Perfectly fine to disagree.
((Edit: Surely most of my guildmates at The Matrix agree with you)).
The guild in my main world (
Slayers EN4 Dinegu) has quit GvG long ago, and we are now mainly focused in GE (more Gold Trophies than all others)) and GBG (Diamond League). My guild in my second most active world (
The Matrix EN8 Houndsmoor) is a main competitor in GvG holding top positions at several maps, also do GBG and GE. Participation of my guilds at GvG in my other worlds is very rare, the large majority have shifted to GBG. Me, personally, since mainly using my mobile device for several years now, dont do any GVG even when playing at
EN8 Houndsmoor. My experience says people are leaving GvG behind. Many other forum members have/can said something similar. But not counting just on my experience, Inno surely has the updated statistics on how many guilds/players invest time/efforts in GvG. Inno surely have the statistics of how many players play FOE using PCs vs Mobile devices. It seems than Mobile players are now more than PC players (can someone confirm? Or just Inno can confirm?).
On top of that Inno have announced more than one time their decision to not invest more resources to fix the multiple problems we have pointed out about GvG. Even added items to the Do Not Suggest List to stop more ideas aimed to fix GVG, or to add GvG to Mobile version:
- Bringing GvG to mobile. The developers have stated this will not happen.
- Changes/Additions to GvG.
(This can indirectly confirm my inferences in a previous paragraph.)
Therefore, if GvG have declined to be a main activity for players/guilds within FOE, and not a top priority for Inno, and this level of activity continue to be decreasing month after month (Inno to confirm with their stats) then the question of the influence of GvG on the Ranking Points formula should be evaluated.
- If GBG is by large (again Inno to confirm) more relevant to guilds/players than GvG, is it not fair then that GBG be more influent in Ranking Points than GvG?
- If guilds doing GvG are a minority, should they receive a big push in the ranking for that participation over guilds that have abandoned GvG?
- How large is that influence now? How large it should be?
Great analyse, this is precisely why in my opinion the suggestion of
@planetofthehumans2 is
such a great idea. The idea to convert a certain amount of VP into prestige for the guild
ranking.
I feel like the intensions with GvG where good but how it turned out is inferior compared to
GbG. Yet I think GbG could be improved a bit. Better match making it actually is randomised
and not based of guild ID number, guild names hidden until the end of the season. Guilds in
the active season can be named after the colour of their provinces. This makes it significant
harder to make ping-pong deals. As it should make communication practical impossible to
arrange deals. So, I feel like this GbG enhancements would be great additions:
> X% VP converted into prestige, suggestion from planetofthehumans2
> Guildnames hidden until season has been completed (name of colour of guild's provinces are listed in active season)
> Reduced effectiveness of siege camps (EG cap of maximum chance or multiple adjacent siege camps don't stack)
> Additional champion league for top guilds with negative LP, #1 keeps LP for that victorious season, IDK who suggested this first
>
Actual random matchmaking instead of matchmaking based off guild ID or bug fix for this
Source for the not really random match making system of GbG:
Personally I feel like GbG is the only true cross platform multi player feature of FoE currently.
Where GE is rather like a checklist of up to 64 fights / neg. on an weekly base. It's not bad
though. I feel like GE, GbG and cultural settlements are the best features outside of the main
game to focus on. While camping or forced to when hitting the last released age or being
stuck in the TT.
GvG was kinda fun but the way it rolls ain't. It could still become a good feature tho. The strengths
from GbG could be easily implemented into GvG to safe it. Like hourly or every 4h calculating and
rewarding control over sectors. Protection for sectors making time limited, preventing ping-pong
strategy to securing sectors with invincible protection. Much higher cap for sector defence bonuses
or no cap at all. This would improve value for defensive GbG's and would making guilds less feeling
forced to rely on their ping-pong strategy to securing sectors. Rather to designing good matchups
for defending armies. Maybe a quarterly season of GvG. Giving new guilds the opportunity to rise
and shine in an fresh and new playfield of GvG every quarter. Alternately annual seasons could be
more exciting and Inno could promote on their fora an annual recap of the past annual GvG season,
with honourable mentions and a special list of fame for top performing guilds in various rankings.
Like greatest GvG warriors (most fights won), most conquering minded guilds, etc. This would
Drastically making players more interested in GbG and perhaps in defensive GBs. This in game news
letter idea originates from Grepolis.
Such things could be implemented into GvG or even an remastered version could be made. Enabling
cross platform Browser / app. All of this could provide an decant GbG alternative with the advantage
of more continuous gameplay and more strategy and upgrading value for defensive GBs. Really big
bummer Inno doesn't seems to see how great 2 major multi-player features could be for the player
base... but maybe somewhere in the future or in an alternative universe their working on something
like it or an FoE remaster one can always dream for better days