Spoiler New Guild Expedition Buildings! (GE Update?)

[UBERhelp1]

I'm starting to wonder if it will be you defending against other guilds at the final level, a little bit like GvG. I doubt they'd be changing the fighting system to start you on the right side, and that would just be a normal fight anyways like any other, just in the other direction.

I could be completely wrong, but my guess right now is that you choose a fortification to hold, and if you successfully hold it you get its bonus or whatever after the GE season. You can attack other guilds' fortifications, but have to defend your own.

 

[CrashBoom]

I guess the only reason for defending instead of attacking is
the attack boost of players is already too high to make a proper balancing

that would just be a normal fight anyways like any other

except of the 1000%+ boost

 

[MonkeyDMonkey]

Mh a Button with defend?
Is this Innos desperate attempt to bring city defense back into game with more relevance?

 

[DEADP00L]

However, there is an easy solution to restore utility to the defense, it is to merge the attack and the defense!
By adding the % of the red and blue swords we would obtain a % of strike which would be used both in attack and in defense.
Same with the red and blue shields which would give a % of resistance.

 

[drakenridder]

@DEADP00L basically turning Zeus, CdM and such into TA. While I would love to see such an easy solution, it would defeat TA’s only perk: supporting both attack and defence. Unless it’ll be rebalanced into a equivalent of those by buffing it by 10% additional buff for both armies, or the other way around. Dropping every military buffing GB by 10% and decreasing all military buffing event building’s buffs by +/-33%. Including settlement grand and time rewards.

 

[Emberguard]

@deadpool the defending buildings would all need to be nerfed if it were merged together, they’re already stronger than your attack buildings

 

[DEADP00L]

the attack GBs (zeus, aix castel) could then provide only % of swords which would be used in attack and defense.
the defense GBs (basil, deal) could then provide only % of shields which would be used in attack and defense.

 

[Emberguard]

I meant Event and Special buildings in comparison to other Event and Special buildings

Your idea about Great Buildings could work sure..... but the addition of two Great Buildings worth of stat boost will be significantly less than the stat boost that all the Event / Special Event Buildings would be able to provide if we were to rearrange our cities around Defending Unit boosts

 

[CrashBoom]

that still doesn't solve the main problem of a regular level 5 GEx with using attack boost

balancing the opponents for
elite fighters which have 2000%
top fighters with 1000%
and average players only 500%


so how can it be challenging for elite (not just a no brainer autobattle with their default 8 unit combo) but still beatable for average

Mh a Button with defend?
Is this Innos desperate attempt to bring city defense back into game with more relevance?

or is this the point where they recognize they gave too much attack boost to the players

 

[drakenridder]

so how can it be challenging for elite (not just a no brainer autobattle with their default 8 unit combo) but still beatable for average

In another game about pirates there where 2 type of enemies: ships and sea monsters. Each enemy was attackable with their own respective weapons. Anti-ship was furthest developed of all. Since this had the most uses. Both in events as in general. The sea monsters could be ignored except for a few parts of the game. Resulting in much less capabilities in general to fighting them. Still it had a decent enough use, to be interesting to keep investing in. Just not at the scale anti-ship was.
Similarly in Forge the defensive buffs have no real advantage at all: GvG’s support pool is capped at 75%, which is laughable against the meta you’ve described, city defences suffer the same and in the PvE arena it’s the same story; defensive buffs don’t matter. Cause defensive AI fights poorly on behalf of the player. Besides that attacking % is very useful and rewarding. As it enables to remove obstacles, commonly found through out the game: GbF, GEx, PvE arena and the cmap. Unlike the game I’ve described about pirates where anti-monster weapons was useful, in Forge defence buffs’ benefits ain’t rewarding.
In a strange way, if GE5 works like we’ve speculated. In reverse pushing back invaders and relaying on defensive buffs instead of attacking buffs, it would make investing into them immediately useful. Although limited in usefulness, still useful.

Merging both buffs would only lead to further imbalance, except city defence. A simple convertion could happen like this: GB’s buffs / 2 (except TA) = new buff. Special buildings buffs / 2. Special buildings with both red swords/shields: the sum of each sword / shield and divided by 2. All rounded like normal. If it’s 1% it’ll remain unchanged. If it’s for example 1% red & blue sword/shield, no buff would be lost ((1%+1%) / 2 = 1%). Still though I think it’s rather the most unlikely scenario. From a buisnis perspective, making defensive buffs useful make more sense; you could sell them too and buying yourself some extra time selling also those buildings.

 

[DEADP00L]

balancing the opponents for
elite fighters which have 2000%
top fighters with 1000%
and average players only 500%

We should stop trying to make the fights more difficult by taking into account the % attack gained.
Everyone makes their choice between increasing their FP production, their resource production, their defensive % or their attack %.
This choice being assumed, why accentuate the difficulty of those who have made efforts to have 2,000%?
Any increase in difficulty must be the same for everyone and thus give an objective to achieve, either by adapting your city, or by knowing how to give up.
We don't ask ourselves the question of accessibility in GvG to phone players, we don't ask ourselves the question of the increasing difficulty in GbG with attrition, why then differentiate the difficulties during level 5 from expeditions?

I would prefer that the 2 waves at level 5 consist of a wave of manual combat and a wave of hard negotiation in order to force players not to neglect any aspect of the game.

 

[CrashBoom]

We should stop trying to make the fights more difficult by taking into account the % attack gained.

they already have stopped it (in GEx level 5)
the attack % doesn't matter there

This choice being assumed, why accentuate the difficulty of those who have made efforts to have 2,000%?

but why should new things be easier for people who have 2000% attack ?

now people who made the effort to already have 1000% DEFENSE get the advantage

Everyone makes their choice between increasing their FP production, their resource production, their defensive % or their attack %.

yes and it is time that the other people get the advantage of their playing style (in this case the defense %)
not just always the attack %

 

[DEADP00L]

You misunderstood or I misspoke.
I don't want to highlight the attack, I refuse that an assumed choice be more sanctioned than any real choice of the players.

I don't want to put the attack on a pedestal, I want Inno to keep a certain logic that rewards players' choices regarding their city management, whatever they are!

 

[Dessire]

do you want to give more importance to defensive power + to players in a guild? then imagine this:

- A guild with 80 members

- The player with the lowest defense has 10% in both, defensive attack and defensive defense, the next one has 20%, the next one 25% . .. the member with the highest one has 1500% of defensive attack and 1000% of defensive defense. the previous one has 1200% and 844%.

- In GbG, diamond league,against that guild, when you are fighting to conquer one of that guild's sector, your attrition is increased every 2 fights, why every 2 fights? because the enemy guild has 80 members and in order to conquer 1 sector in diamond league you need 160 conquer points

- In the first 2 battles, your enemies, controled by the A.I. of the game, has 10% of attack and defense, battle 3 and 4 they have 20%, the 5 and 6 have 25% . . . the attrition 156 and 157 they have 1200% of attack and 844% of defense and attrition 158 and 159 enemies have 1500% of attack and 1000% of defense; so yes, the enemies you must defeat while fighting to conquer that sector owned by the guild in this example have the defensive attack and defense of all guild members.

- in a Guild with 40 members, the attrition is increased every 4 fights, against a guild of 2 members every 80 fights, and 1 guild well, the attrition is always the same but enemies have only one defense. in that case, if the 1 player guild has 4000% of defensive attack and defense, you can always do negotiations so against those guilds, negotiations should be better + remember that 1 guild player isn't a treat most of the time so have a little of difficult with that single player should not be a headache.

- If you are fighting against a weak guild with 30 members and you reach attrition 30, here 2 options: that attrition keeps being 30 if you fight another guild if you fight against another guild, your enemies will be the one corresponding to that attrition if that guild has 30 members or more. if have less members, should be the defensive attack and defense of the member with the highest number of defense. the second option is independant attritions. Against guild B you reach att 10. if you fight then aggainst guild C, your att should be 0.

- In order to not creat something like "2 guild decided to have all their members with 0% of defense and attack to have always an andless amount of fights", if guild A is being attacked and lose the sector, that guild loses 10% of the LP won until that moment. Example: if that guild has 90K LP and loses the sector, now the total should be 81K. if that guild generates 500 LP per hour, in 4 hours should have 83K LP, if that guild loses another sector, now it should have 74.7K of LP, allowing guilds who really want to play correctly have the chance of defeat guild A and guild B by just keeping enough sectors and allowing guild A and B exchange sectors every 4 hours. at the end of the 11 days, both top guilds now will be moved to platinum league only because they decided to not have good defenses.
In the case of weak guild in diamond league, imagine that the weakest have 10K LP, by losing 1 sector that guild will have 9000K. It is not like as if that guild have a chance to earn a better, excepting if that guild decides to, one night, netogiate a lot to conquer the whole map for example and make the other guilds lose 10% of what they have by each sector they had.

- Players of a guild can also earn an extra of 10 FP for each sector they own x hour and the total is delivered at the end of the 11 days in their inventory, but! that total is divided by the total amount of days they were not able to reach their max attrition. so if X guild had enough sectors to earn an extra reward of 3000 FPs for each member and a player never reached his/her max. att, he/she does not even did a single fight!., then the total he/she will receive should be 300 FPs. 300 FPs for free? yes! of course! is the guild leader(s) who is/are allowing that player still being a member insted of kick him/her for doing almos nothing!!! do not blame that player, blame the guild leader(s). the max. attrition considered by the game should be the max you can achieve in X season according to your battle power. if your guild is against 5 guilds and 4 of those guilds max. defensive power is 400% and guild 5 max. defensive power is 1500 and you have 800% of attack, then your max. att. is when you reach the attrition according to 800%, even if you never do fights against that guild. if in order to achieve 800% of attack against that guild you must reach att. 50, then attrition 50 is your top, does not matter if you do all your fights against other guilds, you must reach at least attrition 50, by negotiating or by doing fights.

more territories = more extra FPs, more time owning those territories, more FPs per hour and more defensive power, more time owning those territories.
..............

- Another option. When an enemy guild (guild B) is attacking one sector of your guild, the max. defensive attack and defense of the enemies who must defeat guild B should be: your guild member 1 defense + member 2 + member 3. . . .+ member 80 and divided by 10. If each member has an average of 500% of attack and defense as defensive power and your guild has 80 members, 500 x 80 = 40 000, divided by 10 = 4000. so at attrition 160, a player of guild B should fight against enemies with 4000% of attack and defense. with an increase of 25% for each attrition. (25% x 160 = 4000).

 

[CrashBoom]

it says: ALREADY AVAILABLE ON BETA SERVER
so tomorrow it should start

EDIT: not available anymore

 

[-Alin-]

City deff really needed for level V ...
Meh, I need more phantom towers ...
213/214 surely isn't enough lol

 

[Battle Tomcat]

it says: ALREADY AVAILABLE ON BETA SERVER
so tomorrow it should start

Great... "Private" video.
I have received server message: "Yes, you read that right! Watch our latest YouTube video to see what's new in the Guild Expedition Level 5!"
with link to video, but "Yes, you read that right!" video is private.

 

[Mailia]

Yeah, the video doesn't work for me either...

 

[Astrid]

I watched it before they hid it. It didn't contain anything we didn't know, but it confirmed the fact that we need to defend and only the bonuses from town defence will matter.

 

[CrashBoom]

Great... "Private" video.
I have received server message: "Yes, you read that right! Watch our latest YouTube video to see what's new in the Guild Expedition Level 5!"
with link to video, but "Yes, you read that right!" video is private.

sorry
when I posted it it was not private

then maybe it won't start tomorrow