DeletedUser117595
50 diamonds to rush a building is way too cheap, should be 50 diamonds to reduce building time by 1/2 hour
-
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:
Agent327
Overlord
Why is it to cheap?
Galladhorn
Monarch
Certain Play Patterns will form that is for sure, The Attrition increase effect sets certain limits to the players capacity, on the other hand it leaves room for obtaining better stats and better actual play when the auto attack limit is reached and negotiatons becomes too expensive (Diamonds).
I also have some considerations towards the lenght of a Season, but I do not fully know yet.
It would be cool with different maps, but making it very difficult to set up farily without the sectors having one more parpametre to describe the Sections (Values).
Perhaps new maps on the actual Battlefield would be a way, IDK.
And yes repeating to take the same Sector has its sort of limited entertainment value for those not burning enough to beat back the enemy – especially at the overall costs of GbG right now - but if the part of the "RISK" style map would offer few more options then that would eb a bonus.
This is the first season where I really had time to do the GbG and I have spend a considerable amounts of Goods, Soldiers and Diamonds battling for a 3rd or 2nd place included with 1-2 Guilds that most likely will move up next round. Playing GbG continuesly will either bcontinue to be costly or setttle into a repetitive pattern due to natural limits of each player.
DeletedUser117595
Because as it stands, GBG is very different from GE or GvG in the sense that it can won simply by spending lots of diamonds. In GE and GvG, diamonds can help and give some "quality of life" for those who want to spend but that won't be sufficient to win it; this is not the case in GBG. When you are against a guild that spend thousands of diamonds as soon as they are on the backfoot, there isn't much that can be done, even with sound strategy and good organisation
as it stands, it is about the same cost to revive a unit in GvG than to rush a building in GBG, yet a building in GBG can be really powerful: simply pop siege camps everywhere as a few fighters blitz the map then switch to traps and whatnots (though not really needed), rinse and repeat.. no need of strategy and frustrating for a lot of players, just brute force backed by diamonds. The use of sound strategy by such guild simply help them to reduce the overall cost of diamonds and make the most of it, but, bottom line, the diamonds become the edge and are abused to win the game.
GBG is OK when no guild abuses the building rush, but when there is one or two on the map... well it feels like wasting 2 weeks of play. Fine, "Diamond league" as to be taken literally
More expensive building would rebalance this by significantly reducing the "diamond edge" and moving to a "strategy/communication/organisation edge" (the one when no guild abuses the diamonds
): it would still be possible to rush buildings, but it would be more expensive to abuse it (and if a guild still abuse it, well, then they really deserve it!).Ceban
Brigadier-General
first not 1 or 2 but probably 20 GbG will be same pattern till guilds dont deplete millions of goods wich they accumulated in their treasuries (talking about goods AF+) and then after that real strategy will take place when they will have to think what to build and on what to spend goods in sectors... GbG have tactical potential and to be intresting, problem is that this game was dumb last 2 years considering AF+ goods usage so now we need some time to deplete them and then we wont take sectors so often and build buildings in sectors so often.
Agent327
Overlord
Because as it stands, GBG is very different from GE or GvG in the sense that it can won simply by spending lots of diamonds. In GE and GvG, diamonds can help and give some "quality of life" for those who want to spend but that won't be sufficient to win it; this is not the case in GBG. When you are against a guild that spend thousands of diamonds as soon as they are on the backfoot, there isn't much that can be done, even with sound strategy and good organisation
as it stands, it is about the same cost to revive a unit in GvG than to rush a building in GBG, yet a building in GBG can be really powerful: simply pop siege camps everywhere as a few fighters blitz the map then switch to traps and whatnots (though not really needed), rinse and repeat.. no need of strategy and frustrating for a lot of players, just brute force backed by diamonds. The use of sound strategy by such guild simply help them to reduce the overall cost of diamonds and make the most of it, but, bottom line, the diamonds become the edge and are abused to win the game.
GBG is OK when no guild abuses the building rush, but when there is one or two on the map... well it feels like wasting 2 weeks of play. Fine, "Diamond league" as to be taken literally
More expensive building would rebalance this by significantly reducing the "diamond edge" and moving to a "strategy/communication/organisation edge" (the one when no guild abuses the diamonds
What rock have you been living under? Diamonds have always been the edge of the game. How on earth can people willing to pay for them abuse them? Because of those players you play for free. Just look at the top players in the recently opened worlds. How do you think they got there? Look at what they must have spend. What makes yo think that more expensive will make a difference. Looks to me like they don't care how much they have to pay.
FantasticMrFrank
Brigadier-General
Maybe inno can change the member setting option so only a founder or leader can initiate a siege so you don’t get random guild members attacking any old province
DeletedUser117595
Disagreed, if people wants to pay diamonds to accelerate the development of their city, and want to be on top of the world like that, that's their problem doesn't impact my gameplay, doesn't impact my fun, and it is actually helpful in many ways. But imagine if in GE one could buy extra encounters counter to go above 64 for 50 diamonds each or if in GvG one could remove sector protection of opponent at anytime simply by paying 50 diams? what would be the point of playing these? paying diamonds to make one stronger faster, no pb, that's not an edge that's a way to play, just buying their way instead of grinding. Each to their own. Winning one of these guild competition simply by throwing diamonds through the window without an afterthought is just lame, it defeats the purpose of battleground, which should be about which is the best guild not which has the deepest pockets, hence the abuse. But hey...
And if they don't care how much they have to pay, well no reason not to increase the price.
Emberguard
Legend
while it’s true diamonds have always been there it’s also true they’ve never had the same impact that they have currently.
City wise if you play long enough you can keep up (reasonably well) with the diamond spenders in all aspects except the extra diamond expansions. It just takes longer. After a couple years of playing even in the city I don’t spend diamonds on extra buildings I can’t fit all the event buildings. All you need to hyper lvl GBs is an Arc and a good network of players.
But for GBG? The problem isn’t the diamonds so much as the timers for building exceeding the lockdown. So it’s much more noticeable when diamonds are used as then you don’t have to worry about either staggering your provinces taken or potentially losing something in the process of being built.
I don’t agree with Elsa’s statement that increasing the price would be the answer for “preventing abuse and if they can afford it they really deserve it” - you could apply that same logic now and as you pointed out if someone really wants to spend they’ll spend. But they did make a good point. Diamonds don’t effect the results in the same manner for GE and GvG once you’re actually in the competition as it does for GBG
DeletedUser117595
It's a question of threshold. What if it was 1 diamond to rush a building? what about 2? and go on until you reach a value that seem fair to you for the advantage it gives. Atm, in my view, it is too cheap for the advantage it gives, and I like the "per 1/2 hour" as otherwise rushing a palace is the same cost as rushing a banner, but this is a very minor point. If it was per building as it is, I would find 250 diams acceptable.
Agent327
Overlord
But if they want to pay diamonds to accelerate their developement on GBG it suddenly becomes your problem? Only reason it does not bother you if they spend it on their city is that you can not keep up with them cause they are in a different league. Same will happen here. Diamondspenders will end up facing eachother in Diamond league ( well chosen name ) and you can have your fun in a league below that. You should give it time to develop. You are complaining way to early.
But imagine if in GE one could buy extra encounters counter to go above 64 for 50 diamonds each or if in GvG one could remove sector protection of opponent at anytime simply by paying 50 diams? what would be the point of playing these? paying diamonds to make one stronger faster, no pb, that's not an edge that's a way to play, just buying their way instead of grinding. Each to their own. Winning one of these guild competition simply by throwing diamonds through the window without an afterthought is just lame, it defeats the purpose of battleground, which should be about which is the best guild not which has the deepest pockets, hence the abuse. But hey...
And if they don't care how much they have to pay, well no reason not to increase the price.
That's apples and oranges. Thinking that Battlegrounds would be about who has the best Guild is rather naive. Players have always found a way to be best by abusing the system. At least the way they do it now is not abuse. Increasing the price would be.
Emberguard
Legend
speaking of threshold, testing out in my main city to compare to current GBG costs a building that takes 1hr 10 mins cost 40 diamonds to instant build while those between 5hr 20 min and 6hr 40 min are 100 diamonds.
Sure we could definitely ask for the diamond threshold to be adjusted, just personally I think it’d be better if the implementation of the timers were adjusted rather then the cost. Adjusting cost is relying on something to not be used to be balanced. Whereas if the timers were adjusted in a way that made diamond use not a problem to non-diamond users then you wouldn’t be relying on the size of your opponent’s wallet to fix the problem
Last edited:
DeletedUser117595
ok that's official I am joining the bunch that thinks you just too thick, you're 1000' miles away from my point – ignored.
is that new? all I have ever seen is 50 diamonds for any building
Emberguard
Legend
No. Pretty sure that was introduced due to player feedback after I started playing. It was either that or the finish production timers but I know the instant build scaling has been there for a while in the main city. In settlements and GBG it’s a straight 50 though. So if you mainly use event buildings you wouldn’t notice it in your main city much. If diamond scaling were applied to GBG you could end up with similar costs to now by simply waiting as close to lockdown expiry as possible.
DeletedUser117595
ha OK I misunderstood, I thought you were talking about diamond scaling already implemented in GBG (as by "building" i meant "buildings in GBG")
Giskler
Legend
What? It's 50 across the board. Are you talking about beta?
Emberguard
Legend
No. I'm referring to live.
Giskler
Legend
Well, it's still 50 diamonds to rush buildings on live... unless they are testing scaling costs with some BGs?
Emberguard
Legend
Pretty sure it's been like that for a couple years? (did you misunderstand what I meant when I mentioned main city?)