-
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:
New Content Guild Battlegrounds Update 2023 Feedback Thread
- Thread starter Kyrael
- Start date
TheKingOfKool
General
Looks like goods costs for bldgs. needs to be increased - the swapping Must be curtailed!
klods hans
Tsar
And attrition reduction capped at 60%
Emberguard
Legend
Removing swaps in and of itself would be very easy, but it still needs to be fun and enjoyable. I don't think continuing to increase costs would be fun and enjoyable. Merely increasing costs isn't fixing or changing any of the underlying reasons that swaps exist in the first place.
Nidwin
Sergeant
This will amplify the swapping, not reduce it. It will badly reduce the amount of sectors you can take while the zergs will still not even be close to reach their true limit of sectors they can take. Inno has changed the meta from potentially unlimited sectors for everyone to total guild attrition pool per day, defining the amount of sectors that can be taken by a guild.
I'm starting to wonder if some changes were introduced for a complete different reason and that swapping was not the main cause. If I'm not wrong it's not 3 members, Ice, but 5 members to be able to join GbG as a guild. At 3 GbG is still a possible challenge at 5+ it fades away as it's too close to 7 where we become diamonds.
edit 1
btw Ice, Inno. If it's players like me (one-man and small guilds) the issue this is easily fixed. You simply do what klods hans suggests cap attrition at 60% and in no time you get rid of us in GbG.
Last edited:
Kev-
Private
They could improve gameplay in a instant and stop swaps at the same time, by putting Guilds of similar ability together rather than one or two top Guilds with Guilds of less ability. But they know that or should do because just about everyone who's posted has at some point complained about the match up process.
Deleted member 127677
I believe the changes were introduced partly because some players were farming pretty much all their resources out of Gbg, not only as campers but also as junior players with higher era units. For those, keeping swaps alive, to the detriment of players in guilds outside of swaps as well as to the general game experience, would have been of paramount importance, whereas it isn’t for those who just tried to compete and/or generate resources in other ways. We are now 4 days into season 2 and at least for my guild, it remains a competition, not necessarily with the guilds on our board but with the guilds also attempting to win the championship.
Deleted member 127677
4 days into season 2 — 3 1000 lp guilds are on track to win their 2nd seasons and will be top. Bar a complete collapse somewhere, and with the unknown element of who among those that were high platinum and low diamond guilds in the previous season may get a 2nd win (unlikely any since their points scores are not moving), the current number 12 guild (yes, same one) will end up 4th, with 1 win and more vps than number 2 guild will have, when this season is over. There is also one guild currently in platinum that may slot in as winner of their current season, where they may end up 1000 lps and 2 wins, in which case they slot in at number 4, ahead of said number 12 guild. These are the realities. Judging by what has happened on Beta, it is possible for a low league winner to rank above guilds who consistently have to compete in 1000 lps because they actually do compete, rather than just hang around in the fringes, waiting to drop down. On beta, now after 4 seasons, the guild in 2nd place has won same amount of seasons as number 1, but at least two of those in lower leagues. So they rank higher than the 1000 lps guilds who have lost seasons. So, we will see changes, they will not be entirely fair, and they will impact potentially more than expected.
Last edited by a moderator:
Knight of ICE
Whatever happened to.
If you want to keep repeating yourself fine by me, but be so kind not to try to drag me in to it.
Deleted member 127677
Same as before, the developments in game. You don’t need to respond if you don’t want to. But just three days on from that last post, the impact of the changes as they are, are becoming increasingly evident. Like with all our statements, they evolve with what happens here.
Knight of ICE
You can say what you have to say, without quoting me. By quoting me you obviously are trying to drag me into the discussion. You could have said what you wanted to say without that quote, so I kindly request you to stop doing that. Say what you have to say about the developments in game. You do not have to convince me, so leave me out of it.
KoA TheMAXIMUS
Private
Hey all, just my tuppance of feedback. I dont think the GBG league table is a fair representation of how strong a GBG guild you are, ill make a dreaded football analogy (sorry loool i know its a poor mans example), its like 1st or 2nd place in the championship (the 2nd tier of English football) is better than 3rd place in the Premier league (the best league in the world)!! Makes no sense to give championship teams the same prizes as lofty premier league teams (why would they even aspire to play in the premier league when they can make more in the championship?)..I would suggest (as its not just a ranting thread lol) maybe that below 1000LP doesnt get the same VPs per sector as 1000LP (maybe half, then reduced again for lower and so on) or below 1000LP maybe doesnt get the new frags of champions or equivalent in subsequent seasons? This would possibly stop guilds wanting to "manipulate the system" and entering lower leagues for same prizes and (crazily) higher ranking...how can a guild that consistently stays in 1000LP be looking up at some of these guilds and its own members have less frags? Maybe even better a fairer system that matchmakes based on GBG league ranking is in order to stop this (so all guids can benefit from "easy seasons"..I would say hey hoo the cream will eventually rise to the top but in a 6 week season this will not be the case and we start again with the same problem..the league table also makes a genuine good GBG guilds look less attractive and stumps possible recruitment drive, my guild isnt a 70 member guild (only 45) but does always come 3rd (maybe 2nd if lucky) in 1000LP or above, we would love new members but our low rank may also put people off and thus never be able to compete with the very best and to boot will always be looking up at worser GBG guild in the GBG ranking table 
KoA TheMAXIMUS
Private
In my 2nd world i was in lower diamond (cant remember what LP sorry) for first season, the quality of the GBG competition was so poor that we owned the entire map for days on end, noone had barely any fights in a "BATTLE grounds" end result we came 1st got a million VP and a victory and lots of frags for a handful of fights (I know the idea is also to hold land but when noone is fightig back AT ALL?), this compared to kicking it in 1000LP and coming 3rd is no comparison (much better sense of acheivement if you can mix it with the cream of the crops), btw my 2nd world guild will get relegated and will go back down and win more seasons and even more frags, i love them for that as they all are wonderful peeps but come on!!
Kims Hubby
Private
Matbe I am just getting old but once the tally approaces the end you have white writting on a light grey background. Very hard to read the count. Would love to see some more contrast so we can all see it better please.
Deleted member 127677
What you are describing, KoA, is precisely how it looks and will continue to function unless it’s grasped immediately rather than in 3 years’ time. When who knows how fed up those guilds who can get a 2nd, 3rd or 4th pretty consistently in upper diamond (the *only* diamond, in my view) will be feeling and how much they care to even try.
Nidwin
Sergeant
You were probably matched up with plats that won or got 2nd spot in their previous battleground in platinum league and 2 plats that were able to get spot 4 and 5 to stagnate in low diamond.
You also have to take into account that plats are used to lock 130 sectors and were suddenly confronted to lock 200+ sectors and not the previous 160 sectors system in diamond league. As a diamond league player/usual you may not realize that those extra 40+ to lock a sector can have a huge impact on a plat guild especially if you add the attrition cap at 80% into the equation.
I'm a gold and for me those 30 extra to lock a sector is simply a killer when I'm dropped in platinum league and clearly too for the other poor souls, fellow gold guild, in my actual matchup in platland.
You diamonds only have diamonds and plats in your matchups. Imagine us in Gold who have to deal with the usual mismatch silvers + gold + plats in the same battleground. Since I left Cham a bit more than a Year ago to go back solo I haven't had 1 single balanced or even close to be balanced matchup in a battlegound, not one. It's always a chaos situation with silvers that don't attack other guilds sector because it's rude, golds that always crawl forward to the middle from day 1 till Sunday and mostly never give up crawling forward while plats paint a large part of the map with their color crushing everything on their path, including silvers that sometimes have to stop playing because they have no free sector to attack and end with 0 contribution.
*Neo
Private
some basic math curently we do have water map
52 sectors are posibile to take and overtake
each sector at the start has 200 points
lets say that we have a strong full guild with 80 players in the guild
so 52*200 = 10400 hits in first run
10400/80 = 130 hits for each player to do at the start of GBG
if we say that we build evrywhere and we have 80% atrition decrease mark it means that if average established player can reach 100 atrition with is equal to 500 daily fights
so one day has 24 hours that is equal at best to 3x map overtakes (8 hours you take sector you hold 4 and you wait 4 before retaking)
so 10400*3 = 31200 fights in total where we dont include extra hit points with the buildings
or 130*3 = 390 hit points for one player
so if well established guild has 80 players with minimum of 100 attrition limit it does means that each plaeyr is left with 390 fights on this case
ok but lets say we go max and we build evrywhere 30% with each sector to increase maximum hit points.
i have calculated on the same map i am looking now 93 slotfs for building
200*0.3 = 60 hit points per building
60*93 =5580 extra hits taking the whole map once
if we say we take it 3x then it is extra 16740 fights
so lets get back to the basic math
31200+16740=47940 maximum fights daily theoricaly (ofc it will be little less as it takes some time to take all those sectors )
so 47940/80= 599.25 fights for each player when guild has 80 well established players
so looking those numbers it is clear at best scenario if evry player just making 500 then there is left some unused fights for other guilds.
but i will take my own example i am doing about 1000 fights daily and reaching evry day at least 201 attrition
evry advanced era player with 1k% attack in average ending day with at least 120 attrition with is equal 600 hights
and in real in most times when you take sector it is almost never 3x 30% extra hits (most in the end is plain 200 fights or few extra)
so where is the problem of this new GBG game?
well problem is very simple 80 players very established guilds can farm the map all day and hold other guilds in the bases just as it used to be with free atrition game we used to play for 3 years.
how to solve this problem i guess math can easily say that the only way to solve it making hit points equal to the point where max fights increase to the point where the strongest guild needs to stop due the fact that evryone has reached max attrition.
so if we calculate with the basic logic extra fights is equal 8370 (half beween theorical max)
so 31200+8370= 39570 fights daily
lets say that each player making 600 fights that will put 39570/600= ~66 players
so 66 active dedicated players are equal to overtake the whole map daily but max number of guildmates we do have 80
so if take back and calculate in other direction how much hit points sector should have to make it balanced
600*80= 48000 daily fights
48000/52= 923
923/3=~308 hits in average for one sector with some buildings.
so in average basic sector hit points value should be not less than 250 hit points where the small guilds can hope that they will be able to take daily at least 1 sector and not sit all day in the base.
52 sectors are posibile to take and overtake
each sector at the start has 200 points
lets say that we have a strong full guild with 80 players in the guild
so 52*200 = 10400 hits in first run
10400/80 = 130 hits for each player to do at the start of GBG
if we say that we build evrywhere and we have 80% atrition decrease mark it means that if average established player can reach 100 atrition with is equal to 500 daily fights
so one day has 24 hours that is equal at best to 3x map overtakes (8 hours you take sector you hold 4 and you wait 4 before retaking)
so 10400*3 = 31200 fights in total where we dont include extra hit points with the buildings
or 130*3 = 390 hit points for one player
so if well established guild has 80 players with minimum of 100 attrition limit it does means that each plaeyr is left with 390 fights on this case
ok but lets say we go max and we build evrywhere 30% with each sector to increase maximum hit points.
i have calculated on the same map i am looking now 93 slotfs for building
200*0.3 = 60 hit points per building
60*93 =5580 extra hits taking the whole map once
if we say we take it 3x then it is extra 16740 fights
so lets get back to the basic math
31200+16740=47940 maximum fights daily theoricaly (ofc it will be little less as it takes some time to take all those sectors )
so 47940/80= 599.25 fights for each player when guild has 80 well established players
so looking those numbers it is clear at best scenario if evry player just making 500 then there is left some unused fights for other guilds.
but i will take my own example i am doing about 1000 fights daily and reaching evry day at least 201 attrition
evry advanced era player with 1k% attack in average ending day with at least 120 attrition with is equal 600 hights
and in real in most times when you take sector it is almost never 3x 30% extra hits (most in the end is plain 200 fights or few extra)
so where is the problem of this new GBG game?
well problem is very simple 80 players very established guilds can farm the map all day and hold other guilds in the bases just as it used to be with free atrition game we used to play for 3 years.
how to solve this problem i guess math can easily say that the only way to solve it making hit points equal to the point where max fights increase to the point where the strongest guild needs to stop due the fact that evryone has reached max attrition.
so if we calculate with the basic logic extra fights is equal 8370 (half beween theorical max)
so 31200+8370= 39570 fights daily
lets say that each player making 600 fights that will put 39570/600= ~66 players
so 66 active dedicated players are equal to overtake the whole map daily but max number of guildmates we do have 80
so if take back and calculate in other direction how much hit points sector should have to make it balanced
600*80= 48000 daily fights
48000/52= 923
923/3=~308 hits in average for one sector with some buildings.
so in average basic sector hit points value should be not less than 250 hit points where the small guilds can hope that they will be able to take daily at least 1 sector and not sit all day in the base.
Forwandert
Lieutenant-General
Or ratio everything
If a 80 guild has for example 240 fights for a sector (equivalent to 3 fights per player) a guild of 15 then has 45 fights for the same sector. Build costs adjusted to similar to GE where each player costs X resources per build.
I think you would need to increase the fights per sector to avoid fully restarting farming so it might start at 400/500 per sector and ratio down but generally then every guild size starts on an even footing and any changes are down to how players build their cities to help with attrition and their activity rather than a handful being against 80 where several might be active at once.
It would reduce incentive for maxed out gbg guilds as players could play in smaller group without being penalised. I would then also take diamond to soley 1000 pts only as the lower diamond isn't much different to platinum anyway and I think platinum is a reasonable place for there to be more guilds and match ups.
Doing it this way you can't have match up problems. You might get the odd dozen players hammering a map with high attack boosts etc but they'll just end up in dia with the larger guilds anyway and they'll deserve the wins there etc though city builds and activity rather than numbers.
If a 80 guild has for example 240 fights for a sector (equivalent to 3 fights per player) a guild of 15 then has 45 fights for the same sector. Build costs adjusted to similar to GE where each player costs X resources per build.
I think you would need to increase the fights per sector to avoid fully restarting farming so it might start at 400/500 per sector and ratio down but generally then every guild size starts on an even footing and any changes are down to how players build their cities to help with attrition and their activity rather than a handful being against 80 where several might be active at once.
It would reduce incentive for maxed out gbg guilds as players could play in smaller group without being penalised. I would then also take diamond to soley 1000 pts only as the lower diamond isn't much different to platinum anyway and I think platinum is a reasonable place for there to be more guilds and match ups.
Doing it this way you can't have match up problems. You might get the odd dozen players hammering a map with high attack boosts etc but they'll just end up in dia with the larger guilds anyway and they'll deserve the wins there etc though city builds and activity rather than numbers.
Kev-
Private
Never going to happen or work the current fudge is a case in point that proves it, make things harder for the big Guilds and you hurt the smaller Guilds individuals more because they have less capacity to absorb the attrition.............. the Ratio idea is a great one if you want total Guild domination, Guilds would slim down even more than now to only a few hard core fighters and no one else would get a look in.
Knight of ICE
I think you need to redo the math. I count 61 provinces. Of those 8 are home provinces, so that leaves 53 to take.