ArklurBeta
Baronet
That's a horrible idea. If anything, that would just give another reason the farm/chessboard the map (where you already don't need to spend a single diamond).
-
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
That's a horrible idea. If anything, that would just give another reason the farm/chessboard the map (where you already don't need to spend a single diamond).
Because you still believe that Innogames wants our comments or new ideas?
They opted for the current nerve, they ask us to wait (test in court for 8 months) without any sharing of information, therefore no search for new ideas based on our experiences.
Everyone agrees that the developers are disconnected from our game and there is no reliable way to communicate with them.
Even juber is either muzzled or sidelined from game development.
Conclusion: what's the point of discussing it again, this thread is nothing more than a stress relief or a contest between personalities.
They opted for the current nerve, they ask us to wait (test in court for 8 months) without any sharing of information, therefore no search for new ideas based on our experiences.
Everyone agrees that the developers are disconnected from our game and there is no reliable way to communicate with them.
Even juber is either muzzled or sidelined from game development.
Conclusion: what's the point of discussing it again, this thread is nothing more than a stress relief or a contest between personalities.
joyfulrider
Squire
Until moderator close this thread, discussions will happen. It's inevitable!!
MJ Artisan of War
Baronet
Doesn't matter..... The INNOvators don't care.... jabber away into the silent void....
Beta King
Viceroy
Yes yes! The constant chatter is soothing...
The point of this thread is and was, that you can discuss things, without the need for us to forward anything. This has not changed. If you want your feedback to be forwarded, use the feedback thread. We continue to forward the feedback from there.
Yekk
Viceroy
That thread was to be made public...The point of this thread is you like fixing bugs more than answering to the players
What's the point ?
8 months of comments and the only response from inno is "we still need time" without keeping us informed or even announcing an approximate time before a possible change.
If you still had the courage or the honesty to tell us why the proposed suggestions are rejected.
But making comments as a monologue isn't very helpful or respectful on Inno's part.
It's easy to talk about balancing but not provide any answers as to the randomness of locations or the value of biased sectors or groupings.
We are all aware that the nerf is not suitable in the current state because it does not solve any problem that you seem to want to solve. This thread is not a collection of information but just an outlet to give you a clear conscience. So what more comment do you need?
When you were a child, did you appreciate the answers "that's the way it is and don't try to understand"? Do you think it allows children to flourish? Personally, I remain convinced that by clearly explaining the reasons, a child can only develop better.
ArianX
Merchant
as it was said, this would only favor those doing a swap, you build stuff that'll be ready by next swap at no cost.
but if you're not in the swap and manage to get a tile, then you need to build and gem to move forward, so it would only punish the guilds that are not doing a chessboard swap.
if something is in need of balance is the access of all guilds to map, either by making new leagues so similar guilds are in one map, or manage attrition cap, but atm more times than often you see 2/3 really strong guilds in one map and the rest has no way to catch up, cos a 20 member guild is unlikely to beat an 80 member guild, simply cos of attrition.
Current GBG in one of my live server cities: 3 guilds (70 to 80 members), 2 guilds with 33 members, 1 with 22 and 1 with 4. Now seriously who do you think will get top ranking spots?
Abacus
Farmer
I've watched this thread since it started and have seen the repeated arguments for and against including all of the ridiculous statistics and overthinking, and considered both sides. I've continued with GBG in beta and have grown my city and attack ability over this long period it's been "testing". My conclusion (however useful or not to other players or devs) is that this nerf simply makes the entire game less fun/exciting, regardless of guild size or personal stats. Being able to fight in GBG for 0% attrition sectors is exhilarating and makes the competition more interesting, and is something to aim for as a smaller player, and a genuine competition when you're a stronger player. This nerf going live will kill off hundreds if not thousands of players as the whole idea of online gaming is based on dopamine rush, which this nerf essentially reduces the power of... it's just less exciting to partake in for all.
Grzechu Junior
Baronet
exactly !!!!
nice2haveu
Baronet
In many forums, GBG balancing was the most discussed topic which doesn't get any conclusion for years. Most people are coming and checking to see if there is any solution available or given. Also some people, just give their opinion towards their actual game play due to recent changes. Some may go beyond imagination or with brilliant analysis helps the community for solving the problem. Somehow, including me everyone falls into any of the category. But as a gaming community to solve one problem by keeping complete balance is very normal, but on the GBG scenario, it cannot be able to achieve any solution just like that. Many people may left the game due to gbg balancing issue (my pure guess), so attempting to solve that problem first priority. I definitely agree, removing 0% attrition in GBG should be consider like Foe building it's own graveyard. But, if it is an attempt to solve earlier (balance) problem, they tried for very long and decided to revisit again because as per my guess, to make next big attempt for solving those problems are not readily available to them, since current solution doesn't get good support from forum members itself, how can they go live with this.
mcbluefire
Baronet
...or using Elvenar systems to monetize FoE...
jwhester
Farmer
I think that it is very smart to design a "battleground" where cooperation/diplomacy yields better rewards than warfare. There are plenty of aspects of this game where competition pays off and not that many where teamwork pays off. I fear this change will undermine cooperation even more.
Markus Stormrider
Regent
any news on when this goes unchanged to live servers?
CrashBoom
Legend
after it is announced
Tech Question: Why don't Diamond League regroups happen before subtracting excess LP ?
Among the guilds at 1,000 LP, there are some who gain 175 points at the end of GbG, giving them a total of 1,175 which is then reduced to 1,000.
But since the groupings are supposed to be based on LP, why aren't they made on 1,175 BEFORE being reset to 1,000 LP ?
Wouldn't we finally have more balanced groupings?
Among the guilds at 1,000 LP, there are some who gain 175 points at the end of GbG, giving them a total of 1,175 which is then reduced to 1,000.
But since the groupings are supposed to be based on LP, why aren't they made on 1,175 BEFORE being reset to 1,000 LP ?
Wouldn't we finally have more balanced groupings?
Retired Guy
Marquis
Has anyone seen anything that suggests they've also "adjusted" the possibility of winning diamonds as a GBG reward?