New Content Guild Battlegrounds Update 2023 Feedback Thread

[Forwandert]

In regards to this issue about the Fragments - did they go ahead and do it without any notification (opposite of what was said below) - as I took a look at my fragments, and now I have a whole mess of the 2 'new' Battleground fragments - and none of the old ones. I thought I had seen a lot of Elephant Fragments during the last GbG, but did not pay too much attention to it (even though the new reward is only a year or so old - the massive addition of stats to the recent Event building has made this new building already obsolete)
View attachment 25273

They converted before the announcement was made on here.

 

[Sir. Kevin of Bagelot]

I can’t disagree more with your statement. I have been a Gbg leader, leader and later founder of two of the most competitive guilds in my world, including when Gbg was launched. Even so, we see more of the guild interested, more fights, those spread out over more people, and less time for me spent in game keeping an eye on Gbg. Win, win win, win win win. It’s fantastic.

Are there problems, yes. Are those solvable, by Inno? Yes, on both counts. But it’s minor. Does it feel like a direction I like the game to go. 100% yes. And yes, I also still think that small guilds need to get a grip. We are talking about something that should be a competitive feature. I read somewhere up there that people appreciate being in dime league and getting better prizes for a while. Great. If you want them more consistently, there is just one way about it. If you’re ok to yoyo, that is fine too. But please, no more cries of how unfair it all is. Life isn’t fair. Improve. Or don’t. Your choice. The feature is great, 95% there as a competitive one, it one people would compete.

You can disagree all you want, but you can't tell me that 80% attrition reduction gets more participation than 100% attrition reduction, it's ridiculous and I couldn't disagree with you more. I've also been a gbg leader since the very beginning of gbg and so far, it's a lot less clicking and rewards, but a lot more watching and waiting and pushing for more participation. "Life isn’t fair. Improve." = by spending more money <---- that's what this is all about

 

[Deleted member 127677]

80% attrition reduction gets more participation than 100% attrition reduction

It seems to be working so that there are more people getting in on the action. That works for me. So far, there is also no need to spend more time asking anyone to do more, the only thing I see my fellow leaders doing is encouraging people to get with it, and plan ahead. Maybe that changes but it’s ok for now.

Improve." = by spending more money <---- that's what this is all about

I disagree with this also, obviously. You need to have an active guild and, yes, with this change, it matters what attrition they can take and how active they are. If that involves money, I would suggest it’s pretty marginal. You won’t get many more attrition for spending lots on a couple more percentages of any stat. I think encouraging your guildies to improve so they can help more is a good step, then recruit more of the helpful ones.

 

[Nuggs]

I do not have to revise anything, cause it shows I have perfect grasp of the sytem as it is now.



The only top 5 there is, is the top 5 ranking based on GvG. Anything else is perception of what you believe are the strongest Guilds. There is no ranking based on GBG to confirm that until now, so the current ranking is the top 5. Not what you or anyone else thinks should be in the top 5. If it turns out Guilds that drop a league to remain in the top 5 and can successfully do so, they deserve to be there, cause they found a strategy that works. The ranking is there to show what Guilds can do in GBG. Not to come up with what you believe are the strongest Guilds.

Anyone that’s played the game seriously for any length of time knows the top 10 guilds. We know the top 10 in gbg and gvg we don’t need some list to tell us who that is.

We know which players in those guilds are gbg, gvg or both, we know what times the different players are on and what players are running gbg sessions at any given time of day. We even know who the heavy hitters are in any given timeframe

We have a pretty good understanding of treasury levels, what players are diamond buyers etc etc.

The fact you don’t grasp this and just keep posting blatant falsehoods shows a true lack of game awareness. At the very least a mod should have a grasp on the game.

 

[Fighter64]

Negotiations should yield double rewards, which is logically accurate as per the advances made.

 

[Sacahari3l]

The discussion here is quite fun to read.
There seems to be two streams:
1. With the introduction of maximum attrition reduction build up to 80%, it took the fun out of GbG due to very limited amount of encounters players can make.
2. It's better with the 80% attrition limit and best would be to make the limit even lower.

Out of the curiosity could the supporters of stream two explain what exactly is so entertaining about being forced to play less, get less rewards and pay more?

 

[harold mouse]

Very disappointed with the announcement about forum feedback. The good thing is that at least there was an announcement. But I can hardly believe they left matching in GBG as is to see how it works. They should already know it doesn't work, and never has, particularly in 1000LP league, and that there is nothing to learn unless they change it. I think they really just forgot to do anything about it and don't want to admit it. It would be interesting to see if it works to use the new ranking table for matchmaking. As it is they are just penalising guilds for being good at GBG.

 

[Deleted member 127677]

Here’s a fun one. We have a 6-player guild in lower diamond with 2 wins to their name. We also have 4 1000 lp guilds now with 2 wins each. One of those is a holiday guild. Should that said 6-player guild win their lower dime season, they will slot in at least 4th in the ranks in 11 days time. Depends if current number 1, 2 and/or 3 face each other this season, in which case they will slot in at lease 3rd. Whether they win or end up 4th in this lower dime league, they will anyway end up on 1000 lps with 2 wins, and with that, push down some further consistent 1000 lp guilds in ranks. And, jubilation, of said 6-player guild, 3 don’t even play my world as their main. Nobody is a heavy hitter. It’s just another example of how the ranking, victory and league point weighting need to change in this new format, it’s absurd.

 

[Forwandert]

2. It's better with the 80% attrition limit and best would be to make the limit even lower.

Out of the curiosity could the supporters of stream two explain what exactly is so entertaining about being forced to play less, get less rewards and pay more?

I'm in number 2 group, Firstly there was nothing entertaining about tapping the same buttons repeatedly for hours on end. It's not engaging, it's boring there was no excitement to it unless in a race which wasn't that often and even then it was down to the amount of players online in your guild and not down to any sort of skill level. Some players would sit on the sidelines till it got to attrition free and milk it for hours. Chances are someone complaining about attrition free going was doing that. I tended to break through the first sectors using my attrition up and leave the rest for others especially this last year or so.

I have kids, I have a job, I don't wish to spend all day playing a game. I can play at work all day, I choose not too. I have better things to do with my time. I also played the game before gbg and numerous other additions so I know the level of play that was previously required to keep a decent level of ranking which was way more reasonable. This was the game I played around other games with higher activity levels required knowing it would be fine. You can very easily get caught up in a hours worth of gbg when you planned to spend 5/10 minutes on the game that log in. (Not only log in that day)

The rewards where not worth the required mindless tapping. For hours worth of tapping it's borderline a job, fairly similar to any type of production line job and I don't do that in RL and wouldn't find it using enough brain activity to keep me there for long if I did. I wouldn't do it for free and certainly wouldn't pay to do it, that's madness.

With being here before gbg started I know how absolutely insane the rewards where in comparisons to what we had before. The rewards completely inbalanced the game. They should never have happened and unfortunately it's now created a generation of FOE players with expectation of the rewards due to not knowing anything else.

Yes as I guild founder for years we had to show new players the best way to progess and maximize there fp income and it was gbg but only because there was no way to get around it.

Gbg has also had a negative impact on new players. I happen to like showing new players how to player and how to play but everyone got so caught up in gbg and not running out of treasury goods for scs we pandered to their addictions and numerous guilds stopped letting either new players join, required certain eras and in every case forcing GBs from a dozen eras ahead on them simply so they could play in an active guild.

Now I know I won't have endless stream of sectors with no end time in sight and once I hit 120 attrition I'm done for the day. I'm seeing players spending up their attrition and stopping and the spread of battles throughout the guild is a lot more even.

Edit: Just to add when gbg came out I thought it was awesome too don't get me wrong and I doubt many would disagree with that. It was a huge change in fp/good production daily. All of a sudden I was leveling gbs like crazy but then gbs I spent a lot of fps and time to get to lvl 100 before gbg got deleted like they hadn't taken years to build, just to replace with an extra 30% attack boost for that few extra battles.

Now they're still getting replaced due to the power creep on special buildings which I can only assume is Inno trying to at least increase daily fp production a little to negate some of the farming income lost from gbg. Alongside increasing revenue.

 

[Deleted member 127677]

I'm in number 2 group, Firstly there was nothing entertaining about tapping the same buttons repeatedly for hours on end. It's not engaging, it's boring there was no excitement to it unless in a race which wasn't that often and even then it was down to the amount of players online in your guild and not down to any sort of skill level. Some players would sit on the sidelines till it got to attrition free and milk it for hours. Chances are someone complaining about attrition free going was doing that. I tended to break through the first sectors using my attrition up and leave the rest for others especially this last year or so.

I have kids, I have a job, I don't wish to spend all day playing a game. I can play at work all day, I choose not too. I have better things to do with my time. I also played the game before gbg and numerous other additions so I know the level of play that was previously required to keep a decent level of ranking which was way more reasonable. This was the game I played around other games with higher activity levels required knowing it would be fine. You can very easily get caught up in a hours worth of gbg when you planned to spend 5/10 minutes on the game that log in. (Not only log in that day)

The rewards where not worth the required mindless tapping. For hours worth of tapping it's borderline a job, fairly similar to any type of production line job and I don't do that in RL and wouldn't find it using enough brain activity to keep me there for long if I did. I wouldn't do it for free and certainly wouldn't pay to do it, that's madness.

With being here before gbg started I know how absolutely insane the rewards where in comparisons to what we had before. The rewards completely inbalanced the game. They should never have happened and unfortunately it's now created a generation of FOE players with expectation of the rewards due to not knowing anything else.

Yes as I guild founder for years we had to show new players the best way to progess and maximize there fp income and it was gbg but only because there was no way to get around it.

Gbg has also had a negative impact on new players. I happen to like showing new players how to player and how to play but everyone got so caught up in gbg and not running out of treasury goods for scs we pandered to their addictions and numerous guilds stopped letting either new players join, required certain eras and in every case forcing GBs from a dozen eras ahead on them simply so they could play in an active guild.

Now I know I won't have endless stream of sectors with no end time in sight and once I hit 120 attrition I'm done for the day. I'm seeing players spending up their attrition and stopping and the spread of battles throughout the guild is a lot more even.

Edit: Just to add when gbg came out I thought it was awesome too don't get me wrong and I doubt many would disagree with that. It was a huge change in fp/good production daily. All of a sudden I was leveling gbs like crazy but then gbs I spent a lot of fps and time to get to lvl 100 before gbg got deleted like they hadn't taken years to build, just to replace with an extra 30% attack boost for that few extra battles.

Now they're still getting replaced due to the power creep on special buildings which I can only assume is Inno trying to at least increase daily fp production a little to negate some of the farming income lost from gbg. Alongside increasing revenue.

I fall into this same category too, except I was never there doing battles for fps. I have always sniped more daily than I could possibly make in any decent way (I mean, not by taking advantage) in Gbg, and my buildings were raised on that. I can’t pretend I didn’t appreciate the extras, but they literally were max a quarter of my daily income, if I also count collection. I think 80% is quite right, actually, it has struck a good balance between guildies in terms of what is (still) available when they happen to be able to be in the game, and between how much anyone still has to give at the end of the day. If it drops further, I fear that small guilds will be hampered much more than they think they are now. A centre sector can be upwards of 400 fights to take, nobody except a guild with significant membership and members with decent attrition capacity is going to get through several of those in a day if it’s capped further. As is, even guilds with high both do have to actually show up to take them.

 

[Deleted member 127677]

The discussion here is quite fun to read.
There seems to be two streams:
1. With the introduction of maximum attrition reduction build up to 80%, it took the fun out of GbG due to very limited amount of encounters players can make.
2. It's better with the 80% attrition limit and best would be to make the limit even lower.

Out of the curiosity could the supporters of stream two explain what exactly is so entertaining about being forced to play less, get less rewards and pay more?

You are prefacing your ‘poll’ bu that last sentence. I don’t play less, I just do other things, like I always did. By less rewards, you mean fewer Gbg rewards, I have no problem with that, it was never my main source of fps. And I don’t pay more. Yes, dime costs are higher at the outset but that evens out over the course of the season. I think it’s been demonstrated that dime rewards are maybe marginally down on previous occurrence (0.25 to 0.22 per fight is the number I‘ve seen, it bears out from my own experience) but that too is bearable given there is less necessity to pay anyway, if you are happy with 2 buildings giving the same as 3 camps previously, ish, and since the pace is slower, you can even let them mature in their own time. If by paying more you mean goods, that is not my experience, I monitor the treasury daily and admittedly, it was good before too, but we are not seeing huge variations to what we got before, compared to the outgoings now.

 

[Emberguard]

I think 80% is quite right, actually,

I'm satisfied with 80% too. We don't need to make it crazy difficult.

There isn't a attrition cap that scales with League, we don't have cross world to increase the pool of opponents and 1,000 LP has too many Guilds lumped into it as a random assortment for a scaling attrition cap to make sense anyway. You'd have to fix the max-making before it'd make sense to increase difficulty via attrition cap for anyone

 

[Forwandert]

I have always sniped more daily than I could possibly make in any decent way (I mean, not by taking advantage) in Gbg,

I've always liked sniping. They even made that easier, It used to be pretty funny when you couldn't specify the fp addition and you tapped passed the other person trying to snipe. Mobile was especially good for that. It was like sniping 2 players at once.

I'm satisfied with 80% too.

80% is fine, I think it's hit just the right amount of compromise.

 

[Deleted member 127677]

I've always liked sniping. They even made that easier, It used to be pretty funny when you couldn't specify the fp addition and you tapped passed the other person trying to snipe. Mobile was especially good for that. It was like sniping 2 players at once.

I could have competitions with someone if we happened to be on at the same time, was hilarious if you saw them try to sneak ahead.

Separately - is there a new matchmaking bug? The two championship leaders in my world are facing the same main opponents (not each other) for the second season in a row. In our case, one of the guilds we have is there for the third season in a row. Something needs to change here. Can’t repeat that enough.

 

[Kev-]

Match making is a joke as usual........ 1 hour in and we've already what should be lower tier Guilds crying because we've taken over the map as is the norm. Unfortunately its going to be a rerun of the normal procedure we'll retake sectors the strongest of the others manages to take and the small Guilds will be locked out once more with nowhere to go.

 

[Kev-]

One useful change Inno could make is to show support levels in detailed mode even when sectors are locked also number of fights to take a sector.

 

[Timer X7]

I could have competitions with someone if we happened to be on at the same time, was hilarious if you saw them try to sneak ahead.

Separately - is there a new matchmaking bug? The two championship leaders in my world are facing the same main opponents (not each other) for the second season in a row. In our case, one of the guilds we have is there for the third season in a row. Something needs to change here. Can’t repeat that enough.

That might be working as intended; " The guilds you will compete against in your Championship will remain the same throughout these 6 seasons" I'm still not sure if they mean brackets or the diamond division as a whole. It's not 8 guild brackets, it might be 2 or 20. I also don't think they're introducing cross-server battlegrounds after these 6 sessions.

Someone mentioned earlier how everyone doing GBG knows the exact power of each guild... and that's 100% true for every server.
Maybe we should run a poll and fix everything. We need a section in the game for user provided context next to the rank lol

 

[klods hans]

Decent guild matching in Diamond this season. Fair competition. All guilds moving. No swapping. All is good.

 

[Deleted member 127677]

That might be working as intended; " The guilds you will compete against in your Championship will remain the same throughout these 6 seasons" I'm still not sure if they mean brackets or the diamond division as a whole. It's not 8 guild brackets, it might be 2 or 20. I also don't think they're introducing cross-server battlegrounds after these 6 sessions.

Someone mentioned earlier how everyone doing GBG knows the exact power of each guild... and that's 100% true for every server.
Maybe we should run a poll and fix everything. We need a section in the game for user provided context next to the rank lol

I think you’re intended to be ‘competing’ against the guilds that exist on your server at the time the championship starts (so, for example, you wouldn’t find a guild that has been created after the championship started if you searched for it in the guild tab), and to be ‘matched’ against guilds with your league points. That is working as intended. What is worrying is if we have a similar matchmaking issue like a couple of years ago where the same main guilds met the same guilds season after season. It killed quite a few even big guilds in my world when they either could not compete at all against someone and were trapped back at base, or had no competition since all guilds faced had lower league points (low dime, with one guild on 1000 lps), because of how that bug worked. If it becomes the same again, people will simply settle into easy and competition will die. I suspect that may even happen quickly for a lot of guilds if there is no prospect of completing even the first level of the new championship building.

 

[Timer X7]

I think you’re intended to be ‘competing’ against the guilds that exist on your server at the time the championship starts (so, for example, you wouldn’t find a guild that has been created after the championship started if you searched for it in the guild tab), and to be ‘matched’ against guilds with your league points. That is working as intended. What is worrying is if we have a similar matchmaking issue like a couple of years ago where the same main guilds met the same guilds season after season. It killed quite a few even big guilds in my world when they either could not compete at all against someone and were trapped back at base, or had no competition since all guilds faced had lower league points (low dime, with one guild on 1000 lps), because of how that bug worked. If it becomes the same again, people will simply settle into easy and competition will die. I suspect that may even happen quickly for a lot of guilds if there is no prospect of completing even the first level of the new championship building.

That would explain why I couldn't see the gbg ranking when I was switching guilds. Weird system.
Anyway, I think that last part is on purpose to promote competition and to discourage the top guilds from just trading sectors and wins.. if #2 was getting more fragments there would be no need to fight the stronger guild. I suppose people could give up again at some point, but the map at 1000LP will keep moving even if it's just for the personal rewards.