Discussion What would it need to replace GvG?

[DEADP00L]

With the current development team, nothing can replace GvG!
At worst they will give us a nice dung, but nothing can equal the pleasure of playing in GvG.
You just have to see the reaction they had to constructive criticism on Guild Advantages or on 1 year of testing in GbG.
I'm not even talking about the aberration we all see in GE level 5 buildings. A building that costs more than it can possibly save!!! But where did they learn to calculate? And this error would be so easy to fix but no, after 3 months of applying on live servers, no fix.
Proof once again that they can have good ideas but that they do not know how to listen to the feedback given by their community of players to make them credible.

GvG is not giving so much points.

So by removing the ranking points generated by the GvG, it would not change anything and would no longer penalize players on the phone.

Perhaps, but it's not even noticeable in the Neighbourhood tournaments. I can still outrank the neighbours in the personal performance by using Guild Battlegrounds.

Yes, but in the neighborhood tournament, the GbG is accessible to everyone.
Example, I often finish second every week by making more than 1,000 fights in my age. The first regularly reaches 7,000 fights. You think GvG has nothing to do with it?
Personally, I don't care about this ranking, but I see some of my members being tired of being put in unfair competition with these players, and not facing cheating, precisely facing Innogames' ostrich policy .

 

[Emberguard]

Example, I often finish second every week by making more than 1,000 fights in my age. The first regularly reaches 7,000 fights. You think GvG has nothing to do with it?

Not saying it has no effect, of course it's reflected in the scores of those that do participate, I'm saying it's presence is not a valid reason to remove the Neighbourhood Tournament Towers. There's nothing to gain from removing the Towers, and everything to gain from retaining them. I would rather have 2nd place and the benefits that come with it than no place at all

7,000 fights? I got 6.5k fights from Guild Battlegrounds last season, and did PvP Arena and Guild Expedition. Never touched GvG during that time period.

 

[Owl II]

Don't forget that GBG season lasts 2 weeks, while the results in the towers are summed up weekly. In addition, half of the GBG fights are two waves. All fights on GVG are single-wave

 

[Grzechu Junior]

Tough when there are Bots Defending

ye ye, always bots

 

[Grzechu Junior]

Don't forget that GBG season lasts 2 weeks, while the results in the towers are summed up weekly. In addition, half of the GBG fights are two waves. All fights on GVG are single-wave

not everyone knows 2 waves fight gives you 2 fights in rankings.

 

[Emberguard]

Don't forget that GBG season lasts 2 weeks, while the results in the towers are summed up weekly. In addition, half of the GBG fights are two waves. All fights on GVG are single-wave

I did momentarily forget. Thanks

 

[bornempire]

So maybe attack those 4 sectors and go further if they are so weak?
I mean they are blocking entrance by freeing and attacking sector after 8 Pm,
So gather in guild and attack it when they make it free? And next day step further? And again?

I was (still am) in guild fighting long time (few tears) to break allience on AA map, and "open" closed map. We did it few times (many times we were kicking back and map was closed again). Many times we landed, and still be blocked, but we tried.
GvG is about it - trying, fighting. Closing map and Defending it - and attacking from other side - the MAIN PURPOSE of gvg.

Its again - "we are to weak, they are too strong, help us".
If they are blocking - attack the beaches when they make them free. Not that hard. Gather in guild more than 1 person - those guild holding maps need a lot of players online - 20-30 on my server minimum. So create alliance to break the status quo and you will enjoy gvg a lot...

No, the ratio is not fair at all. On their territory there are 67 coastal sectors. the whole area they control is 105 sectors. So that's only 4 LZ sectors available for 105 sectors. That's completely insane, even more if you see how many LZ's there are on the WESTERN part of the map, where you have a LZ ratio of minimum 30-40% of all available sectors. It's a design failure.

 

[Grzechu Junior]

No, the ratio is not fair at all. On their territory there are 67 coastal sectors. the whole area they control is 105 sectors. So that's only 4 LZ sectors available for 105 sectors. That's completely insane, even more if you see how many LZ's there are on the WESTERN part of the map, where you have a LZ ratio of minimum 30-40% of all available sectors. It's a design failure.

but you know they are stronger than yo uso they taken it?

If you assume you are as strong as them - go form beach - from those 4 sectors and get thos 100 sectors.

i mean its again - they are too strong - limit them. They cant be that strong. Its not fair thay are too strong.

And if there would be more beaches - you think they will not Shield all of them at 8 PM? what is the difference between 4 or 20? If you dont want to try on this 4

 

[Emberguard]

i mean its again - they are too strong - limit them. They cant be that strong. Its not fair thay are too strong.

The players on the beaches aren't facing a 1 V 1 battle unless you really have no one else participating. It's every Guild that wants to land there V them.

Whereas those further in land have far fewer competition to defend against

If the controlling Guild is truly stronger then they would be just fine on even footing and don't need the inherent advantage of greying out landing zones. Them being stronger isn't the problem. It's the strongest Guild having a bigger advantage than their opponents based on map mechanics (not Guild strength) that makes no sense.

 

[Grzechu Junior]

If the controlling Guild is truly stronger then they would be just fine on even footing and don't need the inherent advantage of greying out landing zones.

what xDD
we are doing this so we can go focus on other map to do the same. Main purpose of every war - get as big territory as possible, as good to defend as it can be, and have safe advantage over top 2 so we will not lose top 1....

again "oh so you are so strong, it is to easy for you"

Get guild focusoed on gvg, gather more than 5 members on 20:00 and fight them. Its all about inserting the last siege

 

[Yekk]

And if there would be more beaches - you think they will not Shield all of them at 8 PM? what is the difference between 4 or 20? If you dont want to try on this 4

The difference between 4 and 20 is immense. Currently they drop the 4 shore just before reset then set sieges locking down all the tiles they own (example had 105) then head to dinner. That age is done. With 20 shore they can not win the full 20 and that allows for game play. No one guild can continue to abuse the mechanics.

 

[Emberguard]

again "oh so you are so strong, it is to easy for you"

Not what we're saying.

 

[bornempire]

but you know they are stronger than yo uso they taken it?

If you assume you are as strong as them - go form beach - from those 4 sectors and get thos 100 sectors.

i mean its again - they are too strong - limit them. They cant be that strong. Its not fair thay are too strong.

And if there would be more beaches - you think they will not Shield all of them at 8 PM? what is the difference between 4 or 20? If you dont want to try on this 4

This answer sounds like: you never played GvG and didn't study the maps. Your talking theory, the guilds who fight face the practical and tactical issues.

 

[All Free Now]

To replace GvG, my only choice bringing new advanced continent map area with different provinces globally with new logics.

Let all guilds in same world fight for each province. No honeycomb level size provinces anymore and make everything like province size.

If no guild captures the province, the defense units will be set by AI. If captured, guild should mandatorily need to apply defenders for the province. If not, opponent may get free win without any defenders.

Advanced new continent map,

Hierarchy:
Age/Era -> Territories -> Provinces

With this, multiple territories available on every age and each one has minimum 7 provinces. Each territory is a base for any guild and they can receive defense or attack power from the territory base only if any guild capture province in the territory. Multiple guilds gets benefit from same territory if those guild captured few of the provinces in the territory. If all provinces are captured by single guild, a territory can produce random rewards for every two hours which can be gathered only by acquired guild. In this process, if other guild captured any province when those rewards are available, those rewards will be declined.

A province which got captured by any guild doesn't have any lock time period, it will be available for other guild to capture anytime. So making strong defense to a province is must.

And mainly, attack or defence units used should be match to the territory age. No cross age units fighting and exception is no age units only.

Can add more details, but this itself will not get implemented since it's a massive change where Dev's need to adjust lot of codes to this game approach. As a fact, it will take minimum 3 weeks time to delivers this without any issue or lag if no challenges on making same design pattern on Mobile and PC.

This is not mentioned in idea thread. Would you post this in idea thread, I willl give my supportive vote for it. This should not to be mingled with GvG PC users handshakes here.

 

[All Free Now]

What would it need to replace GvG?​

Better alternative to address guild ranking to cover all players in the game and making players engaged to game more than before.

Is it possible to remove GvG?
General answer is anything is possible, but it needs them courage to demolish something which satisfies few percentage of the players in the game and doesn't have any good justifiable reasons to do so.

 

[planetofthehumans2]

If it's one giant map for everyone, just make it all ages and have the units match what age the person is in when they fight. If someone puts ninja's in defense, it translates to all ranged units for someone that's not in VF.

There's way too many ages at this point to continue with age specific maps/areas/ext.

 

[Grzechu Junior]

This answer sounds like: you never played GvG and didn't study the maps. Your talking theory, the guilds who fight face the practical and tactical issues.

i am one of the commander in top 1 guild for (for now - 100 days and still counting) on my world and we are keeping 75-80% of AA. We were fighting for opening AA for few years and we managed many times to do so.

 

[MATR]

Jeez a bunch of comments here: I've tried GVG several times and don't get it, I guess I need a better tutorial. I would be glad if GVG was gone.

As a replacement I suggest something similar to the first 30 minutes of GBG. It is my favorite part of GBG where our guild is pitted agaisnt 7 or 8 other guilds in a fight to grab territory. There are races to the center then races against others on the same sector. It is the only time in gbg where there is a true fight for sectors and no alliances with other guild. The whole thing is done in 30 minutes. The proposed GVG replacement event is over after 30 minutes and could repeat once per day or only several times per week at different times to accommodate people in various time zones, could be random times announced at the beginning of the week . Winners are those who conquered the the sum total of the most valuable territory. It uses the same mechanic as already exists. No farming, event ends in 30 minutes, players get normal gbg prizes during play, winners get rank points. There should be more sc spots not less as they are only effective for 30 minutes. Challenge is for guild leaders to gather their fighters at a specific time and manage and direct fighters in live action. The same league system can be used to match guilds as gbg.

 

[Grzechu Junior]

Jeez a bunch of comments here: I've tried GVG several times and don't get it, I guess I need a better tutorial. I would be glad if GVG was gone.

its not a gamemode that you just go on random time. Its game mode that need logging every day at 8 to make progress. (if you want to really play gvg)
if you want just points you can even land on all beaches on all map and than be top 1 for one day

 

[angelgail]

Doesn't matter if there's no hidden agenda. Ever heard the saying "the way to hell is paved with good intentions"?

You can't argue in favor of something without changing your opinion in the process. It's human nature. Treating this question from a hypothetical standpoint is almost guaranteed to skew everyones' perspectives on the subject to be in favor of such a change, which would then misalign our views with the rest of the playerbase.

That will then change the feedback given later on if InnoGames ever asks the forums for official feedback, which won't be the feedback they need if we've already gotten used to arguing in favor of it. Then Inno will be wondering what happened and why there's a inconsistency between what's said and reality of what people actually want.

Even if the above was not the case, can Juber guarantee nothing in this thread will ever be used as feedback no matter where the conversation goes or how much people agree with each other? What happens if the Developers want feedback from forum threads created on the topic? Is this thread going to be excluded?

Anyone taking a quick glance over the thread would get the wrong idea on what we actually want if we're answering the OP's question at face value, instead of answering it with what we genuinely want. The Developers do get player feedback from these forums, and there's nothing stopping them from passing by and reading the thread even if Juber never forwards it. So there's no point in giving support to a hypothetical replacement unless we're actually on board with such a replacement.





My assumption is they most likely opted to make Guild Battlegrounds due to the amount of work necessary to port over GvG. If you basically have to build it up from scratch anyway, you might as well create a new product if you wish to make major changes in the process of porting it over

good point