DeletedUser15372
With alcatraz and so many unattached units plus atomium and observatory with so many goods in stock equals?
ghosty ghosty guilds yayyyy
ghosty ghosty guilds yayyyy
-
Dear forum reader,
To actively participate in our forum discussions or to start your own threads, in addition to your game account, you need a forum account. You can REGISTER HERE!
Please ensure a translation into English is provided if your post is not in English and to respect your fellow players when posting.
-
We are looking for you! Always wanted to join our Support or Forum Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
Take a look at our recruitment page for more information and how you can apply:
DeletedUser3157
@mink, I think he means that the vast majority of attackers unit losses when ghosting for pvp points would come from placing sieges, not from the attacks themselves. And now placing sieges now longer needs units, so you can do it so much easier..
Overall cooldown period is an obvious fix for majority ghosting. Only problem is that ghosting itself seems to be more of a symptom of a bigger problem(poor siege goods costs formula) than its own thing. Yes this will make life now harder for big guilds to ghost each-other(or trickier moving between multi-guild alliances etc). But it in no shape or form addresses the type of ghosting rank players would do for rank points. Actually the siege units change will make that type of ghosting much much more viable now. It will be a tiny fracture of your player base who'd fall down that route, but it be lot of ur top customers, most active players, and their effect could be sure felt globally on GvG map.
Overall cooldown period is an obvious fix for majority ghosting. Only problem is that ghosting itself seems to be more of a symptom of a bigger problem(poor siege goods costs formula) than its own thing. Yes this will make life now harder for big guilds to ghost each-other(or trickier moving between multi-guild alliances etc). But it in no shape or form addresses the type of ghosting rank players would do for rank points. Actually the siege units change will make that type of ghosting much much more viable now. It will be a tiny fracture of your player base who'd fall down that route, but it be lot of ur top customers, most active players, and their effect could be sure felt globally on GvG map.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser76094
Lol darling, sure.
.
I agree that you don't get points for setting sieges. You do get points for killing defenses after setting these "no troop cost" sieges. Let's take my case for example. The entire Brisgard knows I love to fight, my battle count says it all. I could set sieges on sectors that are 0% boosted, or even 50% boosted, it's still better than attacking players with 60%+ attack/defense boost (not counting the monastery and watchfires that many players have). I can gain a lot more battle points by doing so. I can trade actively in let's say PME for which I know my observatory and Atomium would give me sufficient number of goods every day. My alcatraz would give me plenty of rogues/unattached troops using which I can easily fight 100+ battles every day without suffering too many casualties. My battle points and ranking points would explode and I would easily be able to go after the rank 1 again. So basically I can become a self-sufficient 1 player guild. In addition, I could help some guilds seeking revenge from larger guilds as long as they keep supplying me goods for the sieges I would need to place.
.
BUT, that's not the point. GvG was introduced to encourage existence and prosperity of guilds. Now we will see 2-3 player guilds who can make unlimited troopless sieges, fight a large number of battles every day on the GvG maps without having to pay too many goods for sieging, and would discourage guilds from participating in GvG all together. GvG would just become a hunting ground for battle hungry players.
.
Like I said, if this change is implemented, this game should be renamed to Forge of Mercenaries.
DeletedUser
Too late for me, I haven't logged in in over a month and don't intend to. The ability for players to jump from guild to guild in their own free will was a poor mechanic in the first place. It didn't make sense and destroyed many guilds' efforts in progressing in the map. It was not a battle of guilds vs guilds anymore, it was a matter of making ghost guilds causing havoc in the different maps.
DeletedUser13082
Implementing a cool-down period between leaving and re-joining a guild isn't going to stop ghost guild activity. It's as simple as that. Think of the independent players who use GvG as a way of gaining more PvP points and nothing else. They use their guild as a ghost guild, never holding a sector which they take, instead they release it and then ghost again somewhere else causing constant damage to real guilds. Do you really see that being stopped with this update? If anything it's going to be easier for them now because somebody, in their moment of utter stupidity, decided to remove the use of ones own units in order to place a siege... Really? You thought that was clever? Did you pat yourself on the back? You definitely deserve a high five... to the face... with a brick...
This update is going to kill GvG completely. We now have people coming here saying "hopping guild to guild is cheating" "It's just as bad as ghost guilds" blah blah blah and all the rest of it. Please come and complain again about how your worlds GvG is at a stalemate with ghosting being the only activity? Now remember how active E world is because of large alliances being formed and people going back and forth from guilds doing battles here there and everywhere and ENJOYING the feature. Your point seems pretty pointless now doesn't it? You may enjoy sitting and looking at those pretty green and red sectors never changing, others, however, prefer to actually use the GvG feature as often as possible.
As already said; Revoke these new additions to GvG, go back to the drawing board and put together an idea which is actually going to work. Stop thinking of a solution and saying "yep, that'll do", try thinking about the consequences of your so called "solutions" first. This fixes nothing, it's actually going to make things worse.
This update is going to kill GvG completely. We now have people coming here saying "hopping guild to guild is cheating" "It's just as bad as ghost guilds" blah blah blah and all the rest of it. Please come and complain again about how your worlds GvG is at a stalemate with ghosting being the only activity? Now remember how active E world is because of large alliances being formed and people going back and forth from guilds doing battles here there and everywhere and ENJOYING the feature. Your point seems pretty pointless now doesn't it? You may enjoy sitting and looking at those pretty green and red sectors never changing, others, however, prefer to actually use the GvG feature as often as possible.
As already said; Revoke these new additions to GvG, go back to the drawing board and put together an idea which is actually going to work. Stop thinking of a solution and saying "yep, that'll do", try thinking about the consequences of your so called "solutions" first. This fixes nothing, it's actually going to make things worse.
Last edited by a moderator:
adam s keemer
Private
So basically us smaller guilds or new guilds wont stand a chance in GVG, we rely on our higher level friends to hop into our guilds to provide us with strength to help us secure a sector. Its unfair on us and makes us think 'why bother'
I've been playing for almost 2 years across all worlds and this has got to be the worst change ever
I've been playing for almost 2 years across all worlds and this has got to be the worst change ever
DeletedUser1081
Ok, thanks Hint & Guptaji - I get it now, I think.
And I'd like to renew my request for Tracey and/or Anwar to explain what the aim of introducing troopless sieges is, please and thank you.
And I'd like to renew my request for Tracey and/or Anwar to explain what the aim of introducing troopless sieges is, please and thank you.
DeletedUser99588
-1 to the guild hopping 7 day restriction. Starting to get fed up with it all now. So many have argued against it that it seems silly to introduce it. I have seen so many better ideas but can't discuss here as I will be accused of going off topic.
DeletedUser15372
Well post modern era is here which means post modern era province will be here too for GvG, sooner or later if not on wednesday, and that means more frustration for players :p
DeletedUser9546
So what most of you are saying is...
GVG is going to die a deadly death? Deja Vu much?
lol You guys kill me.
GVG is going to die a deadly death? Deja Vu much?
lol You guys kill me.
DeletedUser
Instead of 7 day before return to guild i would suggest each guild member should have a personal power bar giving guild level and benefits,
That way if you left guild you would go back to level 1 and have to slowly build level again to get benefits of being in higher level guild.
And looking forward to new era
That way if you left guild you would go back to level 1 and have to slowly build level again to get benefits of being in higher level guild.
And looking forward to new era
DeletedUser99588
I don't think it will die whititera but the 7 day guild restriction hits other parts of the game that have become common place and part of the enjoyment for many. Having sister guilds and forming alliances with other guilds adds another element to the game, which quite frankly could become ever so boring if they keep implementing restrictions. Many who don't participate in GvG will see this as the final nail in the coffin. Maybe inno are only interested in GvG players and don't see that as a problem. Who knows as they never seem to comment.
DeletedUser13082
Much like when we said that PvP was going to die due to the Gb nerfs, which it did. Like when we said that the vast majority of veteran players were going to leave when GvG was released, which they did. Should I continue?
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser12020
surely a good way to stop ghost guilds is prevent newly created guilds entering gvg for a period of time. Also maybe some initial goods deposit needs to be made into the treasury which is non -refundable.
DeletedUser13082
There are hundreds of ideas which would work, they just decided to choose the one idea that won't
DeletedUser76094
There are hundreds of ideas which would work, they just decided to choose the one idea that won't
I agree... Guild hopping restrictions aren't my most favorable but considering the amount of dirt in Brisgard, I liked it... However, I agree with what Muppetmaster says... To enter GvG a guild should be required to make a deposit (non-refundable) and then a cool down period ..
If you release HQ or if your HQ is conquered, you can't re-enter for at least 24 hours...
DeletedUser12020
by stopping ghosting using this method they will kill people moving guilds to trade and gvg will grind to a halt.
E-Nagash gvg is good fun with sectors often swapping hands - making alliances, friends, moving to other guilds to fight and trade is a big part of the game for me. This 7 day idea will not be well received.
E-Nagash gvg is good fun with sectors often swapping hands - making alliances, friends, moving to other guilds to fight and trade is a big part of the game for me. This 7 day idea will not be well received.
mrbeef
Lieutenant-General
Atomiums and Observatories will take care of the goods side of things I reckon though.
PS.. I just had a bash at making an avatar and a sig. Any suggestions on how to improve them will be gratefully received.
DeletedUser7719
That still won't combat the ghost guild activity unless you meant a initial goods cost rather than just a deposit.
DeletedUser13082
I think the idea suggested there meant that when creating a new guild a certain amount of goods from a particular age must be added to the treasury before that guild is then able to begin a siege on that age map. Personally I think that idea could work very well. For example, if a new guild required say 500 goods of the age to be donated to the treasury before sieges could begin, it would act as a heavy deterrent against ghost guilds as people wouldn't want to waste 500 goods just so they could ghost a couple of sectors. They may as well just keep hold of those goods and use them to pay for sieges from there own guild instead.