-
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.
Feedback Guild Battlegrounds
- Thread starter In.My.ConTroL
- Start date
DeletedUser9396
Guest
Please correct me if I am wrong, but a guild can speed up the cost of completing a building with diamonds, and that cost is currently CONSTANT, meaning that if a guild spends 50 diamonds on one building. The next one costs 50, too, right?
I propose that the diamond cost progress for each building the guild constructs and that the cost ONLY reset at the start of the next GBG round.
This would not hurt Inno's diamond harvesting at all because the guilds that spend diamonds freely will spend the same amount of money on diamonds. They just will do it a tad more judiciously, perhaps. And just maybe the maps where these diamond-***** guilds play will not be quite so ridiculously littered with traps, etc. I am not opposed to Inno making money off the game. Far from it -- I just want these guilds that skew the game with their diamonds to pay more. To pay and pay and pay.
What I suggest is an analog to paying for extra encounters in GE with medals. Only here the idea would be that the first building a guild wants to speed up construction for costs say 50 diamonds. The next one 60. The next 80, or any other rapidly escalating scale. For guilds that strew the map with diamonds, money is as cheap as medals. Let them spend more of it.
Guilds that don't spend diamonds to hasten every building's completion will have to plan and strategize accordingly. They will still be able to afford to hasten a few buildings. But if players come to the conclusion that strategy takes a back seat, or a third row seat, to money in GBG, then GBG will lose all its charm. It will become a place to farm for a few trinkets. Not a battleground, just a place where diamonds cut your feet out from under you.
I propose that the diamond cost progress for each building the guild constructs and that the cost ONLY reset at the start of the next GBG round.
This would not hurt Inno's diamond harvesting at all because the guilds that spend diamonds freely will spend the same amount of money on diamonds. They just will do it a tad more judiciously, perhaps. And just maybe the maps where these diamond-***** guilds play will not be quite so ridiculously littered with traps, etc. I am not opposed to Inno making money off the game. Far from it -- I just want these guilds that skew the game with their diamonds to pay more. To pay and pay and pay.
What I suggest is an analog to paying for extra encounters in GE with medals. Only here the idea would be that the first building a guild wants to speed up construction for costs say 50 diamonds. The next one 60. The next 80, or any other rapidly escalating scale. For guilds that strew the map with diamonds, money is as cheap as medals. Let them spend more of it.
Guilds that don't spend diamonds to hasten every building's completion will have to plan and strategize accordingly. They will still be able to afford to hasten a few buildings. But if players come to the conclusion that strategy takes a back seat, or a third row seat, to money in GBG, then GBG will lose all its charm. It will become a place to farm for a few trinkets. Not a battleground, just a place where diamonds cut your feet out from under you.
shad2389
Viceroy
GBG right is useless if founder can't controle who places flag cause guildys are hiting where they want eaven if asked not to in msg cause they don't read and in log you can't see who placed it , you can't do agreements and plan buildings with the agreements with other guilds cause guilds will fight back when hit so it's useless unless you create a right for placing flags and or add it in building right and that won't hapen cause INNO wants its players to be able to place flags when they enter GBG till INNO fixes GBG to be controlable by founders and leaders properly it's a waste of time , goods and troops for not much rewards as it is now
DeletedUser10047
Guest
What rewards does GvG provide? Is that also a waste of time, goods and troops?
shad2389
Viceroy
none apart ranking pts and power to guild
Ian Santa Claus
Marquis
I don't agree with needing rights to plant a flag, I want my guildies to be able to enjoy the feature in their own time.
But I do very much want a log so I can see who is doing what so I can explain things better to that individual on a one to one basis rather than messaging the whole guild about it.
But I do very much want a log so I can see who is doing what so I can explain things better to that individual on a one to one basis rather than messaging the whole guild about it.
shad2389
Viceroy
am only saying somthing is teribly wrong and badly conceived in GBG and should have been tested further and adjusted to fit needs of the players befor hiting live
DeletedUser4409
Guest
Just thinking... We need at least 40 advances to be "eligible for reward", right? And when the GBG started, I noticed that equal amount of points results in the same chest(the higher one, if the 4'th and 5'th guild have the same amount of points, they both get 4th reward). What would happen if all the guilds in the battleground achieved that minimum of 40 in the provinces adjacent to their headquarters and do literally nothing else the rest of the time? Would all 8 guilds get the 1st place reward? As unlikely as it may be, it seems technically possible.
Emberguard
Emperor
Hahaha. I can see it now. Make that agreement and then in the last few hrs backstab the rest
UBERhelp1
Viceroy
You'd have to have some really good alliances with those other guilds. Also, since each province gives slightly different amounts of VP, this wouldn't be possible anyway.
DeletedUser10047
Guest
Except in Copper league, 40 advances are not enough to conquer a province. And even in Copper league, the advances could be split over two provinces for each guild.
It'd be a very risky deal to make. And it only takes 1 guild (or even 1 person in 1 guild) to say 'no, i'm going to actually take a province'. There is one of my diamond mine worlds where it appears there will be an 8-way tie for zero if I don't take a province But also 7/8 of them are not going to have 40 advances even if I stuck to zero instead of finishing a province so I don't know how I could turn that into a test for "what if everyone just tied"
Presumably in a tie situation like that matchmaking rating also would not adjust? I can't imagine they'd give 8 guilds all the first place +MMR for an 8-way tie. Well maybe they might in the assumption it'll never happen? I'm quite sure though that all 8 would get the chest if they all did their minimum advances.
But also 7/8 of them are not going to have 40 advances even if I stuck to zero instead of finishing a province so I don't know how I could turn that into a test for "what if everyone just tied" Presumably in a tie situation like that matchmaking rating also would not adjust? I can't imagine they'd give 8 guilds all the first place +MMR for an 8-way tie. Well maybe they might in the assumption it'll never happen? I'm quite sure though that all 8 would get the chest if they all did their minimum advances.
Natalia1
Squire
I would like to have some general idea about placement within a league and MMR. For example, if BG sizes are equal, is placing 2nd in platinum more or less MMR than placing first in gold? What about losing MMR? Right now the overall trend is that more guilds move upward than downwards, so I am guessing that more MMR is gained for the 1st place than lost for the last one? Is that permanent or temporary?
Is this still worked on? When the whole thing gets worked out, will we be able to see MMR? We are able to see everything that happens in GvG quite clearly, so I hope that GBG will catch up in the sense of transparency of its operation.
Is this still worked on? When the whole thing gets worked out, will we be able to see MMR? We are able to see everything that happens in GvG quite clearly, so I hope that GBG will catch up in the sense of transparency of its operation.
DeletedUser10047
Guest
MMR is equal across all leagues. 1st in Copper gives the same MMR boost as 1st in Diamond (if both have the same number of guilds in the battlefield). The gain and loss of MMR is symmetrical. However, MMR will never drop below 0, nor does it ever climb above a defined maximum amount.
For the season just ended, 34 guilds were demoted from gold to silver, while 68 guilds were promoted from silver to gold.
Natalia1
Squire
Has this been answered by developers somewhere and I missed it? And since more guilds moved up than down, it definitely seems to follow asymmetrical pattern. More guilds have been promoted to platinum than demoted to gold.
DeletedUser10047
Guest
It may seem to be asymmetrical but right now guilds are moving up because MMR cannot drop below 0. That means in any Copper league battlefield with 8 guilds, the top two guilds will always move up to silver. That's because Copper league has a relatively small range (equal to 10% of the entire MMR range, so if MMR goes from 0 to 100, then any guild with an MMR of 10 or less will be in Copper league) while 1st and 2nd places for an 8 guild battlefield boost MMR more than that range (so for an MMR range of 100, 1st gives 17.5 and 2nd gives 12.5).
Silver has a wider range (equal to 25% of the entire MMR range). So a lot of guilds finishing in 7th or 8th will still stay in Silver league. Gold has an even wider range - 30%.
The ranges are fixed. The mere fact that more than 10% of the guilds are currently in Copper league causes upward movement. By the time 10% of the guilds are in Diamond league, the sizes of the leagues should remain relatively constant, although there will always be some flux as new guilds are formed or as existing guilds that weren't participating begin to participate (or the reverse).
DeletedUser4409
Guest
Could someone expand that "MMR"? I mean, what these letters stand for.
Emberguard
Emperor
Match Making Ranking.
End of Season:
Top placement = score increases
Middle placement = no change
Bottom placement = score decreases
Your score determines who you face next time. Basically it’s like any game with a online player ranking.
kaymedic
Marquis
In other games the rating do not change alone on the placement but also depents on the strength of your opponents (and sometimes even more parameters). Also inno caped the MMR from 0 to an unknown (?) maximum MMR so that a guild cannot collect MMR to stay in diamont league forever.