Feedback Guild Battlegrounds

[DeletedUser6764]

Hi
I think that few people play in GVG because one of the biggest problems is that almost all guilds are formed by one or two fighters.
But guilds with 1 or 2 fighters have no chance of being able to play in the GVG maps for which many are abandoning.
For example in the world IT4, only one guild was able to take the whole map.
So how could other guilds play?
Also in my opinion the game map is too small and should be 5 times bigger to allow everyone to be able to play.

It is incredible as inno treats us as a livestock of idiots!
they compare you 5% of participation in GvGs against a 50% participation in map of expedition of guilds

it is a misleading argument, because beyond the GvGs tenic problems, the abysmal difference of this participation is because GvG is restricted to mobile applications.



I ask myself a question, what was the level of participation when FOE was not yet enabled for mobile applications?

 

[conqueror9]

The current concept stands like this:
Guilds will gain prestige points according to the league they are in. So if they drop in league, they also lose some of their prestige, but can regain that prestige by climbing up the league ladder again.
The amount you gain from being in the highest league should be similar to what guilds earn in the existing GvG while being among the best.

What we are additionally thinking of is that whenever you finish a battleground, your guild will gain a few permanent prestige points (that can never be lost), and the amount -again- depends on the league you were playing in.
However, only the three highest leagues would provide these permanent points, and it would only be a very few points each battleground.

Prestige should never lost due to drop in league, it is guild personal effort, Inno can adjust amount between different ranking and limiting to those guild who play guild-battleground. For those guild who is selected and group into the same league and do not play "guild battlegrounds", just get 0 score only

For each guild battleground, it is just a a "say prestige cake" given by Inno. For each guild who play that league, they should divide cake by their effort instead of ranking in that league.
Say "prestige cake is 1000", Guild A score 10, Guild B score 9, Guild C score 2, guild D,E, F score 0 ( not playing )
prestige cake get by Guild A is 1000 * 10 /(10+9+2), by Guild B is 1000 * 9 /(10+9+2)..... etc

For the guild competition, may be offer another channel for same group to express their guild strength
in that channel:
Guild A offer 100 prestige defeated by 1, 500 prestige defeated by 2, 1000 prestige defeated by 3, 1500 prestige defested by more than 3
Guild B offer 50 prestige defeated by 1, 1000 prestige defeated by 2, 2000 prestige defeated by 3, 4500 prestige defested by more than 3

each guild who accpet the each offer in this channel need to place 500 prestige from his own guild
suppose Guild A accept Guild B offer and Guild B accept Guild A offer
so the channel has 2 X 500 prestige = 1000 prestige
if Guild A score 10, Guild B score 9
so Guild B being defeated by 1 by Guild A, lost 50 prestige which is taken by Guild A from Guild B's Guild prestige
and the channel 1000 prestige is divided by as b4, Guild A get 1000*10/(10+9), Guild B get 1000*9/(10+9)
this channel will test guild's intelligence "to go offer or not ", "how to set the offer", "guild-internal- operation", "inter-guild competition"

 

[DeletedUser6764]

Here goes my suggestions, of small changes that do not need much touch in the programming:

1- eliminate the function "delete sector" or "free sector"or "grant freedom" in the map of all the eras in GvGs. with this we avoid the points earned by battles, medals and abound in FOE, it would be a dilemma for the guilds but I would open this map for greater dynamism.

2 - modify the ranking of guilds in their power / prestige mode as they tried to do once, that is, add GvGs, E.G., G. Battlegrounds and the Halls of Fame. What sense does it have to ask for sacrifices of participation within a guild, if not the results? also add that it is necessary to equalize all forms of union participation according to costs for power / prestige.

3 - enhance the awards of the guild levels, only in one item, Forge point, that is, add a fp per level achieved from level 60 or 70, this would require adding more guild levels to acquire. I say it because the table is fixed in the prizes but it is not fixed in surpassing the levels. and it is necessary for a union to have long-term goals to achieve them and solve them in sight.
The reason of the boredom of the player is because they run out of goals, so they ask for new eras to perform, among other things, short objectives such as E.G. or settlements are good things (but heavy for many short-term goals) but short deadlines must be pushed to achieve long-term goals. this is balances the atomized game that inno proposes against the game of group nature. E.G. It gave a dynamic to the game that: made the guilds of 80 members split to atomize to no more than 30 or 40 participants, we must get back to the guilds with more members and this is achieved with long-term objectives

4 - game in the Argentine server, in that particular server, if it is possible to delay 2 hours the balance schedule, since this server hosts players from countries in the region such as Colombia, Chile, Peru, etc, and have time difference, uncomfortable to participate in that vital schedule for GvGs.

5- I'll keep thinking

 

[Dan 77]

conqueror9: In GvG, when you lose a hexagon sector(s), you also fall in ranking.

 

[Miepie]

Prestige should never lost due to drop in league, it is guild personal effort, Inno can adjust amount between different ranking and limiting to those guild who play guild-battleground. For those guild who is selected and group into the same league and do not play "guild battlegrounds", just get 0 score only

Prestige is not Guildpower. Prestige in GvG is lost whenever you lose a sector, as it should be. Same should go for GBG. No active play, no prestige. No endlessly riding on past accomplishments in the ranking

For each guild battleground, it is just a a "say prestige cake" given by Inno. For each guild who play that league, they should divide cake by their effort instead of ranking in that league.

Like sportsday at kindergarden? Everybody gets a medal for playing? That's not competion, that's treating players like children

 

[DeletedUser10112]

1- eliminate the function "delete sector" or "free sector"or "grant freedom" in the map of all the eras in GvGs. with this we avoid the points earned by battles, medals and abound in FOE, it would be a dilemma for the guilds but I would open this map for greater dynamism.

i tottaly agree with this. grant freedom limits where given to prevent an abuse. right now there is an abussive number of guild giving to multiple sectors e conquering right after. specially in all ages map.
not to mention the misleading classification reached by fighting agains champions. please stop this nonsense.

conqueror9: In GvG, when you lost a hexagon sector(s), you also fall in ranking.

spot on. you fight you should get the points. the new gvg seems to avoid some of the strategie of old gvg. sectors protection and granting freedom is the only obstaclle to a clean gvg.

Prestige is not Guildpower. Prestige in GvG is lost whenever you lose a sector, as it should be. Same should go for GBG. No active play, no prestige. No endlessly riding on past accomplishments in the ranking

tottaly accurate. like i said before. if a guild manages to be active and fight on both specters of the guilds battles should earn the number one spot.
thats why inno should rethink the ''grant freedom'' system. the grant freedom system was designed to relase sectors and save guild resources. but it has been used to make dummy points in players ranking and to protect eternally sectors on all ages map. as you know medalls are endless. they don't use that in other ages. were real mercs are required.
want an exemple?
take a look at this:

http://prntscr.com/nuj2f7
every day what they only do is grant freedom and reconquerer..
i praise their effort butt it is only possible because of the system

#removegrantfreedom eheheh

 

[Dan 77]

Yeah, it costs only medals, which can be gained simply (due to the Arc).

http://prntscr.com/nuj2f7
every day what they only do is grant freedom and reconquerer..

Why they gave their champions to the beach? I know they also shield their beach before attacking, but they also tempt to attack these unhidden sectors earlier...

 

[DeletedUser6764]

Here goes my suggestions, of small changes that do not need much touch in the programming:

1- eliminate the function "delete sector" or "free sector"or "grant freedom" in the map of all the eras in GvGs. with this we avoid the points earned by battles, medals and abound in FOE, it would be a dilemma for the guilds but I would open this map for greater dynamism.

2 - modify the ranking of guilds in their power / prestige mode as they tried to do once, that is, add GvGs, E.G., G. Battlegrounds and the Halls of Fame. What sense does it have to ask for sacrifices of participation within a guild, if not the results? also add that it is necessary to equalize all forms of union participation according to costs for power / prestige.

3 - enhance the awards of the guild levels, only in one item, Forge point, that is, add a fp per level achieved from level 60 or 70, this would require adding more guild levels to acquire. I say it because the table is fixed in the prizes but it is not fixed in surpassing the levels. and it is necessary for a union to have long-term goals to achieve them and solve them in sight.
The reason of the boredom of the player is because they run out of goals, so they ask for new eras to perform, among other things, short objectives such as E.G. or settlements are good things (but heavy for many short-term goals) but short deadlines must be pushed to achieve long-term goals. this is balances the atomized game that inno proposes against the game of group nature. E.G. It gave a dynamic to the game that: made the guilds of 80 members split to atomize to no more than 30 or 40 participants, we must get back to the guilds with more members and this is achieved with long-term objectives

4 - game in the Argentine server, in that particular server, if it is possible to delay 2 hours the balance schedule, since this server hosts players from countries in the region such as Colombia, Chile, Peru, etc, and have time difference, uncomfortable to participate in that vital schedule for GvGs.

5- I'll keep thinking

6 *
In Gvgs: in full battle, eliminating the window of classification of points for the tower of PvPs, is a nuisance and unnecessary sampling modality.
who participates in gvgs is not worried about how he goes in his tower (unless he is a sadist), he is more concerned about conquering the besieged sector as quickly as possible.

7/5- I'll keep thinking

 

[DeletedUser4951]

Another big problem is that a strong guild can hold prisoner a smaller guild forever, because at 20.00 he puts it in a corner and shuts it all around and the little guild can't do anything

 

[Miepie]

Another big problem is that a strong guild can hold prisoner a smaller guild forever, because at 20.00 he puts it in a corner and shuts it all around and the little guild can't do anything

Only if that small guild is foolish enough to get closed in. That's the kind of mistake you should make only once.

 

[xivarmy]

Another big problem is that a strong guild can hold prisoner a smaller guild forever, because at 20.00 he puts it in a corner and shuts it all around and the little guild can't do anything

Only if they reshield it every day at a significant good cost (or don't care about land themself and aren't holding much more than needed to keep you hostage)... If they don't reshield it the little guild can hit them in the middle of the night/early morning/whatever - they won't be watching 24 hours a day.

Said little guild can also harass them on other maps even if they've been shut down on one. There's no way they have the time to hold you prisoner on every map so you'll be able to pick one to race them to the reshield.

BTW if a big guild cares that much about you, you've won little guild GvG! Congratulations!

 

[DeletedUser7951]

I ask myself a question, what was the level of participation when FOE was not yet enabled for mobile applications?

6% ?
I honestly don't get the GvG hype. It is boring. It's auto battle as fast as you can at 20:00. Where's the excitement ? Oh yes, ofc there's some stratigy and allies making stuff I'm sure adds some fun for some people, but I doubt GvG was ever the big hit Inno thought it would be. And I'm pretty sure app-players makes up more than 50% of the player base. That would be an interesting number. I was a bit shocked to see only 50% of all players do GE. I assume that means every players doing one confrontation, but is it 50% of the player base or 50 of all active players ?

I'm unsure how this would be, I would need to try it.
As I prefer smaller guilds, this does seem to punish us. Or does Inno plan to take that into consideration as they do on GE?

 

[shad2389]

Where's the excitement ?

lol my excitement in GVG is when i get caught hiting on a sector

 

[Dan 77]

6% ?
...
And I'm pretty sure app-players makes up more than 50% of the player base. That would be an interesting number.
I was a bit shocked to see only 50% of all players do GE. I assume that means every players doing one confrontation, but is it 50% of the player base or 50 of all active players ?
...
As I prefer smaller guilds, this does seem to punish us. Or does Inno plan to take that into consideration as they do on GE?

I think much more. But I like GvG a bit.
That's true.
In the notification isn't indicated from which base the percents are.
As game designer The Envoy wrote here, the bigger guild, the more battles to win for them.

 

[DeletedUser7951]

lol my excitement in GVG is when i get caught hiting on a sector

and the frantic clicking (and misclicking to open the sector gaahhh) to hit auto the fastes and the most.

Oh well, I think those 5 % may still stick to GvG, if that is where the most prestige is to be had.

 

[DeletedUser10112]

6% ?
I'm unsure how this would be, I would need to try it.
As I prefer smaller guilds, this does seem to punish us. Or does Inno plan to take that into consideration as they do on GE?

smaller guild in numbers or in prestige ? i think this new gvg will balance things. the majoritie of players on mobile will be able to join efforts anda make big guilds to fight for the rankings.

lol my excitement in GVG is when i get caught hiting on a sector

oh man. true that.

and the frantic clicking (and misclicking to open the sector gaahhh) to hit auto the fastes and the most.

Oh well, I think those 5 % may still stick to GvG, if that is where the most prestige is to be had.

that's s why the prestige of the battles guilds for mobile should give an equal ammount of prestige. embrace the shadowed members of all the guilds, that don't play on pc. with tihs everyone cant be involved and help reaching the high rankings.
''sorry i only play on mobile. i can´t even donate troops to defend.'' those days are over, imagine th boost the game will have by adding more 45 % of players into the fight for prestige.
every week i see many guilds battle so hard for the number one spot. i see plenty doing 120% plus. but only 3 or 4 guilds do regular gvg in each world.
let's go inno. the new feature should be here already.

 

[Bellasaurus]

If you are going to keep GvG, please consider:
1. limiting the length of shield times
2. eliminating auto battle
3. make ALL sectors available as landing zones.

 

[Bellasaurus]

i tottaly agree with this. grant freedom limits where given to prevent an abuse. right now there is an abussive number of guild giving to multiple sectors e conquering right after. specially in all ages map.
not to mention the misleading classification reached by fighting agains champions. please stop this nonsense.


spot on. you fight you should get the points. the new gvg seems to avoid some of the strategie of old gvg. sectors protection and granting freedom is the only obstaclle to a clean gvg.



tottaly accurate. like i said before. if a guild manages to be active and fight on both specters of the guilds battles should earn the number one spot.
thats why inno should rethink the ''grant freedom'' system. the grant freedom system was designed to relase sectors and save guild resources. but it has been used to make dummy points in players ranking and to protect eternally sectors on all ages map. as you know medalls are endless. they don't use that in other ages. were real mercs are required.
want an exemple?
take a look at this:

http://prntscr.com/nuj2f7
every day what they only do is grant freedom and reconquerer..
i praise their effort butt it is only possible because of the system

#removegrantfreedom eheheh

I would keep Grant Freedom, but only if you had to wait several days before your Guild could take it back (7 days like exists for leaving a Guild)

 

[Bellasaurus]

Both features should be relatively on par, however:
GvG will always have a higher potential, simply because you can just aim to dominate more of the different era's maps to get even more prestige.
The potential of Guild Battlegrounds in terms of prestige will be rather hard-capped.

Please move forward with the GBG concept. You all must be excited by the energy developing something brings to your group, BUT don't forget to at least "tweak" GvG as it exists.

 

[Bellasaurus]

Oh, another thing to consider about the daily reset is this:
In GvG, the daily reset is such an important time because the results of one moment decide about the whole outcome.

In Battlegrounds, we measure the total performance over a course of 10 days, and victory points are awarded each hour.
This degree of granularity should make a single point in time less important.

But again, if we see issues arise with this (or too strong concerns from you guys), we can totally think about this aspect further. The only reason that kinda kept me from adding something about it to the concept as of yet, is that it would add complexity. And if we can avoid adding unnecessary complexity, that would be great.

Yes, RESET/RECAL time is extremely important, it drives when players spread across the Globe can play since it's important to complete actions before and start actions immediately after. While you are developing the GBG concept, please try to look at tweaking GvG so more (PC) players can participate.