Feedback Guild Battlegrounds

[Logain Sedai]

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.

I fully agree. Battlegrounds are still a "guild thing", so there should be a common tactic. And having designated players who can put a flag would allow to work together.

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

Agree with this too.

And if we can't get a log of all fighters, we should at least know who put a flag on a province.

 

[The Lady Ann]

as I said before if you want to kill it stone dead, go for it

 

[jovada]

I agree , giving rights for putting flags will kill GbG, only rights to buildings are necessary.
It is the job of the leaders to say first we fight there and then put flag there etc.... once your guildmembers get familiar with this i don't think they often put flags anywhere, at least not in our guild. If your guildmembers put flags everywhere then it is mostly because they don't have instructions.

 

[jovada]

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.

Wrong, it is also supposed in GE just like in GBG for buildings, because it needs goods from the treasury

 

[xivarmy]

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

It's only draining the attempts of people who aren't listening anyways. People who might well not even use attempts if they had to wait for your say so.

If this is coming from the PoV of a GvG guild, I get it, it's not the same - and a lot of GvG guilds relish the social aspect of having to all be on at one time. But this is also trying to appeal to the GE crowd which in general has a much higher participation rate and a big part of that is being able to fight on your own time, not wait for someone else to come and set a siege. There are still benefits to coordination and being on at the same time; but you can also do something if you can't be on at that time. That seems to be a nice balance.

 

[LordTachikawa]

PLEASE make it so that when in Battleground mode, hovering over a province with the mouse pointer will give it's name. It will make it SO much easier to coordinate guild actions and communicate.

 

[Blatantlybiased]

Please forgive me if this has already been addressed, but I don't have time to read all the way through 47 pages to check. Was there a change for this current GBG competition that makes it no longer necessary to remain connected to your provinces to keep them or continue a siege? We tried to cut off another guild from besieging one of our provinces by taking one of their provinces which would cut them off from the one they were besieging, along with a couple of others they already owned. After we took the province and cut them off, they still owned the others and their siege was still going. I know that in previous competitions, cutting a guild off from a province it was besieging would end the siege, and I was pretty sure it would also end their occupation of any provinces they already owned that were cut off from their home base. Is that a change, a bug, or am I just remembering wrong? Also, if it is a change, does this mean that the guild can besiege other provinces adjacent to their provinces that are cut off from their home base? Thanks for any informaion, and apologies if this has already been addressed.

 

[DeletedUser10047]

Please forgive me if this has already been addressed, but I don't have time to read all the way through 47 pages to check. Was there a change for this current GBG competition that makes it no longer necessary to remain connected to your provinces to keep them or continue a siege? We tried to cut off another guild from besieging one of our provinces by taking one of their provinces which would cut them off from the one they were besieging, along with a couple of others they already owned. After we took the province and cut them off, they still owned the others and their siege was still going. I know that in previous competitions, cutting a guild off from a province it was besieging would end the siege, and I was pretty sure it would also end their occupation of any provinces they already owned that were cut off from their home base. Is that a change, a bug, or am I just remembering wrong? Also, if it is a change, does this mean that the guild can besiege other provinces adjacent to their provinces that are cut off from their home base? Thanks for any informaion, and apologies if this has already been addressed.

Some of what you say seems to be mis-remembering. Provinces that a guild owns do not need to be connected to each other. If a guild is sieging a province and that province gets cut off (is no longer adjacent to any other province that the guild owns), then the siege will be terminated.

Perhaps you could supply additional information. What provinces did the besieging guild own? Which province were they sieging? Which province did you take away from them?

 

[Blatantlybiased]

Some of what you say seems to be mis-remembering. Provinces that a guild owns do not need to be connected to each other. If a guild is sieging a province and that province gets cut off (is no longer adjacent to any other province that the guild owns), then the siege will be terminated.

Perhaps you could supply additional information. What provinces did the besieging guild own? Which province were they sieging? Which province did you take away from them?

Tried to do a screen shot and post it here, but can't seem to find the paint file after creating it. Hoping all the maps are the same and the same provinces are in the same locations...

They owned A3 Vobilize, A2 Sladisk Icro and A3 Xemga.
They were besieging A1 Mati Tudokk, which we owned.
A3 Vobilize was the only province connecting their home base to any of these.
We owned D3 Zilgypt.
We besieged and conquered A3 Vobilize, cutting off A2 Sladisk Icro, A3 Xemga and A1 Mati Tudokk from their home base and their other provinces.
They still owned A2 Sladisk Icro and A3 Xemga and their siege on A1 Mati Tudokk was not broken.

Hope this explains how the map was set up. I wish I could figure out how post the screen shot, but this is the best I can do for now.

 

[Blatantlybiased]

So, after we took A3 Vobilize, they still owned A2 Sladisk Icro, which is adjacent to A1 Mati Tudokk, so I guess that must be why their siege was not broken, but both of those, along with A3 Xemga, were cut off from the rest of their holdings, which is why I thought their siege would be broken and they would lose A2 Sladisk Icro and A3 Xemga when we took A3 Vobilize. If, however, as you say, they don't have to keep their owned provinces connected, then that would explain why the siege didn't terminate. If had taken A2 Sladisk Icro, it would have broken their siege, I assume.

 

[xivarmy]

this is the part of the map blatantly is referring to (not his GBG though, so different situation in terms of who holds it):



The flagged territory is A3 Vobilize.
The territory he was coming from (D3 Zilgypt) is the one west of it.
A3 Xemga is east and A2 Sladisk Icro is South
A1 Mati Tudokk is south of A2 Sladisk.

In this situation with them already owning A2 sladisk, taking A3 vobilize should not have any impact. you would need to take A2 sladisk to break their siege on A1 mati tudokk. Owned provinces do not need to be connected to home. Sieges only care about the owned provinces they're connected to. Not a path to home.

 

[DeletedUser10047]

Very good. Since they owned A2 Sladisk, their siege on A1 Mati was still connected to a province they controlled. Provinces that get disconnected from the base are still owned and attacks can still be made on adjacent sectors.

 

[Blatantlybiased]

Thanks for helping with the screen shot, xivarmy, and thanks for the explanations guys. My confusion was that I didn't realize that you don't have to maintain a connection between all owned provinces. I've learned something new. Thanks guys!

 

[Ian Santa Claus]

The initial placement of guilds in various battlegrounds and the hidden amount of MMR is obviously causing upset to guilds who feel they have been harshly allocated.
The easy way to avoid this situation in live is for everybody to start with zero MMR and all in the same middle gold league.
After one round of GBG the guilds who participated enough can be directly split into the 5 different leagues for the 2nd round based purely on their own performance during round one.
This would seem to be the fairest way and the fastest to get the five leagues going.

 

[LastWarrior]

start everybody in bronze and lets all work our way up, its a new league so we start there.

 

[DeletedUser10349]

In my opinion it would be nice to design a new great building like the Temple of Relics to increase the amount of rewards when you battle or negotiate in BG.

 

[DeletedUser10002]

I would like to see a unique code (letter/number) for each sector
We were about invading one sector to discover there were two with the same number (C1)

 

[DeletedUser10047]

I would like to see a unique code (letter/number) for each sector
We were about invading one sector to discover there were two with the same number (C1)

The first letter of the name following the "C1" is unique, and in alphabetical order going clockwise.

 

[xivarmy]

the letter is a quadrant, the number is a ring (1 being central, 4 being outside), the name is the final unique specifier. (though i only see 1 of any of the 1s in the inner ring)

A Unique way to specify a sector in shorthand then is "C3: V" for instance.

 

[DeletedUser9666]

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

Well said.

Not only I get troops and resources depleted in this GBG thing but now I would also need to spend all evening waiting for someone to put a flag somewhere?
I hope you all are kidding here.

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

And 9 out of 10 times you will be rejected as most guild leaders I played for, were deeply distrustful control freaks.

But InnoGames does not need to take my word for it. It is enough for InnoGames to check statistics and see how small is the percentage of players holding trusted rights across all servers.

That's how drastically would be reduced GBG player base if this idea was implemented.