Discussion Guild Battlegrounds Watchtower and Siege Camp Ability Re-balance

[Pericles the Lion]

I think the 8 strongest guilds in a world should have to face each other every week without fail and then all other matchups should be reasonably fair. I do kinda like when they put 2 really strong guilds and 6 weak guilds as it makes the farming process easier for us.

You think that the top 8 guilds (however defined) should square off each week, but you like it that they don't do it this way. Sounds like you approve of the current match up process.

 

[DEADP00L]

If there are 8 guilds of approximately equal strength, won't the map end up looking like an 8-slice pizza with less opportunity for swaps?

One must know what one wants !
Either 2 or 3 dominant guilds farming while the other 5 or 6 watch, or 8 guilds going head to head in a real fight for the love of competition.

 

[Beta King]

You think that the top 8 guilds (however defined) should square off each week, but you like it that they don't do it this way. Sounds like you approve of the current match up process.

I do like the current matchmaking now for us to farm but if i was in a weak guild i would like it the other way is i guess what i meant to say.

 

[DEADP00L]

But in any case, there can be no real competitions as long as Innogames gathers more guilds in a league than in lower ones.
The very principle of championship includes that with each higher league there are fewer and fewer guilds.
However, the simplest system to set up and the most logical is to double each time you drop down the league (as has already been suggested many times without ever getting an answer from Innogames): X guilds in the Diamond league, 2 X in Platinum league, 4 X in Gold league, 8 X in Silver league and everything else in Bronze league.

 

[Beta King]

But in any case, there can be no real competitions as long as Innogames gathers more guilds in a league than in lower ones.
The very principle of championship includes that with each higher league there are fewer and fewer guilds.
However, the simplest system to set up and the most logical is to double each time you drop down the league (as has already been suggested many times without ever getting an answer from Innogames): X guilds in the Diamond league, 2 X in Platinum league, 4 X in Gold league, 8 X in Silver league and everything else in Bronze league.

Yes this way it will cut back the rewards most guilds get and they would not even have to do the nerf since most guilds will then fall in plat or even gold that have been camping in diamonds for years. They would get 25%-50% less FPs and diamonds most seasons but still get all the ranking points as before.

 

[Kev-]

I do like the current matchmaking now for us to farm but if i was in a weak guild i would like it the other way is i guess what i meant to say.

We're one of our Worlds high level Guilds and we want a real fight every round there is no satisfaction going around in endless circles swapping sectors, so please 8 strong Guilds every time.
Inno's stealth Nerf on our live server with only a single 3SC sector on the entire map we've currently experiencing is making no difference other than limiting fights more so for the junior players and Small Guilds who are still stuck at or about home base as was predicted. The answer is simple and been repeated many many times sort the match up.

 

[DEADP00L]

it would be interesting to have the opinion of the active community of the beta forum on the grouping mode of the guilds within the diamond league (for the other leagues, the LP is enough):
- by number of meetings (fights + negotiations) made over a season
- by number of meetings (fights + negotiations) made on an average of the last 3 seasons
- by number of victory points won over a season
- by number of victory points earned on an average of the last 3 seasons
- by number of cups won in the Diamond league
- by number of members (I don't like it but it has often been asked)
- by general ranking of guilds
- by randomness according to Inno (as currently).

 

[MJ Artisan of War]

- by number of meetings (fights + negotiations) made on an average of the last 3 seasons
- by number of victory points earned on an average of the last 3 seasons

These two criteria... Mainly the first one, the second one in case of a tie.
Everything else remains as is. Unless they are willing to change end of season ranking points so that the bottom half of each grouping get either no points or negative points... Then You will see battlefields...

 

[Pericles the Lion]

I think another option should be considered:

By the number of meetings (fights + negotiations) made on an average of the last 3 seasons divided by the average number of members during the last 3 seasons.

 

[DEADP00L]

divided by the average number of members during the last 3 seasons.

it is not the number of members that makes the power of a guild but its number of active members in GbG.
With your idea, a lot of guilds will fire members who don't do GBG but are active elsewhere.

 

[Pericles the Lion]

it is not the number of members that makes the power of a guild but its number of active members in GbG.
With your idea, a lot of guilds will fire members who don't do GBG but are active elsewhere.

That, or they will actually work together to help strengthen their weaker members (which, by the way, many guilds falsely claim to be doing). I've lost count of the number of guilds that have fewer than 10 members doing nearly all of the fighting while the vast majority get few battles. Riddle me this...why would a top 10 guild set a minimum standard of 100-200 encounters per season? Lots do and I suspect that it is because they want to attract players that really don't want to do a lot of GBG but will provide a bunch of treasury goods. By matching guilds using the 3-season average number of encounters per member, guilds will need to behave as a real team and share the battles more equitably. Which is the stronger guild, one 60 members each doing 1500 encounters or one with 60 members with 10 of them doing 9000? Your way, they are equals, but I think the former is much stronger.

 

[Yekk]

That, or they will actually work together to help strengthen their weaker members (which, by the way, many guilds falsely claim to be doing). I've lost count of the number of guilds that have fewer than 10 members doing nearly all of the fighting while the vast majority get few battles. Riddle me this...why would a top 10 guild set a minimum standard of 100-200 encounters per season? Lots do and I suspect that it is because they want to attract players that really don't want to do a lot of GBG but will provide a bunch of treasury goods. By matching guilds using the 3-season average number of encounters per member, guilds will need to behave as a real team and share the battles more equitably. Which is the stronger guild, one 60 members each doing 1500 encounters or one with 60 members with 10 of them doing 9000? Your way, they are equals, but I think the former is much stronger.

You do realize under the rules you gave they are equal. Both doing 90K fights and having 60 members. BUT the one with less fighters will get the nod as it will dump players that do not fight. Guild one averages 1500 fights. Guild two which kicks 10 players will average 1800 per player. Averages will favor the greedy guild. By the way congrats on reaching level 160 with your Arc.

 

[Pericles the Lion]

You do realize under the rules you gave they are equal. Both doing 90K fights and having 60 members. BUT the one with less fighters will get the nod as it will dump players that do not fight. Guild one averages 1500 fights. Guild two which kicks 10 players will average 1800 per player. Averages will favor the greedy guild. By the way congrats on reaching level 160 with your Arc.

You are correct of course. In the manner I posed the question both quilds are equal in the limited sense of GBG. However, I think most would agree that the more balanced guild is stronger overall. If changes to the matchmaking metrics were to be implemented wouldn't a broader definition of "strength" be in the best interest of the game?

Thanks for the congrats on my Arc. The crazy thing about Arc levelling is that L160 is actually only halfway to 180. I have a long way to go still.

 

[Beta King]

At least in preparation of the nerf they have stopped putting all the atk/def on the event buildings and started adding troop production to help with the higher attrition that will be required. That is pretty convincing to me that we will be seeing this before Christmas on live servers.

 

[Pericles the Lion]

At least in preparation of the nerf they have stopped putting all the atk/def on the event buildings and started adding troop production to help with the higher attrition that will be required. That is pretty convincing to me that we will be seeing this before Christmas on live servers.

Not so. There have been event buildings in the past that did not offer A/D for the attacking army (e.g. Suishun Mill, Hanami Bridge) and there have been special buildings introduced (e.g, Timeless Dojo, Governor's Villa) that provide units. Nothing new going on here.

 

[Beta King]

Not so. There have been event buildings in the past that did not offer A/D for the attacking army (e.g. Suishun Mill, Hanami Bridge) and there have been special buildings introduced (e.g, Timeless Dojo, Governor's Villa) that provide units. Nothing new going on here.

Timeless Dojo is not an event build so doesn't really count, the only event building ever put out before this nerf to provide troops was the Gov Villa now since this nerf has been announced they have released the knights pavillion and now coming is the Sunflower press building. Coincidence, i think not. After the nerf the sunflower press would be the ideal event building IMO.

 

[Juber]

The boosts provided by buildings have nothing to do with this change.

 

[Emberguard]

Timeless Dojo is not an event build so doesn't really count, the only event building ever put out before this nerf to provide troops was the Gov Villa now since this nerf has been announced they have released the knights pavillion and now coming is the Sunflower press building. Coincidence, i think not. After the nerf the sunflower press would be the ideal event building IMO.

They had units on pirates hideout initially too (the reef pieces)….. it’s not something that suddenly came about

 

[Yekk]

The boosts provided by buildings have nothing to do with this change.

They are not affected by the nerf. But as MrBrister states the nerf affects their value. As such talk on them is of value here. Pease remember you changed this from a feedback thread to a discussion thread.

 

[Juber]

They are not affected by the nerf. But as MrBrister states the nerf affects their value. As such talk on them is of value here. Pease remember you changed this from a feedback thread to a discussion thread.

My post was only a response to the theory, that the boosts of recent buildings were done, because of this change.
Maybe I overread it, but I don't see where they wrote, that this change affected the value of boosts.