Do Not Suggest [Suggestion] rebalance GvG defense

[DeletedUser7855]

Let's imagine the following situation: one top rated guild names X has 80 active players with high leveled military GBs, millions of goods in treasury and it owns (for example) 50 sectors on FE GvG map. On the other side there is only one middle-rated player, who hates X and creates a small "satellite" guild Y. The new guild Y uses cheap sieges (5 of each goods) to attack X in the night or at random time. What possibilities has X to defend their sectors against that ONE player? I don't see any options. Even if all sectors would have 75% defense bonus it would not help against player Y. With every successful siege X is loosing tens of thousands goods and has no way to counterattack his enemy due to expensive contras or shields.

At some point the guild's treasury is empty and X has to give up its GvG sectors. On the other side, player Y became top rated because of the fights he did.

Summary: guilds are weak, GvG has no sense.

--------------------------

Possible solutions (could be also combined together, but with lower defense boosts):

1) Introduce basic defense bonus on all guild sectors, which are dependent on:
- top-1 player ranking
- guild level

On the new servers the basic defense is 0%, so it would be possible to fight on GvG even without rogues. On older servers it should be much higher, let's say 50% if top-1 rated player has 100kk points and +2 or 3% for each guild level. HQ and nearly placed sectors should receive additional defense bonus (75%, 50% and so on) as now.

2) Rebalance guild GBs
Observatories should give much more defense bonus. For example, a guild with 80 x 10 lvl observatories should have enough points for 100% or more basic defense and additional 75% on HQ.

3) Make sieges costs depending on defending guild
Every siege should cost, let's say, 20% of the goods, invested by the defender guild. If one guild has about 40 sectors, a satellite guild should pay about 1k of goods for every siege (or real siege costs, if it is higher than 20% of defenders value). I am not sure about this suggestion, but maybe someone has a better idea how to prevent clone-guilds

4) Your suggestion?
Please, do not try to rebalance the whole game. Keep your suggestion as simple as possible and as complex as needed

The main points of my suggestions:
- sieges must be possible only with many participants making GvG fights more social-interactive
- single-player mode should win against top guilds, as it now is
- guilds should have some motivation to increase their levels and fight for it on GvG

 

[DeletedUser7779]

A big no from me, that would only make strong guilds (i.e. guilds holding many tiles and/or guilds with high GB players) even stronger and impossible for weaker (i.e. guilds with not so fat treasuries / players) to hold more than 1-2 tiles. GvG is not only about attacking and taking sectors, it's also about being able to keep them. If you can't protect your tiles, then you might consider other options ... not changing the concept of GvG Rebubble the tiles or hand them over to an allied guild for example. But suggesting a huge change like this only because some ghost guild is causing you trouble is not serious.

Also, I don't see what the issue is. What's the fun in holding 100 tiles and not being attacked? I call that champ farming, not GvG. And that's actually what killed it at least on the server I'm playing. In fact, I'd much more like to see a change in the opposite direction - to encourage small/weak guilds to attack the big guys.

 

[DeletedUser7855]

A big no from me, that would only make strong guilds (i.e. guilds holding many tiles and/or guilds with high GB players) even stronger and impossible for weaker (i.e. guilds with not so fat treasuries / players) to hold more than 1-2 tiles. GvG is not only about attacking and taking sectors, it's also about being able to keep them. If you can't protect your tiles, then you might consider other options ... not changing the concept of GvG Rebubble the tiles or hand them over to an allied guild for example. But suggesting a huge change like this only because some ghost guild is causing you trouble is not serious.

Also, I don't see what the issue is. What's the fun in holding 100 tiles and not being attacked? I call that champ farming, not GvG. And that's actually what killed it at least on the server I'm playing. In fact, I'd much more like to see a change in the opposite direction - to encourage small/weak guilds to attack the big guys.

Come on, every player has already 90% military boost and can alone beat 75% bonused HQ sector on GvG map. You mean that is what is called GvG war, seriously? GvG is now as simple as putting 7 rogues + some unit and clicking autobattle, even GE is harder than that

That is the reason why GvG is dead - top guilds are not fighting with each other, they are just sitting and handling diplomatically to avoid "angry" satellite guilds. Clone wars, lol

 

[DeletedUser7779]

Come on, every player has already 90% military boost and can alone beat 75% bonused HQ sector on GvG map. You mean that is what is called GvG war, seriously? GvG is now as simple as putting 7 rogues + some unit and clicking autobattle, even GE is harder than that

Heh, GvG has always been about autobattling, and of course it's way easier than GE becoz 1)the defense boost is much lower (at most 75%) and 2) there's only 1 wave. Which is the reason why it is possible to GvG at all - becoz in GvG we need speed especially at recalc time. If defense% is increased like you suggest, auto will lose way too many troops and will result in killing GvG eventually.

Second, like you implied, GvG is not (only) about the battles themselves - it's more like strategic positioning, planing and being able to protect and keep the tiles you posses. You're suggesting to make it even harder or almost impossible for other guilds to attack and take your sectors. Why? Is that what would make the game fun for you? If your guild is holding tiles on all maps forever and no one dares to attack becoz their sieges costs 1K goods?

 

[DeletedUser7779]

@Whiskey-s
that's what war is, my friend and the first rule of GvG is that you can't hold tiles and fight at the same time because you will simply go broke.
I really don't see an issue here - that guild which chose to fight against you did exactly what had to be done - they were releasing tiles behind them to keep their siege cost low. And filling tiles with spears to keep their real troop count high. Let me ask you this, if it were the other way around and you were the attacker, wouldn't you do exactly the same??I really can't believe you're complaining about this....How is any guild supposed to take tiles if it wasn't the way it is..?
Only thing I agree is the lag and surely someone with better PC would have advantage over someone with a 7 year old laptop, but this has nothing to do with the topic here.

 

[DeletedUser7855]

Second, like you implied, GvG is not (only) about the battles themselves - it's more like strategic positioning, planing and being able to protect and keep the tiles you posses

Yes, it should be strategy, but it is not. Even one player is able to beat full defended 75% sectors at 2 am in the night. He could use shields to avoid counter attacks and the defending guild has no way to protect its sectors. The only possible solution is to create 10 or more clone guilds and let them create shields across the border every day. Is that a sense of guild wars? I don't think so, it sounds more like PvG (player vs. guild). Guilds has currently no sense - they are spending much game resources in leveling observatories and guild treasury but loose against those single players.

I think you are one of those ranking point hunters without a guild, right?

 

[DeletedUser7779]

Yes, it should be strategy, but it is not. Even one player is able to beat full defended 75% sectors at 2 am in the night. He could use shields to avoid counter attacks and the defending guild has no was to protect its sectors. The only possible solution is to create 10 or more clone guilds and let them create shields across the border every day. Is that a sense of guild wars? I don't think so, it sounds more like PvG (player vs. guild). Guilds has currently no sense - they are spending much game resources in leveling observatories and guild treasury but loose against those single players.

I think you are one of those ranking point hunters without a guild, right?

Hahaha, now that really made me smile No, dear, I'm in a top guild on my server which just about a few weeks ago held 1/2 of AA map and has been ranked #3 for a very long time. I've never been about the points, I even have it in profile text heh - otherwise I'd have simply joined the top champ farming guild on server and gained millions of battle points each week.
But you know what happened instead? We just got bored of holding tiles and doing nothing, so we dropped everything and attacked other top guilds. Your suggestion would prevent exactly that and make the hegemony and dominance of top guilds even stronger.
And are you really complaining about 1 guy taking 1 tile at 2am? So what, you'll take it back next day at recalc. And even if they took more, they will run out of troops sooner or later - in the long run 1 player has no chance against a guild.

 

[DeletedUser7855]

First of all, AA map is cheap because of endless medals and should not be compared with FE or other maps where sieges are limited by goods and troops.

I'm not complaining about 1 player, there are many such single player guilds which are just hunting for points and attacking every sector on its way. Now explain me how you would defend a sector in FE when one siege costs about 2k x 5 = 10 k goods and you are not able to counterattack either today nor on the next day at recalc because an attacking guild drops all surrounding sectors and takes one of them under a shield on each recalc. There is no way to attack shielded sectors. Yes, it is possible to drop many sectors, loose a half of the goods spent and counterattack an enemy. Your enemy would attack on other era map until you drop all sectors there and return to the FE map as soon as you guild takes many sectors again. The only one solution is to create many clone guilds which should fight against other clones.

And yes, units are endless. I am doing about 200 fights every day but my rogues quantity did not significally changed in the last 6 month I have only 90% military bonus + 50% attack boost, 32 lvl Alcatraz and 30 rogue hideouts with tavern boost. Now imagine players with 80 leveled OA, Alcatraz and military GBs which could attack in every era at every time from some of many clone guilds and use shields at every recalc. Explain me how you would defend it

PS: if you were able to hold 50% of AA map for longer time, it means that other guilds already lost interest to GvG map or the quantity of players reached OF is below 100 or your enemies do not use / do not know basic GvG tactics like shields usage

 

[DeletedUser7779]

The situation you're now describing doesn't really look like a single player who's just hitting for points which was the issue in your first post. This looks more like a targeted offense towards your guild or in other words war.
So, yes, there's no universal way to defend against enemies and that is why I personally find GvG so interesting. But you're suggesting to make it extremely difficult for the attackers, which would only favor the guilds which are already holding lots of land.
And that's what I meant in the first place - here comes the strategic planing and good decision making. Would you drop half of your tiles to reduce siege cost or would you try to defend and replace defending armies in between the sieges? And if there was a straightforward answer to that, it wouldn't be interesting anymore, as either the attacker or the defender would be victorious. Idk what server you're playing, but I can assure you that even a lvl 80 Traz and AO don't help in a long lasting multiple Era war. Just to give you an example - a CE tile stocked with 8 tanks loses at least 2 rogues/battle. So let's take 2 tiles fully filled with 8 tanks, that's 160 fights. If there are 5 people hitting, that's 32 battles each x 2 = 64 rogues lost only in CE..

 

[DeletedUser7855]

80 battles in CE against tanks are easy to do with right combination and max. 16 dead units
With auto-battle I would loose 64 rogues, but it would be still less than I produce daily (32x2 = 64 from hideouts + 30 from Alcatraz = 94). So if I would alone take only one from (let's say) 30 enemy's sector each day, after 3-4 days the guild has to give up many sectors, because they just can do nothing if I am attacking from shielded sector. At this point I would loose interest for CE map and attack the same guild in FE and then on other maps until the defending guild has only few sectors in each era or empty treasury if they are keeping sectors. It works, I did it already many times and other guilds are doing the same against us - creating clone guilds and fighting with cheap sieges. So what is the sense of guilds if noone can defend them?

PS: my server is ru13, top-1 player has already OA 70 and military GBs at 80+ lvl each. GvG with its max. 75% defense is underpowered even for normal 90% attack / defense skills, imagine how easy it is for top players to fight on it.

 

[DeletedUser7779]

Okay, we're either talking about different things or I don't understand The so called attacker cannot always attack from a bubbled tile if your guild does its job right. Let's say this ghost player lands on one of your tiles. Ideally, they will take also all surrounding sectors, then move HQ to one of them and take a few more. But, in order to rebubble the tiles, that player would have to drop 1 (or more) shortly before recalc and siege them right after. Now, what's the problem in stealing the tile when they drop?? But even if you can't and even if that player is able to siege it right after reset, your guild can break the siege and steal then! (Note, we're still talking about 1 player vs a whole guild, right?). If your guild cannot steal from a single player, then I don't think the problem is in how GvG works..
Trust me, been there, done that. My guild used to be constantly attacked by ghost guilds.

And tbh, i really don't think attack% matters that much in GvG. Because you auto and rarely change your army in between fights - especially when time is an issue. I did lose 30+ rogues hitting a 0% tile in AA earlier this morning with 170% attack boost. I don't wanna imagine if it were at 75%. So that boost is just fine imo, don't forget that GvG is auto 99% of the time.

 

[DeletedUser7855]

Surround an enemy having 30 sectors? I see, you have not much experience on GvG

To steal one of the dropped by me sectors you need to drop 20 of your 30 sectors or pay 10 thousand goods for one siege. If your guild has dropped 20 sectors - I am already a winner and your guild lost many goods. If your guild has not dropped, than I would just rebubble one of the sectors I dropped 2 seconds before recalc and then attack at any time I want.

---------

Let's explain from the other point of view - there must be a reason why GvG has such a low popularity (and after reading your posts I concluded that on your server it is completely dead)

Could you answer this question: why should guilds fight on GvG or generally why should they spend a lot of resources for levelling up the guild? What's the goal of it? To get 2 forge points more than a guild that is living only from expedition points and does not even know that gvg exists? Or pay 1-2% less gold for buildings? Come on, no one needs this, in OF is everithing built and 100k gold you are spending for one new building per month is nothing

If higher guild level gives us no benefits, then it is senseless to fight for the possibility to get new levels faster than other guilds, right? If each level would give us some better bonus, like increased defense, than there would be one more reason to fight for it on GvG?!

 

[DeletedUser7779]

My friend, if your guild is not willing to drop 20 sectors or pay a siege cost of 10K goods, or find any other way to deal with ghost guilds, then that's your guild's problem, not GvG's. Why should it be changed to favor guilds holding tiles and not those who want to conquer some? It's always worked that way. Taking tiles is easy, keeping them is the hard part!

Yes, our server is dead due to a few reasons, which I wouldn't like to discuss now as they're out of topic. One of them though is the hegemony of the #1 ranked guild - no one dares to attack them even now (with at most 75% defense and siege cost at 5), so they're just champ farming all day long. With your idea, this will get even worse.

To your other question - i can speak only for myself, but I personally fight GvG for the glory. I love destroying other guilds on the maps, i love messing up with their plans, I love outsmarting them and taking their tiles. But that's just me. I know lots of players who would choose one guild over another only becoz Town Hall gives 1 fp more..

 

[DeletedUser7855]

1) I'm not able to attack ghost guilds, because they use bubbled sectors. It is not my guilds problem, it's not possible by the current system.

2) Glory is imho to win against stronger enemies either with tactics or teamplay. With current gameplay gvg ends up with creating a ghost guild and farm points using bubbled sectors. Very simple tactic and zero teamplay.

3) I've got your point of view, let the other comment or suggest something. I just discovered other related topics on this forum, so I am not the only one who complains about unbalances gvg.

 

[Lionhead]

I think what, if anything, needs to be fixed in GvG depends on how everyone approaches GvG and the whole purpose of GvG.
I think IG has been too vague in definig the whole purpose.
Personally I believe it´s about Guilds having as many sectors as possible and trying to hold those and expanding their territories without having to worry about ghosting.
I truely enjoy getting involved in my guilds efforts to coordinate goods-production, so that we don´t over-produce / underproduce goods meant for GvG alone. And the more sectors on a map we hold, the more important it is, that we produce the right goods in the right amounts. With an effort like that, we have the possibilty to take on top guilds, but I´m very hesitant. One wrong move and we´re the main target of ghosting from such top guild within 24 hrs. And they can destroy months of goods-producing efforts in a very short time.
I honestly don´t understand why IG hasn´t put a stop to ghosting long ago. GvG simply shouldn´t be possible for guilds with only one member. It can be discussed how many members is required in order to participate, but 1 is simply ridiculous. Alone the defenition of a guild should be the first clue. What would be the required number of members in a guild? In my opinon it could be 5 or more, but defenitely not less. Is ghosting then still possible? Sure. Big dominant guilds could probably easily afford to loose 5 members in 7 days, while they go on a rampage on several maps.
Therefore, I´d like if releasing of sectors simply was made impossible. Then it´s no longer possible or at best very goods-consuming to chase a guild with 20-ish sectors and more of a map in pure vengance.

Most importantly I´d like the big lag-issue around calc-time to be fixed once and for all. Probably easier said than done, but the issue has been going on for ages, and I have never seen this being adressed by IG.