• 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 in to 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:
    Apply
  • Forum Contests

    Don't forget to check out the current contests here.

Unformatted: GbG adjustment

JudgeDredd81

Private
Proposal
CAP max sectors of conquering


Reason
To give smaller guilds a fighting chance when strong guilds are hatefully crushing anyone and everyone!


Details
Set max CAP on 50% of all sectors, that way you will keep more ppl motivated to stay doing GbG. How it now goos with high ranked guild is that they take all and crush them down again when timer hits 0. This is therefor no fun at all to keep doing GbG, ive more then one members came to me that they are getting demotivated when this happens and even outside the guild i hear a lot of complaining about this way of doing GbG


Balance/Abuse Prevention
This way will be more fun to play for all sizes of guild and it will be more balanced GbG experience
 

The Lady Ann

Master Corporal
no, if you are in a league too high for your capabilities drop down a league, there are a lot of things wrong with GbG but this is not one of them
 

JudgeDredd81

Private
Top 10 over rule always bye taking all, just play fair and allow other to just play GbG also, we are to good to me in platium league and to bad to be in diamond league. Thats just to short headed dont you think! And all would stay the same for the strong guild becourse they would still will, only the optics for many ppl would be diffrent by giving them a fauls hope. But fauls hope is better then no hope at all is only 1 guild takes all sectors. To be fair thats just nasty f*cked up to my opinion!
 
No. Small guilds can compete with big guilds, if they have the desire and drive. Heck, just last GbG, had a 1-man guild take top spot to our 2nd place 70+ guild. The guy was determined.
 

JudgeDredd81

Private
Now you say it right, but if a guild take that away by take all sectors in a wink of an eye, its just f*cked up. Like i said, i am not the only one who think like this but many many many more. And i didnt say smaller or bigger, just stronger in a David vs Golliath situation what happens a lot
 
Now you say it right, but if a guild take that away by take all sectors in a wink of an eye, its just f*cked up. Like i said, i am not the only one who think like this but many many many more. And i didnt say smaller or bigger, just stronger in a David vs Golliath situation what happens a lot
There are 4 levels of GbG - and the higher you go, the higher the competition is. If you are in a level that you do not feel you can compete in, then you do not belong in that level and should go down a level. If you do not feel you should have to go down a level, they you will have to learn how to play at the higher level, or you will not. And if you do not - then you will quickly enough lose LP so you will automatically go down a level where you probably have better chance to compete.
This is like you saying you have gone to Vegas, and have been invited to the High Rollers table (Diamond League), but because you cannot afford the $1000 ante, you think they should create special tables for you. Well, if you cannot afford to ante with the High Rollers, then you do not belong with the High Rollers.
And so what if the sectors get taken in a blink of an eye?? That is all part of the game - and the speed with which sectors get taken is usually much higher when you are playing against the High Rollers.
Stay in the gold, or preferable Silver League, and enjoy playing a level that you feel you can compete in.
 

r21r

Major-General
There are 4 levels of GbG
5, but 3.5 of them are same - Inactive.

from cooper~gold is the same level, then from platinum low to platinum high harder , and if you get matched with top guilds on 1000LP, the difficulty is insane (for quitting, not just demotivating)

This is like you saying you have gone to Vegas, and have been invited to the High Rollers table (Diamond League), but because you cannot afford the $1000 ante, you think they should create special tables for you. Well, if you cannot afford to ante with the High Rollers, then you do not belong with the High Rollers.
And so what if the sectors get taken in a blink of an eye?? That is all part of the game - and the speed with which sectors get taken is usually much higher when you are playing against the High Rollers.
nobody got invited to such table without being such a spender, good example, irrelevant with the case
Stay in the gold, or preferable Silver League, and enjoy playing a level that you feel you can compete in.
this is the problem, when all guilds are inactive, you either stop fight (less rewards) or you finish #1 (rank up league)

no, if you are in a league too high for your capabilities drop down a league, there are a lot of things wrong with GbG but this is not one of them
there is no such option ann, all the wrong things with GBG start with the LP (mmr) formula, and now (for some!) with the ID match ups.

i spoke to a couple top players and they are more than happy with the ID match ups, thank god i've quitted GBG since winter..
 
5, but 3.5 of them are same - Inactive.

from cooper~gold is the same level, then from platinum low to platinum high harder , and if you get matched with top guilds on 1000LP, the difficulty is insane (for quitting, not just demotivating)


nobody got invited to such table without being such a spender, good example, irrelevant with the case

this is the problem, when all guilds are inactive, you either stop fight (less rewards) or you finish #1 (rank up league)


there is no such option ann, all the wrong things with GBG start with the LP (mmr) formula, and now (for some!) with the ID match ups.

i spoke to a couple top players and they are more than happy with the ID match ups, thank god i've quitted GBG since winter..
The only ones really quitting, are the whiners - look in a mirror. It is still quite active, and nothing about it is insane - if it is, then perhaps you really do not understand how it works.
And nobody gets invited to Diamond without lots of spending (time and goods for buildings) - but if they cannot afford to spend in Diamond, then they do not belong - still very relevant.
All guilds inactive - perhaps just the ones you visit and whine with. Lots of active guilds, just because you cannot find a way to be with an active guild is more your problem, not Inno's.
Congrats you spoke to a couple top players - but really, who cares? If elitism is all you care about - why are you in this game? This game is leagues below anything a real player wants to prove themselves in. This game is relaxing and long term. It is a good game for what it does. You not happy - then go find something else, and stop putting your constant toxic whining and complaining in nearly every post you make. You are not happy - good, leave. But you are not leaving - why?? Perhaps because you are more interested in whining and crying then doing something. The biggest problem with this game, are wanna-be players like you. Anyone with an ounce of intelligence that was not happy with an online FREE game would maybe whine and cry a bit, but eventually would move on. But you have not moved on, you stay and keep your whiny posts all the time.
 

TheGreatFinger

Sergeant
No. Small guilds can compete with big guilds, if they have the desire and drive. Heck, just last GbG, had a 1-man guild take top spot to our 2nd place 70+ guild. The guy was determined.
Just.. just stop, please. It's not the first time you're trying to extrapolate things you do not understand. The gap between competitive GBG and the little sandbox where 1-man guild went further than front sector is insane.

And nobody gets invited to Diamond without lots of spending (time and goods for buildings) - but if they cannot afford to spend in Diamond, then they do not belong - still very relevant.
I'll explain for people without intense GBG experience.
Imagine you're a guild that is doing 500 hits per day. That's a pretty solid 20-player young guild which occasionally uses camps, but tries to save goods when it's possible. Like, you know, an average guild. You're matched with guilds who do:

0 per day - in bronze
0 - in silver
10 - in gold
200 - in platinum

So far so good. You walk through that like a breeze. Get yourself to 1k LP diamond in one huge leap.

Now you are matched with guilds who do 10k+ hits a day. 2 of those. Surprise!

Again. GBG ranking is flawed. The system converges to the point where every active guild will be very close to diamond, most likely bouncing between 1k and platinum or lower diamond. It may not have happened yet, but the trend is obvious.

The reason for this convergence is that total LP of all guilds should be constant except for 2 cases - when a guild with 1000 gets +LP or when a guild with 0 gets -LP. There's a case when a guild was dragged to higher league so its LP gains are multiplied (or divided) by 2, but it's no longer applicable.

Imagine a pyramid where at the bottom there are guilds with 0 LP and at the top with 1000 LP. And now pyramid starts to widen at the top - because the amount of bronze matches (where guilds with 0 LP get -LP) is higher than amount of diamond matches, where guilds with 1000 get +LP. So total LP in the system grows. It happens until the number of guilds at the top will be equal to the number of guilds at the bottom. Given most guilds are inactive (and I mean totally inactive, not just the ones that r21r visited in your imaginary universe), all the active guilds will be at the top of pyramid, as there's more inactive than active guilds. This is design problem. You can spit poison at people who are trying to point that out as much as you want, that's not gonna change the fact.
So please. Next time you are claiming people who are trying to give valuable feedback as toxic, think, maybe there's something wrong with you?
 

JudgeDredd81

Private
Just.. just stop, please. It's not the first time you're trying to extrapolate things you do not understand. The gap between competitive GBG and the little sandbox where 1-man guild went further than front sector is insane.



I'll explain for people without intense GBG experience.
Imagine you're a guild that is doing 500 hits per day. That's a pretty solid 20-player young guild which occasionally uses camps, but tries to save goods when it's possible. Like, you know, an average guild. You're matched with guilds who do:

0 per day - in bronze
0 - in silver
10 - in gold
200 - in platinum

So far so good. You walk through that like a breeze. Get yourself to 1k LP diamond in one huge leap.

Now you are matched with guilds who do 10k+ hits a day. 2 of those. Surprise!

Again. GBG ranking is flawed. The system converges to the point where every active guild will be very close to diamond, most likely bouncing between 1k and platinum or lower diamond. It may not have happened yet, but the trend is obvious.

The reason for this convergence is that total LP of all guilds should be constant except for 2 cases - when a guild with 1000 gets +LP or when a guild with 0 gets -LP. There's a case when a guild was dragged to higher league so its LP gains are multiplied (or divided) by 2, but it's no longer applicable.

Imagine a pyramid where at the bottom there are guilds with 0 LP and at the top with 1000 LP. And now pyramid starts to widen at the top - because the amount of bronze matches (where guilds with 0 LP get -LP) is higher than amount of diamond matches, where guilds with 1000 get +LP. So total LP in the system grows. It happens until the number of guilds at the top will be equal to the number of guilds at the bottom. Given most guilds are inactive (and I mean totally inactive, not just the ones that r21r visited in your imaginary universe), all the active guilds will be at the top of pyramid, as there's more inactive than active guilds. This is design problem. You can spit poison at people who are trying to point that out as much as you want, that's not gonna change the fact.
So please. Next time you are claiming people who are trying to give valuable feedback as toxic, think, maybe there's something wrong with you?
Well thank you for your explaination, that more understandable! And yes we are bouncing around for a year! And some in diamond league are playing nice and fair, but you have like 10 guild on me server who are just taking everything with in an hour and just kicking you every 4h, so that is what happening, and depending on what others do, you get kicked down this round or the next!

but like i said in previously post, would a switch not be a solution for this problem?
 

r21r

Major-General
but like i said in previously post, would a switch not be a solution for this problem?
in my oppinion no. we have a "switch" after the rounds we captured zero sectors, but we still have "inactive" guilds.
Imagine a pyramid where at the bottom there are guilds with 0 LP and at the top with 1000 LP. And now pyramid starts to widen at the top - because the amount of bronze matches (where guilds with 0 LP get -LP) is higher than amount of diamond matches, where guilds with 1000 get +LP. So total LP in the system grows.
this is the source problem in my oppinion, as long as guilds keep gaining rewards no matter if their enemies captured 0 sectors (which is very low as standarts) we will keep having "anomalies" on the higher leagues.
 

JudgeDredd81

Private
in my oppinion no. we have a "switch" after the rounds we captured zero sectors, but we still have "inactive" guilds.

this is the source problem in my oppinion, as long as guilds keep gaining rewards no matter if their enemies captured 0 sectors (which is very low as standarts) we will keep having "anomalies" on the higher leagues.
There is no switch were a leader can choose a league they want to be in or what not, now when you reach X amount LP you go to next league with out any concense
 

TheGreatFinger

Sergeant
but like i said in previously post, would a switch not be a solution for this problem?
It would address the problem from only one perspective - namely, would allow guilds that belong to platinum to avoid diamond.
It would eliminate any importance of LP, would simply destroy the ladder, which, I believe, is one of key features for inno (despite it's not working since month 4 of GBG), would seriously diminish the importance of final place of the season, etc.

It may work if you only allow to go down a league from what is available to you due to LP. I wouldn't be able to analyze the impact on LP system though, it's beyond my abilities. Maybe it will even stabilize it. But, as we say in programming, it's a patch, not a fix :) Those tend to over-complicate design as every single patch serves some purpose, when they start contradicting each other, the hell breaks loose.
 

r21r

Major-General
There is no switch were a leader can choose a league they want to be in or what not, now when you reach X amount LP you go to next league with out any concense
it wont help in my oppinion because the problem is other.
say you had a switch, and you picked to stay in platinum instead of diamond.
wouldn't the rest guilds pick that too ? to avoid the big dogs ?
maybe you wouldn't meet guilds that capture sectors in under 1-2minutes, but would that balance your guild with the weaker ones that still capture sectors under 10 minutes ?
in my oppinion again, even if you could say the above a small improvement, it doesn't actually balances it because the problem with GbG is getting +LP over guilds that never actually captured the 1 sector limit (which again, is very low imo).

currently, my guild is on ~688LP and the guilds on the map need average ~1 day per sector (130 advances).
i consider GvG far more competetive and foyfull than GbG but hey, GbG gives rewards (for the guild mostly and the individual)
 

TheGreatFinger

Sergeant
it is those who feel they know better than anyone else
Not anyone. Just the ones who don't face the facts.
those who create figures with zero backup (i.e. multitudes of people leaving/quitting, etc)
Why it pains you that much? It's a simple exaggeration, but there's a grain of truth to that - people indeed are leaving. If you know 10 players left because of some change, you don't need inno to tell there's 10 or more people left - you know it already, no secret data needed.
Players, such as 'r21r' are making constant toxic comments, non-valuable feedback
His feedback is by orders of magnitude more valuable than yours. He is unraveling problems in game mechanics. Maybe not always correct, maybe some exaggerated, maybe with a degree of annoyance - but his input is about actual things. His game knowledge is deep enough that he can make a weighted statement about something complex happening in the game. Yours isn't, at least judging from your forum posts. Your average post is telling people who complain about some game feature (that they know better than you) that it is working for you and they don't understand it because inno doesn't provide them secret data. Splendid, but you haven't got to the root of it. You can voice your opinion, but you have no right to act like you're the supreme court - you just don't understand the issue. It doesn't mean everyone doesn't.
These forums for months now have been quite a toxic environment because of the multitude of varied and constant complaining that people keep making.
Maybe you are the one that needs to take a step or two back and think before you type.
From what I see so far you're the most toxic guy here. Look in the mirror, seriously.
Constant complaining is a form of feedback. Feedback has its uses in any form. It may have unpleasant side effects, but it always has its uses.
 

r21r

Major-General
@TheGreatFinger and @JudgeDredd81

to me it was obvious from the very start of Battlegrounds that the formula was creating such examples, i also made a thread about that ~1year ago where i hoped more could realise it, and try give feedback about a future problem.


seems like they had a solution, the ID thing, which can be good or bad depending to what your guild aims for, and who is matched with.

@JudgeDredd81 i don't know if you can actually see the connection to the reason you made this idea and the whole match up thing, to me it's obvious though, and that's why i don't believe a switch can make much of a change, it could be an alternative imo but "anomalies" will keep existing.

don't take my thoughts for granted, i might be smart with maths but i dont have the data inno has..
 

JudgeDredd81

Private
@TheGreatFinger and @JudgeDredd81

to me it was obvious from the very start of Battlegrounds that the formula was creating such examples, i also made a thread about that ~1year ago where i hoped more could realise it, and try give feedback about a future problem.


seems like they had a solution, the ID thing, which can be good or bad depending to what your guild aims for, and who is matched with.

@JudgeDredd81 i don't know if you can actually see the connection to the reason you made this idea and the whole match up thing, to me it's obvious though, and that's why i don't believe a switch can make much of a change, it could be an alternative imo but "anomalies" will keep existing.

don't take my thoughts for granted, i might be smart with maths but i dont have the data inno has..
I agree it would be a patch and not a fix, but for now you have an working (chooseble) alternatieve till the matters will be overhauled‍♂
 

TheGreatFinger

Sergeant
For now the best idea I have is to reset LP to 0 every half a year. Ladder reset, so to speak. But SC issue has to be dealt with as well, at least partially.
 

r21r

Major-General
I agree it would be a patch and not a fix, but for now you have an working (chooseble) alternatieve till the matters will be overhauled‍♂
For now the best idea I have is to reset LP to 0 every half a year. Ladder reset, so to speak. But SC issue has to be dealt with as well, at least partially.
Finger's idea sounds better to me, as overall ofc.
not sure if it will make Dredd's issue dissapear, as he might meet again all those guilds hes actually trying to avoid with his idea, maybe for 2-3 rounds more or less.

as for the siege camps, again, if the maps where limited, then farming would aswell be limited (at least not expoitable), so my idea for that, would again be balancing via competetion. all big clubs on 1-2 diamond maps, depending to what each world has , then the rest within 1-3 platinum, 2-4 gold and silver-cooper, make them unlimited with reduced chance for SoH fragments as rewards..
(not that this will ever happen, but come exploit that lol)