Discussion problem between players

[Raspa]

Since the new CBG, tensions have risen between players within the guilds regarding the installation of siege camps and the obligation to diamond the camps with a minimum of 375 diamonds!!! (3 camps)

Why not have made a new currency (green diamonds)

which would only be usable in CBG but not elsewhere at least so that it would force us to use them, and we gain some immediately.

 

[Pericles the Lion]

Since the new CBG, tensions have risen between players within the guilds regarding the installation of siege camps and the obligation to diamond the camps with a minimum of 375 diamonds!!! (3 camps)

Why not have made a new currency (green diamonds)

which would only be usable in CBG but not elsewhere at least so that it would force us to use them, and we gain some immediately.

Membership in a top guild usually comes with some responsibilities. One of which may be to participate in diamond rushing GBG buildings. I'll assume that you understand the rationale for rushing the buildings. Players that object to sharing the diamond expense are probably not a good fit for that guild.

 

[Kronan]

that's the theory - the practical side is that people covertly skate from that financial obligation, or worse - lie about it - and no one wants to monitor that (or even can), to make it fair for all. So bottom line - it's built on trust. They're around to get the rewards for winning..., and conveniently absent for the initial and ongoing diamond rush responsibilities.
Some guilds have topics that ask members to record their altruistic treasury injections (the volunteer ones, not the automatic ones...). Maybe a topic for "diamonding" sectors in GbG could let everyone in the guild know who's shouldering the responsibility - and who isn't.

 

[Emberguard]

I'm not going to diamond camps that aren't serving a purpose. It's very clear within the first hour the difference between Guild capabilities on the map for securing sectors. There's a 80% reduction cap. If we're rushing three camps it better be because we needed three camps for attrition and not just someone overbuilding on every province when we're already way in the lead or it's painfully obvious we can keep 2nd but we won't be able to rush camp our way into 1st.

If we don't have the manpower for securing sectors it won't matter how much we diamond rush, the opponent will have way more opportunities to do so. If we do have the manpower then we don't need to overdo it on diamonds when the opponent isn't keeping up on points.

 

[Raspa]

ok but forcing players to split camps isn't necessarily cool. Inno didn't really think about the conflict and should never have mixed the game's diamonds with those of the CBG. It would have been better to separate and save diamonds used only for CBG than in CBG, which would have far avoided conflicts.

 

[CrashBoom]

so instead of getting the good diamonds (which can be used everywhere)
we would only win bad green diamands in GBG (bad because they can't be used elsewhere)

 

[Raspa]

Yes, that's the idea to avoid conflicts, headaches, insults, etc.... Inno generated Hate more than play

 

[Pericles the Lion]

Yes, that's the idea to avoid conflicts, headaches, insults, etc.... Inno generated Hate more than play

If your guild members are experiencing any of the above then your guild leaders are not doing a proper job of maintaining camaraderie. If I were in your position I would PM the founder(s) and ask them to intervene. If they are unwilling (or worst, are active participants in the abuse) I would find another guild. I'm in top guilds on both of my main worlds and, in both, there is no badgering regarding spending diamonds in GBG.