DeletedUser
I'm fine with that as long as the smaller guild has somewhere else to go where they can compete against guilds at their own level. Currently that is not the case.
There's always somewhere to go if a guild gets whiped off as the province is full of landingzones However, I can't agree that a guild should get a new sector served on a silver platter just because they are small. If they are active enough they have a good chance to take a new sector that will become their HQ, and if they are not, well then they will simply have to get stronger
Let me know when you think 10 of 15 guilds can get together to organized a coordinated attack, hard enough to get players in 1 guild coordinated. Also consider the case of a top guild with say 75 sectors backed into the bottom corner of the ME map. It is unlikely that the guild will be bordered by more than a handful of other guilds not the 10-15 you are talking about. Similar situations can occur on several of the maps along large mountain or oceancoast(non LZ)
I did not mean that 10-15 guilds would get together in a coordinated attack - that is not even necessary What I meant was that all guilds that are actually interested in participating in GvG will continue to fight for their first sector untill they get it. And if 10-15 guilds does this against a larger guild that is currently dominating they will manage to get a sector, even if they don't coordinate their attacks with each other
The thing is: no guild has an enough large support pool to fill up all of their sectors to 50% boost if they are also dominating the province. This means that smaller guilds without any province will easily be able to set their siege against the sectors with 0% boost. If the guild is active, they will manage to take the sector, and keep in mind that other guilds may do this at the same time. The attacker needs to focus on 1 sector, the defender needs to focus on multiple sectors. And once that smaller guild has taken 1 sector, that will become their HQ which will have a very strong boost.
However 5 or 6 guilds out of 50 each with 30-40 sectors could and after a time will likely get tired of attacking each other and the statuesque sets in.
Yes, and why is that? It's because of the high costs. A guild that controls 30-40 sectors will have a siege cost of 1000s of each good. And keeping in mind that it's much easier to defeat a siege than to defeat the defense, I'm not surprised that it leads to a stalemate Now instead consider that the cost for this guild would be 100 of each good, then they would most likely start to attack each other, because now it's simply affordable
I direct you to read my post number #12 where i provide the specifics of my reset idea. I specifically mention that at the time of reset there will be rewards paid including repayment of a portion of the goods costs for the sectors held at the time of the reset.(on top of decrease in goods costs to start with) " Presuming there were still goods costs for gvg sectors some amount of goods would have to be paid back at the reset. " Included in my proposal are added daily rewards and reward sectors which would help offset the costs of gvg. " Instead rewards will consist of the daily reward sectors, some daily rewards for guilds by ranking in each gvg age, and a large reward based on a guilds ranking in each individual age at the end of the gvg tournament cycle."
Yes, I understand, but why? What does we gain by reseting the province? Instead of a strategical war we will see another race of which guilds that can more quickly rush through the province and secure X amount of sectors. And this will be repeated forever, just like the PvP-towers. The stalemate will still occur when the costs get to high
My proposal also includes a limit to the number of sectors a guild could take in an age to offset the function of the siege goods cost which would be eliminated with goods costs being decreased drastically(this would force the top guilds with the max number of sectors to plan and attack more based on sector power values instead of just accumulating as many sectors as they can). It also would limit the number of ages a guild could fight in at a time, so those smaller guilds would likely have a place where they can go in the lower ages and not have to compete with the top guilds.
I hate to say it - but I do not like this suggestion. Why should the largest and most active guild get punished? If the players in that guild work hard enough to control so many sectors, shouldn't they get rewarded for it instead of having a limitation where they can't take more sectors?
In my opinion the strongest guild is the one that should rule, and in order for other guilds to compete, they will need to become equally strong. That is what creates the entire competetion between guilds, right? And of course I'm not saying that smaller guilds should not have a chance - but they will There is no guild that is strong enough to control an entire province if there's other active guilds that are also interested in that province
Hence - let the balance come by itself. Start out with just a tiny adjustment and see what happens After a few weeks, adjust it again if it's not good enough. It's much better to do like this than to make large drastic changes