Feedback Guild Battlegrounds

[DeletedUser9523]

correct assumption with the bold part
no 2nd platinum league, so why once again only 5 members in platinum?

The matchmaking system tries to build a reasonable platinum battleground and only found two guilds. Therefore, it took as many (high) gold players as necessary to be able to have a battleground running in platinum.
Battlegrounds can contain 5 to 8 participants.

@devs: what timeframe do you expect to fill all leagues completly?
half a year? one year? longer?

In the simulations that we ran it would take about four months (8 seasons) to have a fair distribution, BUT this simulation started with all guilds being in copper with 0 MMR.
Due to the initial allocation that we did here on beta, the actual required time will be lower.
Again, this an insight that we gained here on beta that we probably have to make the initial MMR-allocation more generous so that the natural sorting of guilds goes even faster on live worlds!

should'nt the BG log show who faught and who placed a flag ?

Showing every individual action would bloat the event log fairly quickly and would make it hard to look up top-level information.
There are some ideas though to give guild leaders (and officers) more control / direction over what their guild would do.

 

[Tom the Hawk]

I would like to see the sector number and title when the cursor is hovered rather than having to click on every sector to find the one you're looking for.

 

[Nessie]

thanks for the detailed information @Envoy however not only me would appreciate it if you could answer my question on page 30 or somewhat and my post today 12.04PM and other posts regarding this issue: what about a 4th try for negotiation, can we expect this?????

 

[shad2389]

Showing every individual action would bloat the event log fairly quickly

well your answer does'nt realy answer my question ,
what is that log suposed to show
GBG buildings ?
in GVG event log shows last few actions done and stay there for a fixed amount of time why not use same thing in this new log ?
realy would like more info shown on the log
it seems to me those things would be needed to be shown to see who does what at least from leader point of vue my event log in GB is presently fully empty but my guild has done some action in GB

 

[Natalia1]

Showing every individual action would bloat the event log fairly quickly and would make it hard to look up top-level information.
There are some ideas though to give guild leaders (and officers) more control / direction over what their guild would do.

Makes sense about the log for everyone, but could leaders please have some control over who places the flags?

 

[Natalia1]

Quick question-does anyone have a problem accessing the BG on Android phone?

 

[aragon82]

The matchmaking system tries to build a reasonable platinum battleground and only found two guilds. Therefore, it took as many (high) gold players as necessary to be able to have a battleground running in platinum.
Battlegrounds can contain 5 to 8 participants.

Meanwhile I pretty much understood the system you use, because of the detailed infos you offered.
You called our "case" a special one... and now we still continue

once again highest rated battle-ground(pulled up of course), once again facing the #1
once again only 5 members -> fewer MMR offered(even with a good performance)
good performance = 2nd spot, no chance to challenge the 1st spot....the third time in a row now.
you know exactly the same will happen to us again when diamond league is available? ...if nothing serious changes...

...so think about how motivating it is for everyone(not only us) behind the #1
fighting guilds of equal strength is maybe good overall, but it becomes a chore for the "upper end"
top5 overall feels a bit like a punishment, or moving in a circle, not a reward for the effort done so far...

 

[LastWarrior]

On Main are you going to start all guilds in copper or spread as you did on Beta?

 

[LastWarrior]

The placings for the individual encounters should be done on individual encounters not on negotiations.
I am a fighter and have done more than the ones above who are negotiators, this to me at least is incorrect for this part of the game.

Also we need a minimum position rank of siege setter controlled by leaders as we have found random players setting sieges is not on.

 

[Natalia1]

Also we need a minimum position rank of siege setter controlled by leaders as we have found random players setting sieges is not on.

Exactly, either make that tied to trusted status, leader status, or battleground constructor, not just random person

 

[beelzebob666]

Also we need a minimum position rank of siege setter controlled by leaders as we have found random players setting sieges is not on.

That would interfere with the intention that anyone in a guild can chose to participate in GBG even if the guild lead has no interest in it...

 

[Lionhead]

Trusted rights = can begin province attacking (setting flag / siege)
Constructor rights = can use Treasury goods to build province buildings.

That would make sense in my opinion. Then a guild lead, which themselves won´t participate, can have their members do GBG at will without jeopardising goods.

 

[DeletedUser10047]

Trusted rights = can begin province attacking (setting flag / siege)
Constructor rights = can use Treasury goods to build province buildings.

That would make sense in my opinion. Then a guild lead, which themselves won´t participate, can have their members do GBG at will without jeopardising goods.

Well, no, because if it requires rights to begin attacking a province, then there can be no participation until a trusted person kicks something off. Which again goes against the concept of anyone being able to participate if they choose to do so. Particularly since it does not cost any guild goods to attack a neighboring province.

 

[beelzebob666]

Just tell your members to only attack existing flags or provinces announced in the respective guild chat for GBG... everything else is unnecessary and would be overkill.

 

[aragon82]

Just tell your members to only attack existing flags or provinces announced in the respective guild chat for GBG... everything else is unnecessary and would be overkill.

We do this and it is not possible to get 70+ people in line for 24h/11days
a single flag somewhere on a low-priority sector is draining a lot of attempts every day, you dont know who started, you cant prevent it next time

 

[The Lady Ann]

I am in a guild where maybe 1/4 of us dabble to varying degrees and I don't want to log on when no one else who plays GB is on line and I can't start to play, that for me would be the fastest way to kill the thing stone dead

 

[Lionhead]

Well, no, because if it requires rights to begin attacking a province, then there can be no participation until a trusted person kicks something off. Which again goes against the concept of anyone being able to participate if they choose to do so. Particularly since it does not cost any guild goods to attack a neighboring province.

I haven´t seen any mention of a concept. But it wouldn´t be any different from GvG. If you don´t have trusted rights, you need someone with that right to kick things off too. Isn´t GvG concept-wise meant to be for everyone too?
Sure, there´s the goods-issue attached to GvG, but still.
If you´re worried about GBG comming to a rest, because there´s no one to plant a flag, just provide enough with trusted rights.
But as @aragon82 mentioned, let us in guilds with many members decide, who can do so, so we better can channel our combined effort where it will provide the best output.

I am in a guild where maybe 1/4 of us dabble to varying degrees and I don't want to log on when no one else who plays GB is on line and I can't start to play, that for me would be the fastest way to kill the thing stone dead

Then ask for the needed rights to begin on your own. Problem solved.

 

[The Lady Ann]

it's not supposed to be GvG version 2,

you are supposed to be able to play independently the way you can in GE

and laying a flag cost the guild nothing, educate your players how to play have an active thread talking about what sectors to attack and why they are the ones to attack

 

[LastWarrior]

no way can we have infiltraitors joining and setting things, we always have a leader on so set a control now to avoid this please.

 

[Lionhead]

it's not supposed to be GvG version 2,

you are supposed to be able to play independently the way you can in GE

and laying a flag cost the guild nothing, educate your players how to play have an active thread talking about what sectors to attack and why they are the ones to attack

It is also not supposed to be GE version 2. And in fact you need someone to unlock GE lvls 2, 3 and 4, so this also isn´t entirely independently played.