Guild V Guild Guild Battlegrounds building diamond cost

Status
Not open for further replies.

pdosev

Private
Hi everyone,

*I used the GvG tab as I didn't find GBG or battlegrounds one.

Searched forum for similar?: I searched but could not find if this suggestion has already been posted.

Proposal: I would like to suggest increasing the diamond price of buildings in Battlegrounds to at least 100 diamonds per hour or 8-10x times the current ones.

Reason: At the moment each building costs 50 diamonds. That is a small price and I already see 2 guilds in our current battleground getting a sector, placing 2-3 siege towers, moving to the next one --> take it --> build siege towers. Rince and repeat it took a few players and probably 1000+ diamonds to take over half of the map.

Details/Other: With the current price GBG is basically pay to win and no strategy is involved in what to build or when as you can just use diamonds.

Balance: This will balance things out as the price of completing a building will be quite high to do this repeatedly.

*Addition suggestion: When you destroy a building in your province instead of removing it at once start a timer. The building can be removed in 5 or 10 minutes. Again planning ahead instead of removing the building 3-4 fights before it is taken,
 

Cursedveggie

Forum Ambassador
Buildings cost goods in GbG as far as I can see no diamond purchases :)
you can instantly complete the building for 50 diamonds, and of course if you are short of goods you can buy them with diamonds too.

however there must only be a very small minority of people who would actually do this and we should thank them for spending so much and keeping the game free for the rest of us :D
 

Agent327

Emperor
- 1

Stupid idea. They can not defend the sectors, so if you take them there is a chance you will also get the buildings. If they want to pay for that I have no problem with it.
 

pdosev

Private
They can not defend the sector but they can replace the building with traps and buy them with diamonds. So suddenly a bunch of players can fight with 28-50% or 100 of not receiving attrition and you fight with near or above 100% chance of getting double attrition.

A guild who is not using diamonds has no chance against one who is. Test it. Get a guild of 10 people against a guild of 20 or even 30. The smaller ones can use diamonds the other one will not be using diamonds. That is basically the point I am making, it is very cheap in diamonds to do this all the time and it pretty much 'pay to win'.
 

Cursedveggie

Forum Ambassador
it pretty much 'pay to win'.
What feature of the game isn't?
  • Any event that has leagues is dominated by big diamond spenders
  • when S opened diamond spenders had multiple buildings giving extra goods and fp and were up in Contemporary or higher before most were out of Bronze.
  • The top ranks of worlds are dominated by people who spend lots of diamonds
Inno is in this to make money so they want people to spend diamonds, the guild(s) you are talking about will move up in the leagues and at some point will probably all end up fighting each other in a big diamond-fest that will keep the accountants at Inno happy for months.

Is it unfair? Yes. But the whole game is like that and will not change at any time
 

pdosev

Private
Yes, it is. Of course, they are in making money as well. Still to spend diamonds for Forge points or a building is quite costly, the same for resources.

Buying buildings is also expensive and it gives you an advantage to quickly progress, still as a free player you can be caught up with them.

The same applies to GvG where you can heal units etc but it is costly as well and even the top diamond spenders are not buying FP with diamonds nor constantly reviving their units with diamonds from what I've seen.

I am bringing this to the attention as the price of diamonds for the gains in GBG and the gameplay that unlocks and allows is unrivaled and presenting a huge advantage that can't be compensated in time or by other means. The price can be increased a bit to give you some pause in using it, maybe indeed 8-10 times is large and probably making a building completion cost 100-200 diamonds is more likely. Not too costly but not too cheap.

Edit: To add up and clarify I am using this tactic as well with the diamonds I bought so don't look on this as some cheap guy who just likes to complain. Exactly because I see how overpowered this is I think it blows any tactics in GbG. Just spam buildings and have 5-6 people ready to fight and you pretty much own the map. That is why I think it should be checked and Inno can decide what to do I am happy either way
 

Cursedveggie

Forum Ambassador
I am cheap and don't buy diamonds :D so wouldn't waste the ones I have in this way!
the price of diamonds for the gains in GBG and the gameplay that unlocks and allows is unrivaled and presenting a huge advantage that can't be compensated in time or by other means.
All that spending diamonds in GbG does is let you win the round, the output from this is increasing your guild level. This can be achieved by all with lots of time and patience, yes they will benefit from a higher guild level but this does not make a huge difference in the game.

Personally I would like to see diamonds banned in all aspects of the game so there was a level playing field for all, of course I know this would never happen so am content to let people waste lots of money to gain a slight advantage if that's what makes them happy :)
 

Andrew420

Chief Warrant Officer
-1 let the spenders spend
This isnt actually on our DNSL it would be on 2 other FoE forums I know of but thats besides the point
What I mean is Inno doesnt want any of our ideas regarding changing diamonds( how to get them,cost,amount you spend on each item,etc.....)
So you can complain on as many threads as they will let you it wont do you any good
 

Agent327

Emperor
-1 let the spenders spend
This isnt actually on our DNSL it would be on 2 other FoE forums I know of but thats besides the point
What I mean is Inno doesnt want any of our ideas regarding changing diamonds( how to get them,cost,amount you spend on each item,etc.....)
So you can complain on as many threads as they will let you it wont do you any good
True. Still baffles me that there is no one DNSL for all forums.
 

Angelphena

Private
New suggestion for gbg negotiations... the tavern hasn't changed for a few years, with this new battleground it would be good if you could buy an extra turn for negotiation in the same way you can for GE. The extra attack/ defense bought in GE applies in gbg, so should the extra neg turn.
 

Agent327

Emperor
New suggestion for gbg negotiations... the tavern hasn't changed for a few years, with this new battleground it would be good if you could buy an extra turn for negotiation in the same way you can for GE. The extra attack/ defense bought in GE applies in gbg, so should the extra neg turn.
Adding it to another idea that has nothing to do with it will get you nowhere.
 

Vesiger

General
New suggestion for gbg negotiations... the tavern hasn't changed for a few years, with this new battleground it would be good if you could buy an extra turn for negotiation in the same way you can for GE. The extra attack/ defense bought in GE applies in gbg, so should the extra neg turn.
It's been pointed out elsewhere that this makes attrition rather ineffective, since experienced players can win the majority of GBG-level negotiations with an extra turn - you would have to increase the number of possible goods up to GE level, i.e. picking from up to ten different goods, and I don't think that would be popular.
 

pdosev

Private
Thanks for the replies guys. The suggestion was to allow this and to make it more difficult to use but I am fine with it as well as we also used it and benefited from placing siege towers for 3 seconds :)
 

Agent327

Emperor
Thanks for the replies guys. The suggestion was to allow this and to make it more difficult to use but I am fine with it as well as we also used it and benefited from placing siege towers for 3 seconds :)
Then ask for it to be closed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.