DeletedUser13805
oh thats interesting what troops do you use to beat these units with in unboosted mode ??? dont tell me i can guess : )
-
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:
oh thats interesting what troops do you use to beat these units with in unboosted mode ??? dont tell me i can guess : )
DeletedUser
Exactly what I'm thinking. The last nail in the coffin...
DeletedUser8813
I think that is the whole idea..kill pvp..make it more sim city like...
ddevil
Chief Warrant Officer
I think their whole idea is to KILL PVP so that players JOIN GvG ....thats where a lot of diamonds are needed to succeed specially after these planned nerfings ...and not in making the game more sim city like...
DeletedUser8813
from what i have been reading on th forum we cant mention...the long awaited GVG is a bust and it wont keep us very excited for long...
DeletedUser15432
from what I have also been reading and various other sources, they might are supposed to be testing the new GB's over their from the next update, U wonder if that testing will put back the implementation of the changes here
Re PvP, to dramatically increase the score for a particular tower, it is not just a matter of posting the score first, to increase the battle score by 30% takes some serious effort
Re PvP, to dramatically increase the score for a particular tower, it is not just a matter of posting the score first, to increase the battle score by 30% takes some serious effort
DeletedUser13805
i dont know why the devs seem to have it in for pvp but its been clear even with the protests over attached / unattached units that they have no intention of speeding pvp play up or listening to player who play it
every update in pvp has caused the game to take longer to battle for me, as a protest i am going to kill off my gvg town and i would suggest to anyone who really wants to try to save pvp that a message needs to be sent to the devs loud and clear and what better way to send that message to them then to withdraw from the gvg if enough players do it they will understand the strong feelings and love of pvp players have ?
they will not listen to our moans on the forum the attached / unattached issue proved that never did they update that simple idea, so enough of words lets take some action
every update in pvp has caused the game to take longer to battle for me, as a protest i am going to kill off my gvg town and i would suggest to anyone who really wants to try to save pvp that a message needs to be sent to the devs loud and clear and what better way to send that message to them then to withdraw from the gvg if enough players do it they will understand the strong feelings and love of pvp players have ?
they will not listen to our moans on the forum the attached / unattached issue proved that never did they update that simple idea, so enough of words lets take some action
DeletedUser13082
Basically what you're saying is that modern troops can't be defeated with older troops unless rogues are used? Fine by me, challenge accepted. I'll take some screen shots and post them up in the champions thread for you to see when I get round to it.
As for this post, I agree in theory and opinion but not in strategy. A load of people not playing GvG will make no difference, devs get paid whether we use the new feature or not. Constantly bringing up the attached/unattached also makes no difference, we've been told it's on the way and therefore it's on the way. Posting about it constantly won't get it here any sooner, also it's off topic.
As I've said before. Only a handful of players have a good opinion of this update. Personally I think this update will likely be removed. There is too much negative feedback concerning it. Players have already begun to quit the game as they see no point playing when this update comes (neither do I) and those who are still here and who don't plan on quitting are all of the same opinion and are grouping against the update. I personally don't think it will happen which is why I haven't been complaining about it too much any more.
DeletedUser13805
dont twist my words please : )
what i am saying is this
hint posted up a score were he used 7 rouges and 1 either Armored infanty or it was a legionare,i can not remember which he used and beat the new paratroopers with them so if you want to try to beat 8 paratroopers with 8 armourd inf or legionares and beat that score i would love to see you try
the rouges make the game a joke when you can beat such strong armys in my book and you know it
DeletedUser13082
As hint has said before. They make very little difference in battle, using them and not using them both have pros and cons. They're useful more because of the out of battle perks (no population decrease and very small grid space usage). On the battlefield their just whatever unit they are morphed in to. They will absorb one enemy attack with 0 damage taken, yes that's true, if you are using ranged units however they also potentially miss an attack on the enemy, this means the attack they absorbed is then countered by the attack they were unable to use until they were hit and morphed and therefore cancels out the perk. Like I said, pros and cons. You have a very one track mind about you desy, learn to think outside the box and look from all angles and perspectives. Just because you have an opinion doesn't mean that your opinion is correct.
Nothing more to be said. Back on topic please.
DeletedUser13805
i dont have single track mind i am telling the truth the rouge unit is the king of the battlefield and makes a huge difference and if you dont belive me try doing a hood full of mod era units without using rogues you will then understand what i am saying and how much difference it makes hell if germany had rouges in the war they would of won : )
just them taking the one hit in round one makes all the difference in the world as in round 2 they will have 7 units at least all untouched and moved up into attack postions and as for the high scores chart well its a joke that the low units beat mod era units isnt it ? or are you so closed minded that any way to rig a result is ok by you ?
and its still on topic as its all pvp related stuff and i have said the rouges are the units to tweak so that we can stop this sillyness and get back to 8 troops v 8 troops battles like the game should be not tweak the castles like there doing and going to make the rouge even more powerful as rouges will be the only ones that will beat defenses of 500% etc useing 8 troops v 8 troops will give the win to the defender or thats me guessing at the outcome i really hope it isnt the case
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser15432
I do not use rogues in my attacking armies and only have a few unattached rogues in defence, I can defeat virtually all colonial and industrial defences (read as all) without the use of rogues and have also beaten a Modern Era defending army in a map sector using colonial age troops, rogues are a waste of space and can easily be bypassed if negated
Praeceptor
Lieutenant Colonel
We'd better be careful about dissing rogues. The devs might take it as a sign to nerf them too.
Let's get back to the central point. If you spent hard earned cash on a sports car then the garage came and took out half the spark plugs because reliant robin drivers thought they were too powerful, you'd want your money back, wouldn't you? Plenty of us spent diamonds getting our attack GBs sorted. Just leave them alone.
Let's get back to the central point. If you spent hard earned cash on a sports car then the garage came and took out half the spark plugs because reliant robin drivers thought they were too powerful, you'd want your money back, wouldn't you? Plenty of us spent diamonds getting our attack GBs sorted. Just leave them alone.
DeletedUser13082
Using rogues isn't rigging in any way, shape or form. It's tactics. Isn't that what you cry about all the time saying you are the master of battle and yet too dumb to realise the benefit of rogues?
Second point, no, it's not a bad thing for it to be possible for lower age units to be able to defeat higher age units. It means that the person attacking clearly has a good knowledge for the tactical side of PvP and is able to defeat a stronger army because he is smarter than the AI. Something which, seen as you are complaining, I assume you can't do.
Point #3. I have only had rogues since the winter event. Before then I was using standard troops 100% of the time and doing perfectly fine. Rogues however are better for me as it means I can fit more supply buildings into my city and as a result I get better growth rates.
Next, you literally quoted what I said about the rogues absorbing a hit and then ignored the part where I clearly stated why this can also be a loss on the battlefield when using rogues. This is why I say you have a one track mind. I have given you a pro and a con for rogues and you focus solely on the pro because that betters your argument, you ignore the con because you know it makes sense and there is nothing you can say to it.
Finally, this is no where near being on topic. Rogues, and the way people do their PvP, has nothing at all to do with the purpose of this thread. This thread is to discuss the update. Rogues aren't a part of the update, neither are the tactics of PvP. The update concerns the nerfing of GB's. This is you, yet again, moaning and complaining, feeling sorry for yourself, saying "It's not fair, he does better than me but I work harder". The fact of the matter is you work harder because you make things difficult for yourself. Others do better with less effort because they make things easier and they do things effectively. It is your choice to play ineffectively. If you don't like being behind due to ineffective game style then start playing more effectively. If you choose not to play more effectively then don't come and moan about your bad decisions as if it was somebody else's fault.
Now to conclude, as you are seriously beginning to grind on my nerves, I'll not be replying any further, unless it is something which is on topic for the thread, as talking to you is like talking to a brick wall. Have clearly don't have the brain capacity to take in the information that multiple different players are spoon feeding to you, because of that, I am putting down the spoon. If you want to continue your incessant, pointless ranting then create a thread for it so that nobody else has to look. P's and Q's.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser13082
Can somebody tell me, if a player were to have all offence GB's at level 10, and defending player had all defence GB's at level 10, with the new nerf, would the percentage be cancelled out entirely as if the GB's were none existent, or would one or the other have benefit? (that's not including other offence buildings, just with GB's only)
DeletedUser
Well, as far as I can see, this is what we have learned thus far...
1. The game will be ruined by this new change, and people will be quitting in droves. However, I've been around long enough to see lots of updates that will supposedly ruin the game and have people quitting in droves, yet that doesn't seem to have happened yet. TRANSLATION: People like to complain about change that they feel will somehow grant them less advantage than they previously felt they possessed. Often this is masked by "it makes the game too easy" comments, in an effort to look as though they are more concerned for other players. What is usually forgotten is that ALL players are affected by changes, so whatever advantage you feel you have lost, everyone else that enjoyed that advantage are losing it as well. SOLUTION: Stop the incessant complaining and adjust your game play when the new update is released. Undoubtedly, there will be some aspects you feel have become more challenging, and others that are easier. Again, remember that everyone is affected by these changes, not just you. For example, if you feel that it will become too hard to defeat your entire hood everyday and you will have a harder time getting PvP points, all the other war-mongers in your hood will face that same challenge, so you won't be "falling behind".
2. Certain buildings have now become useless, and were a waste of time and (sometimes) money. Yes, I've heard this one plenty of times too, and equally as often I've heard the complaint that what was previously thought of as a "useless" building so the player deleted it, and now they are upset because it has come around that it IS useful. The Rogue Hideout is my favorite example of this. Many players felt that the Rogue Hideout was practically useless when it was introduced, yet most will now agree that it is a very useful troop to have available. So, go ahead and delete those great buildings and whatever else you feel has been nerfed - it will give you something to complain about later.
3. GvG should have all new buildings that provide GvG-only bonuses - this makes the playing field more "fair" for smaller (or newer, or weaker, or whatever) guilds to be more competitive. Ok, here is the immediate problem I see with THIS solution: The NEW complaint will be that Innogames are a bunch of greedy money mongers, and are making it necessary to buy all new stuff to be competitive in Guild Wars when we already had Great Buildings that could have done the same thing. TRANSLATION: No matter how Innogames implements Guild Wars, lots of players are going to complain that something isn't fair about it, even though EVERYONE playing is bound by the same new rules and restrictions. Whatever it is you feel you have lost, so did everyone else that had it, therefore you haven't really lost any "advantage" you thought you had.
This is enough for now, I think.
-Sigmar
1. The game will be ruined by this new change, and people will be quitting in droves. However, I've been around long enough to see lots of updates that will supposedly ruin the game and have people quitting in droves, yet that doesn't seem to have happened yet. TRANSLATION: People like to complain about change that they feel will somehow grant them less advantage than they previously felt they possessed. Often this is masked by "it makes the game too easy" comments, in an effort to look as though they are more concerned for other players. What is usually forgotten is that ALL players are affected by changes, so whatever advantage you feel you have lost, everyone else that enjoyed that advantage are losing it as well. SOLUTION: Stop the incessant complaining and adjust your game play when the new update is released. Undoubtedly, there will be some aspects you feel have become more challenging, and others that are easier. Again, remember that everyone is affected by these changes, not just you. For example, if you feel that it will become too hard to defeat your entire hood everyday and you will have a harder time getting PvP points, all the other war-mongers in your hood will face that same challenge, so you won't be "falling behind".
2. Certain buildings have now become useless, and were a waste of time and (sometimes) money. Yes, I've heard this one plenty of times too, and equally as often I've heard the complaint that what was previously thought of as a "useless" building so the player deleted it, and now they are upset because it has come around that it IS useful. The Rogue Hideout is my favorite example of this. Many players felt that the Rogue Hideout was practically useless when it was introduced, yet most will now agree that it is a very useful troop to have available. So, go ahead and delete those great buildings and whatever else you feel has been nerfed - it will give you something to complain about later.
3. GvG should have all new buildings that provide GvG-only bonuses - this makes the playing field more "fair" for smaller (or newer, or weaker, or whatever) guilds to be more competitive. Ok, here is the immediate problem I see with THIS solution: The NEW complaint will be that Innogames are a bunch of greedy money mongers, and are making it necessary to buy all new stuff to be competitive in Guild Wars when we already had Great Buildings that could have done the same thing. TRANSLATION: No matter how Innogames implements Guild Wars, lots of players are going to complain that something isn't fair about it, even though EVERYONE playing is bound by the same new rules and restrictions. Whatever it is you feel you have lost, so did everyone else that had it, therefore you haven't really lost any "advantage" you thought you had.
This is enough for now, I think.
-Sigmar
DeletedUser
attacker would have 90% on both stats, defender would have 60% on both stats
DeletedUser3157
Well defender would have his normal 10/10 unit as 16/16 unit and attacker would have his normal 10/10 unit has 19/19 unit. In offense/defense ratios it would be compareble to current 150% offense bonus attacking a 343% defense bonus. So it will be a stronger defense to face than it is now(would be 200% defense bonus 2 maxed defense GBs currently), but still quite easy to beat. But if you throw in some watchfires, it quite quickly gets harder. For example 2 maxed defensive GBs together with 16 watchfires would be (attack/defense ratios) like fighting 525% defense bonus with 150% offense bonus is right now. What is like fighting an unboosted defense with unboosted offense cause that's actually the point where max offensive bonus meets it's equal defensive value. Anything above that and attacker goes in with a disadvantage.
PS: This is just numbers talk for a pretty simplified system. In reality there will be plenty of outside factors which make predicting this outcome more complex. Like for example the unit type bonuses will have increased roles because of lower totals they add up upon, or just the fact that it will be completely different fighting cause instead of doing many blows for super low damagaes, you will be just doing few ones for big damages, much increasing the role of strategy and odds to beat defenses against who you'd be at disadvatage against when going in to the fight.
For example player who currently has 2 maxed DGB and 50 WF(400% def bonus) will be according to mathematical ratios be as difficult to beat in the new system as someone with 900% defense bonus is right now. Defeating someone with 900% defense bonus right now is impossible if they are well defended. Mostly because you can't use too much strategy and evade hits etc, it will be just hundreds of blows traded back and forth and due to having a much weaker unit, attacker always loses that fight. But defeating the equivilant of such defense in new system should be more possible in theory, because damages being dealt are bigger, so it gives more room for strategy, to kill units smart before they can hit back etc. And also unit and other type bonuses having an increased role due to making up a larger % of the total values should help.
Now anyone who ofc already has 900% defense bonus in current system will be absolutely unbreakeble in the new system. And the player who has 400% defense bonus right now will be unbreakeble in 90% cases in the new system. I'm just trying to point out that even if matheaticly something can be correct, there are always outside factors you need to consider and which in a case like here, could be super important.
PPS: I like when the PS becomes 3x longer than the post itself
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
If only GBs are counted, then it is equivalent to +19% boost to the attacker (1.9/1.6 = 1.1875). It is like fighting with lvl 4 Zeus against player without defense bonus (with current system).
DeletedUser3157
I think this is a better example than mine, because the damages will be much more easier to compare and visualize in this instance. Btw I remember when I got my first zeus and it was at like lvl4 or so. I was loving it, PvP seemed instantly so much easyer haha. And then I got spoiled by the rest of the 130%, so now 20% reads like a joke
Although I'm pretty sure average top half player in my hood didn't have around 300% defense bonus back then either
Last edited by a moderator: