STBs
Private
Introduction
I have my main account in Greifental and am a member of the guild Lords of War (LOW). We have held first position for the entire time of GvG until rather recently. In this text I want to explain why we have drastically changed policy and why I personally am rather fed up with FOE.
.
.
Guild policy
LOW have so far actively tried to keep as much land as possible and secure the position as leading guild. Just recently we have given up and will release most of our sectors and just kill any guilds that happen to be close. In ages where we have not been hit we will probably not do any special action.
.
.
Background
LOW was some time ago attacked by a “family” of guilds call Unseen (UU, UC, UF). The players are jumping between those guilds and attack from the one that can cause the most damage for the moment. In all previous conflicts with other guilds, their target has been to hold as much land as possible. The Unseen release the sectors behind them and are just trying to cause as much damage as possible to us. With this approach, it is impossible to defend. They can lay new sieges as often as they like with no cost in troops and a minimal amount of goods. LOW have killed countless of sieges, kicked them off the map, but nothing is stopping them from coming back and starting over. We are now fed up with watching the map 24/7 and killing sieges that cost them less than a day’s production of one single player. It will probably be really fun to cause Armageddon until something changes. For me it is either that or quit playing.
In short: The game mechanics promotes us acting like this so we will until something have changed.
.
.
Problem in the game mechanics
The cost for the first sieges is now almost negligible even compared to the production of a single player. Depending of age, it is easy to own up to 5 sectors and still make new sieges without even thinking. It is supposed to be GvG wars, but when it is possible for one or very few players to make such a difference, it is not only guild wars, but also some kind of PvG.
.
.
Suggestions for a better GvG experience
1. Cost of sieges should be higher.
1.1. Make the sieges cost troops. It is very illogical that you can use the same army over and over and watch it be killed every time.
1.2. Start the cost for a siege with at least 100 goods of each kind. It should require a guild to collect enough goods and make a difference.
.
2. Remove the unfair clicking and timing contest. Too much is dependent on the internet speed, latency and computer speed.
2.1. When entering a battle, the minimum time it takes should be a fixed amount of seconds even if the computer has finished loading earlier. I suppose it should be somewhere around 10 seconds.
2.2. When a siege is killed, the defending guild should be guaranteed to place at least one defending army if this is done within 10s after the siege is killed. (This can be also achieved by making it take a couple of seconds to set a siege, and a couple of seconds between each replacement of defense. It can also be modified to one guaranteed replacement every second or third siege.)
.
3. Make an icon be visible whenever the guild is attacked, just like the icon for finished production.
.
4. Limit the times possible for attacks to normal daytime. As it is now, players from other time zones can rule during night. This could be the case for international servers, but for domestic servers the action should be limited to times when normal citizens are awake. I would like to suggest 08:00 to 22:00, but can naturally be discussed.
.
Notes
Changes 1.1 and 1.2 will make ghosting much more difficult. It should require a guild to collect enough goods and make a difference.
Changes 2.1 and 2.2 will remove the advantage of superior hardware and internet connection. (Players should spend their money at the game, not computer hardware.) It will also be more important to have larger guilds with more active players participating in attacks or defenses. The longer time it takes to do each attack, the more important will it be to have more players participating. I think the game will be enriched of having larger guilds that promotes cooperation instead of zillions of miniature guilds.
Change 3 will promote playing actively with the city, writing messages, trading or other fun activities. Watching a dull map is boring and kills the fun of playing.
Change 4 is kind of obvious. Why should it be an advantage to be playing at any server but the one for my country?
.
The ultimate goal is to make sure the guild with most online fighters wins the battle and the guild with most production of goods can hold most sectors. Other changes that can be considered is to restrict the possibility to release sectors or increase cost for consecutive sieges. A sector could for example be considered to be owned for a week or a month after being released when calculating cost for sieges.
I have my main account in Greifental and am a member of the guild Lords of War (LOW). We have held first position for the entire time of GvG until rather recently. In this text I want to explain why we have drastically changed policy and why I personally am rather fed up with FOE.
.
.
Guild policy
LOW have so far actively tried to keep as much land as possible and secure the position as leading guild. Just recently we have given up and will release most of our sectors and just kill any guilds that happen to be close. In ages where we have not been hit we will probably not do any special action.
.
.
Background
LOW was some time ago attacked by a “family” of guilds call Unseen (UU, UC, UF). The players are jumping between those guilds and attack from the one that can cause the most damage for the moment. In all previous conflicts with other guilds, their target has been to hold as much land as possible. The Unseen release the sectors behind them and are just trying to cause as much damage as possible to us. With this approach, it is impossible to defend. They can lay new sieges as often as they like with no cost in troops and a minimal amount of goods. LOW have killed countless of sieges, kicked them off the map, but nothing is stopping them from coming back and starting over. We are now fed up with watching the map 24/7 and killing sieges that cost them less than a day’s production of one single player. It will probably be really fun to cause Armageddon until something changes. For me it is either that or quit playing.
In short: The game mechanics promotes us acting like this so we will until something have changed.
.
.
Problem in the game mechanics
The cost for the first sieges is now almost negligible even compared to the production of a single player. Depending of age, it is easy to own up to 5 sectors and still make new sieges without even thinking. It is supposed to be GvG wars, but when it is possible for one or very few players to make such a difference, it is not only guild wars, but also some kind of PvG.
.
.
Suggestions for a better GvG experience
1. Cost of sieges should be higher.
1.1. Make the sieges cost troops. It is very illogical that you can use the same army over and over and watch it be killed every time.
1.2. Start the cost for a siege with at least 100 goods of each kind. It should require a guild to collect enough goods and make a difference.
.
2. Remove the unfair clicking and timing contest. Too much is dependent on the internet speed, latency and computer speed.
2.1. When entering a battle, the minimum time it takes should be a fixed amount of seconds even if the computer has finished loading earlier. I suppose it should be somewhere around 10 seconds.
2.2. When a siege is killed, the defending guild should be guaranteed to place at least one defending army if this is done within 10s after the siege is killed. (This can be also achieved by making it take a couple of seconds to set a siege, and a couple of seconds between each replacement of defense. It can also be modified to one guaranteed replacement every second or third siege.)
.
3. Make an icon be visible whenever the guild is attacked, just like the icon for finished production.
.
4. Limit the times possible for attacks to normal daytime. As it is now, players from other time zones can rule during night. This could be the case for international servers, but for domestic servers the action should be limited to times when normal citizens are awake. I would like to suggest 08:00 to 22:00, but can naturally be discussed.
.
Notes
Changes 1.1 and 1.2 will make ghosting much more difficult. It should require a guild to collect enough goods and make a difference.
Changes 2.1 and 2.2 will remove the advantage of superior hardware and internet connection. (Players should spend their money at the game, not computer hardware.) It will also be more important to have larger guilds with more active players participating in attacks or defenses. The longer time it takes to do each attack, the more important will it be to have more players participating. I think the game will be enriched of having larger guilds that promotes cooperation instead of zillions of miniature guilds.
Change 3 will promote playing actively with the city, writing messages, trading or other fun activities. Watching a dull map is boring and kills the fun of playing.
Change 4 is kind of obvious. Why should it be an advantage to be playing at any server but the one for my country?
.
The ultimate goal is to make sure the guild with most online fighters wins the battle and the guild with most production of goods can hold most sectors. Other changes that can be considered is to restrict the possibility to release sectors or increase cost for consecutive sieges. A sector could for example be considered to be owned for a week or a month after being released when calculating cost for sieges.
Last edited by a moderator:
