• 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.

New Content Guild Battlegrounds

r21r

Major-General
another suggestion on how to match guilds

we all know that some sites, display the number of fights each player did on daily basis.
we also know they take that data from the game, so the data is known to the devs.

wouldn't it be more balanced, to match guilds depending to their overal fights within guild on an average of 1-2-3 rounds*?

say for example that you have a guild that does ~50.000 fights per round, and a guild that does ~10.000, no matter if they came to have the same LP, it can't be balanced.
ofc, GBG is not about 2 guilds, but what we see here is that 2 guilds manage to handle the rest 4-5-6, so as is at the moment, it is completely unbalanced in competition means.

i would say that it might not be a popular change because we all know that everyone is expecting to get without giving, but if you want balance and healthy competition, this idea is a very good base to start with.

i remember the very 1st rounds of Battlegrounds, where all higher maps where filled with competetive only guilds, ofc not all guilds where equal but for sure there was a competetive spirit and diamond spending was more attractive as there was a reason.
 

TheGreatFinger

Sergeant
wouldn't it be more balanced, to match guilds depending to their overal fights within guild on an average of 1-2-3 rounds*?
A good one. It's not just more balanced, it's self-balancing due to potential negative feedback loop. Farm setups producing more fights, pushing best farming guilds into the top where they can't farm as good because everyone is active and takes their share of the map.
That would kill GBG in Sin though, for a while. In more balanced worlds that would probably result in more healthy GBG than it is now. Or at least would provoke mass migrations in between seasons :)

I'd even prefer total attrition gain, not fights. Unfortunately it's much more abusable than your idea and has no negative feedback :(
 

r21r

Major-General
A good one. It's not just more balanced, it's self-balancing due to potential negative feedback loop. Farm setups producing more fights, pushing best farming guilds into the top where they can't farm as good because everyone is active and takes their share of the map.
That would kill GBG in Sin though, for a while. In more balanced worlds that would probably result in more healthy GBG than it is now. Or at least would provoke mass migrations in between seasons :)

I'd even prefer total attrition gain, not fights. Unfortunately it's much more abusable than your idea and has no negative feedback :(
i think that if they keep track of the last say 3 rounds, it will be balanced even for worlds like sinerania.

meaning that, a guild did a)60.000 fights b)45.000 c) 20.000 = ~40.000.

they could make that range bigger or smaller though.. it for sure needs testing and is not perfect, but i think is a good formula to start with..
at least better than the current, or even the very 1st one which worked till the stronger guilds establish theirselves in diamond.

another thought, that also might be not much popular but for sure is reasonable, is to limit the number of diamond maps to 1 or even 2 (actually it completely depends to each world)
reason i am suggesting this, is simply because on each world, the guilds that can handle maps like diamond (160 advances per sector) are not more than 10? with 2-3 out of them really smashing it.



PS in other words, something like an "ELO" system working parallel with the current LP one
 
Last edited:

Dastar

Private
I read thru about 14 pages and couldn't find this question being asked so :
Is attrition level individual or does my attrition I gain hinder my lower age guildmates ?
ie I take my attrition level to 20 and a lower age guildmate wants to participate later in the same 24 hr period, but are they starting at an attrition level of 20 ?
Just curious as may keep people from playing
 
I read thru about 14 pages and couldn't find this question being asked so :
Is attrition level individual or does my attrition I gain hinder my lower age guildmates ?
ie I take my attrition level to 20 and a lower age guildmate wants to participate later in the same 24 hr period, but are they starting at an attrition level of 20 ?
Just curious as may keep people from playing
It's individual
 

FantasticMrFrizz

Brigadier-General
Since this season started sectors with 4 connected siege camps give attrition at much higher rate, almost comparable with having 3 siege camps. And I'm not the only one who is wondering about it.
same was said a few weeks ago by ex guild member wouldnt put it past inno but some would say 4% chance would at some point balance it out
 

DESYPETE

Chief Warrant Officer
Since this season started sectors with 4 connected siege camps give attrition at much higher rate, almost comparable with having 3 siege camps. And I'm not the only one who is wondering about it.
i can only hope they do increase the attr rates, lets try to stop players gaining 1000s of fights just because a sc gives them zero attr, they can not get there without those sc camps, at best most would struggle to get past 50 fights a day, so something is needed to stop it as its just turning the gbg game into a game of bingo
the lucky ones will rake in 1000s of goodies and its feeding the greed big time with players who are getting obsessed with it all
get rid of the camps would get my vote and make players have to work for there gains not depends on how many camps
 

BenTrovato

Private
"The Guild Battlegrounds' matchmaking should no longer be sorted by Guild IDs, from now on the matchmaking should be random by leagues."

If this announcement isn't a mistake, it's going to make working a guild up through Platinum far more difficult. Does anyone know what was wrong with the old system of sorting by league points only (and random within that)? Presumably they are fiddling with it for a reason.
 

FantasticMrFrizz

Brigadier-General
"The Guild Battlegrounds' matchmaking should no longer be sorted by Guild IDs, from now on the matchmaking should be random by leagues."

If this announcement isn't a mistake, it's going to make working a guild up through Platinum far more difficult. Does anyone know what was wrong with the old system of sorting by league points only (and random within that)? Presumably they are fiddling with it for a reason.
Not difficult just not as easy so you get a better balance and you are in the correct league for your guild level more often than not
 

BenTrovato

Private
The problem was it wasn't random, the matching was done by league points and then guild ID so the same guilds were always together.

Now it should be back to a random grouping based on league points
I meant what was wrong before February. I hope you are right and it will revert, but that's not what the announcement says. It says random within league.
 
Last edited:

Vagabontin

Private
I think it will be very elegant if INNO remove the autobattle option after the 30th battle for the day for example. Or make any autobattle 10 diamonds after the 30th. This will balance the game a lot.
 
Last edited:

klods hans

Monarch
I think it will be very elegant if INNO remove the autobattle option after the 30th battle for the day for example. Or make any autobattle 10 diamonds after the 30th. This will balance the game a lot.
30 auto battles limit, In GBG only or all battles total?
 

Drunkzera

Private
So, I totally understand how significant is this change in worlds where we got 50-100 guilds in Diamond League/Platinum
It`s will make it a more competitive random form, more `war` more diamonds spent for Inno.
Amazing! never back to the ID system.

But...

Keep an eye on some exponents regions, regions that got few players, who is currently developing
Like some servers like Brazil, Portugal, Argentina, Sweden, and a lot more.

A complete server got 16 Guilds Diamonds/30 Platinum
For this kind of servers, should be avoided the first division by League Points.
and only focused in a random way to vanish a `dominant groups`

Example:
As you are in Diamond League, with 1000 LP or 901.
you are in a Random system.

In this way a battleground who is dominated by 3-4 Guilds always in `Private Groups` conserving their swap sectors,
and keep the others `blocked` will be minimized,

If theres possibility to divided them by random so other guilds got a chance to fight, as 1x1... or 2x2,
broken this kind of alliance where INNO don't win anything, and only 3-4 guilds (10 members) rule by 11 days

Regards.