to diamond sc as there is no need to rush to get more"

 

[Thunderdome]

So, anything related to GbG, a change or something, a third round of testing because the other 2 were useless, or we will again know things 5 minutes before the next GbG round?

Pathetic InnoGames, Pathetic.

They are not going to do anything about it other than let it drag on. It's part of their idea so far:

• Throw forth a change
• Let everyone "test" to see how it goes
• Let everyone "voice" their feedback
• Drag it to the next season because feedback "wasn't" good enough
• Repeat sections 2 and 3
• Slowly hide away as it dragged on
• Everyone will forget about it
• Repeat the same towards live servers

I just don't see how much "testing" and "feedback" they need in order to come forth and state they will leave the change (with good reasoning and analyzing) or put it back on the shelf. The ones that are in favor of this change have expressed some really good points on why it is warranted (we're just speculating here folks since we have yet to hear a real reason why from Inno) while the ones that were opposed to such have also expressed some really good points as well.

If I was said developer and this was my game, I would carefully look back on this (from all points) and incorporate some changes (if needed) while tweaking on others. This takes me back to when a business wants to have VoIP because everyone else is having it. The first thing I look is for room for the equipment. This can be physical but also through the network (number of ports available for the device). The next I look for is speed; will it be fast enough to be connected to the network for calls and be able to conduct business through computers, devices, printers, etc. This might need an upgrade to the internet (if it is a DSL or lower) in order to do so. And finally, number porting or assignment.

Feedback is always crucial, but in Inno's case, it is yet to be addressed.

 

[Yekk]

This is what happens now on one of our RL worlds in a 1000LP league

Turqoise and yellow don't like each other so they fight.
Because they fight it gives opportunity to other guilds to jump in and conquer sectors.

If they liked each other the map would be half with flags and blocking every other guild.
This is a proof that swapping is for the only purpose of farming.

Wrong again... it just shows warring in GBG does not work unless it is 2 on 1. Early many guilds warred but almost all got tired of warring. Now, on that map if you actually worked with one or the other you would help win that war. Let me guess... You aren't helping

 

[jovada]

Wrong again... it just shows warring in GBG does not work unless it is 2 on 1. Early many guilds warred but almost all got tired of warring. Now, on that map if you actually worked with one or the other you would help win that war. Let me guess... You aren't helping

Wrong again..... what war , who wins i don't care , i only show the difference between swapping , i really don't know what is your point here or just trying to be contrarian.

 

[donjuan]

I like the new rebalance. Before the more powerful or richer guild would place numerous siege camps or watchtower, and then they would just run over the other guilds. The same people probably have Alcatraz that gives many armies. It now becomes a more strategic game instead of a roll them over.

 

[Yekk]

Because there's a stark difference between building a friends list and helping them while gaining FP AND playing GbG while totally blocking others through zero attrition abuse.

One enriches by helping others, the other enriches by blocking others.

You still haven't understood that the nerf has been adopted (it will come live soon) and that it is counterproductive to attack each other instead of sharing experience and possibly offering complementary solutions.

I have seen nothing that says it will go to live. In fact the no's % on the current poll are very close to what was seen in the first poll. Inno would not be smart to take this to live as is. The drama is causes hurts the game.

 

[CrashBoom]

So, anything related to GbG, a change or something, a third round of testing because the other 2 were useless, or we will again know things 5 minutes before the next GbG round?

Pathetic InnoGames, Pathetic.

1 hour after the start

 

[zookeepers]

I will make a very weak suggestion.

1) Making the calculation with multiple buildings mutiplicatively rather than additively is fine. I was actually surprised to see it this way when GBG was first introduced. But rather than doing it only to SC, apply it to every buildings.

The Fortress should be the exception because 1.3*1.3*1.3=2.19 and this might cause owner change while province is locked. Triple fortress should give 319 hitpoints rather than 351. Otherwise, value for fortress itself can be nerfed to 25.9%.

2) Adding a cap of 66%(4 SCs) is nonsense. You should withdraw that. If you think a cap is really necessary, then make it 80%(6 SCs) or 75%(5 SCs) at least.

 

[-Alin-]

1 hour after the start

Next year

 

[conqueror9]

I like the new rebalance. Before the more powerful or richer guild would place numerous siege camps or watchtower, and then they would just run over the other guilds. The same people probably have Alcatraz that gives many armies. It now becomes a more strategic game instead of a roll them over.

There is no difference, seigh camps and watchtower are still build when needed. In fact, less build becos it is not required.
inactive guild is still corner becos of inactive..not becos of fully-co-operation guild
seigh camp and watchtower are always there, (my guild do not delete them unless we find that guild delete them b4 we capture back ). You are think positive, if u can capture that sector with those sc and wt, you can use them to advance...that is the main reason why we do not delete them, we want you to take more sectors while u move, but u choose sit, pretend inactive but complaint,...what we are afraid, u just sit there and perform inactive

with sufficient guild-co-operation, u can always able to run over "what u call <powerful ??> or <richer ??> guild " and go to central. GBG is not a single player game, it is a group of guild member who do the same action ( guild co-operation ).

this is a war game, any GB that help battle, like castle del monle, zeus, aachen...Alcatraz...etc, should be raised. You should not blame other player who has higher level of those GB... those player who has higher level of those GB becos they play for many years while u player less years. Those GB take time to build...

As u point out alcatraz, u should consider to raise your alcatraz to match the needs of soldiers ...u should not blame any feature that other player who is very well-equip compare with ..rather than blame other player who has a much higher level of alcatraz comparing with you...becos u are at the "equal" with them

As I have pointed out many times, it is INNO fault, Inno has place a cat (less active in guild co-operation) among lions (high guild-co-operation ), how can a cat win a lion, the cat is helpless and defendless...

If inno does re-group guilds according their total ( battle + negotiation), lion play with lion, cat will play with cat, cat also get training up to become lion.

 

[CrashBoom]

this is a war game

nope

it is a farming game
you farm rewards with fighting

in a war game you would get harmed if someone is attacking you

Generally, activities where the participants actually perform mock combat actions are not considered wargames.

Mock combat involves the execution of combative actions without intent to harm.

Grepolis is a war game:
first you get attacked to lose your defending units
and then someone attacks your city and you lose your city

can we make FoE a real war game please?
I want to conquer your city and then you have to start from zero again

 

[Owl II]

They announced at the beginning of the second season that the voting would last until July 28. That is, it was assumed that the third season in beta would be opened in the same way as the first and second, regardless of whether they put it on live servers or not

 

[kawada]

So, anything related to GbG, a change or something, a third round of testing because the other 2 were useless, or we will again know things 5 minutes before the next GbG round?

Pathetic InnoGames, Pathetic.

@Juber is on vacation or something, and other staff dgaf about GBG and the changes. Even moderators don’t show up to wig their finger at us here

totally failed communication and oversight
meanwhile, one more seas of GbG frustration. I don’t have any motivation to participate, tbh. And that’s not because I am a greedy farmer and want my 19678 battles a day back (how some of you might think), it’s more about poor management from Inno and disappointment

 

[-Alin-]

@Juber is on vacation or something, and other staff dgaf about GBG and the changes. Even moderators don’t show up to wig their finger at us here

totally failed communication and oversight
meanwhile, one more seas of GbG frustration. I don’t have any motivation to participate, tbh. And that’s not because I am a greedy farmer and want my 19678 battles a day back (how some of you might think), it’s more about poor management from Inno and disappointment

I have seen already ...

We are with the same enemies from the first round after the nerf ...
Even worse than that round, but madcheninternat are active to pass sectors between each other.

 

[lady hilde]

don't you join in?
it doesn't say anywhere that it's required

@Juber is on vacation or something, and other staff dgaf about GBG and the changes. Even moderators don’t show up to wig their finger at us here

totally failed communication and oversight
meanwhile, one more seas of GbG frustration. I don’t have any motivation to participate, tbh. And that’s not because I am a greedy farmer and want my 19678 battles a day back (how some of you might think), it’s more about poor management from Inno and disappointment