• 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:
    Apply
  • Forum Contests

    Won't you join us for out latest contest?
    You can check out the newest one here.

New Content Guild Battlegrounds

  • Thread starter Deleted member 109369
  • Start date
Cursedveggie

Cursedveggie

Legend
GreenHar said:
Apologies if that has been discussed as I haven't read the 58 pages: is anyone else concerned about pay to build in GBG?
The buildings can give a massive advantage, that put guilds who are (for various reasons) not paying in quite a disadvantage.

If only one building is paid for in a sector conquered (not accounting for delays and such of course), 3300 diamonds will be spend. The 4000 diamond package costs currently €49.99.

That's a lot, isn't it?
Click to expand...
There's a reason the top league is called diamond....
 

DeletedUser

It is not an argument, simply a reminder. Some people have deep pockets-live with it.
 

DeletedUser112026

Emberguard said:
if the rewards suck because they don’t care about SoH, then they’re not abstaining due to receiving a reward if they do nothing (assuming other members reach the minimum needed). Because then thatd mean they care about the reward
Click to expand...
but they still get a reward even if they do ZERO in GBG that's the problem they still get the piece's
 

Green Sky

Private
Fulhamguy said:
If some folk want to pay money for something I dont complain because it helps support Inno who obviously need some sort of income to keep the game going.
Click to expand...
Of course they do, and I do occasionally buy diamonds to do just that. I'd be happy with a subscription as well, for instance.

I simply do object to the fact that GBG is blatantly unbalanced in this regard.

But since it appears that most of you are fine with pay to win, so be it. Hope your pockets are deep ;)
 

DeletedUser110131

Test Ament said:
or do they get maybe 95% of the total benefits ?

because most player rewards aren't the ones they get at the end

but the rewards for fighting/negotiation
so if they do the same work they definitely NOT get less than 20% of the total benefits

and the benefits of the guild level ?
if the guild is high 7 FP a day from town hall
that is one time the FP reward in my platinum league after a fight
and I get many of them every day (except the Tuesday/Wednesday between GBG seasons)
Click to expand...
We were talking about guild power. They get <20% of the benefits from that.

The rewards for advances will be 100%, but at a much higher cost, since they'll be advancing with much higher attrition.

For individual players in a 15 person guild, fighting as much as an 80 person guild, the rewards from the guild level will be relatively and comparatively smaller. When both guilds make 1600 advances, that's 20 per player in the large guild, but 107 per player in the small guild. They'll get >5x more reward for advances, dwarfing any guild benefits. However, they'll also do >5x the work. If you consider getting the resources needed as part of the work, they'll do several times more work than that 5x.

SilverFoxes said:
The solution is obvious, limit guild sizes to 20. That way you should be able to fill most guilds and there'll be an even playing field.
Click to expand...
Guild sizes are irrelevant, excepting only cases where all members are maximally active, with maximum strength cities. In all other cases, smaller guilds can compensate. Having all guilds filled with only such players would result in equal scores for all guilds. We'd end up with everyone playing in the same league, and no one ever winning more than they lost. I really wouldn't consider this an improvement. There's no benefit to "filling all guilds", nor is it possible to do so; new guilds are made, every day.

Lugh Longarm said:
I've had a bunch of Invites and Msgs, attempting to recruit me to Guilds who have the avowed intention of reaching 80 Members. I get where they're coming from of course and wish them good fortune. The mergers and Guild hopping seems to be at an all time high as idle Players are finally being dropped. The GBG feature has brought this situation to a head and, if it continues will result in multiple big Guilds solely made up of the most active Players. The idle beggars don't seem to be catching on either, which is something of a shame. The fact that they have been idle, lazy hangers-on is the sole responsibility of the Guilds who were more interested in quantity over quality. I'm not certain about Inno limiting Guild sizes though, it seems a bit too "Big Brother" to me.
LOL, just had a thought: will there now be new Guilds for idle Players or, perhaps they can't be bothered?
Click to expand...
Things are a bit stirred up, right now, because guilds are having to adapt. Some are deciding to become GBG guilds, others not. As a result of guilds changing, some no longer match the needs and wishes of all their members, who are looking for other guilds that do. Just like there are guilds who don't do GvG or GE, there will be guilds that don't do GBG. For those guilds and those players, nothing has really changed. They were never top ranked, and never had any ambition to be. They'll just have to wait out the fuzz from the players and guilds scrambling for GBG, and then they can settle down and play the game as they always have.

People aren't "idle, lazy hangers-on" just because they're not playing the game the way you do. You're not the model for how the game should be played. None of us are. We're each only the model for how we like to play the game. Isn't that great?
 

Fulhamguy

Corporal
GreenHar said:
Of course they do, and I do occasionally buy diamonds to do just that. I'd be happy with a subscription as well, for instance.

I simply do object to the fact that GBG is blatantly unbalanced in this regard.

But since it appears that most of you are fine with pay to win, so be it. Hope your pockets are deep ;)
Click to expand...
That is a bit of an assumption that just because one is ok with people paying that one is paying.
I have paid a bit of money but not much recently.
 

BhaaluJi

Corporal
hit count need to be calculated whether one is using manual battle or auto battle. at moment 1 negotiation = 2 battles (auto or manual)
manual battle should be weighing more as it requires more effort and time than negotiation and autobattle
 

DeletedUser

huihaa said:
hit count need to be calculated whether one is using manual battle or auto battle. at moment 1 negotiation = 2 battles (auto or manual)
manual battle should be weighing more as it requires more effort and time than negotiation and autobattle
Click to expand...
+/- could be
if they could prevent battles finishing with auto-finish to count as manual seems pretty legit
they could also add 10% rewarding chance on those ones
 
Goremise

Goremise

Lieutenant-General
Really hoping we get some mobile optimisation for GBG soon, cannot play on my tablet device at all, the moment I click GBG (if there is a lot going on) My tablet lags so hard on the map or even in messages if I have the map open. Fine literally everywhere else, but GBG is killer. I've done some crazy things in other games but just never gotten this intense lag.

Other then that, honestly can't wait to see GBG later down the track with more updates to it and improvements because it is a great fun mode and brought some life back into the game for some :)
 

Fulhamguy

Corporal
I so wish leadership get some help with knowing who is not reading their messages. Was speaking to one leader and he has narrowed it down to 1 of 3 people who are not reading their messages by making a note of how many fights each player has done and when a wrong attack has been made checking.

I just get this time and again from other leaders and they are finding it so annoying that we dont know who is attacking incorrect provinces.

I so hope something is done to help. Cant we have something like who was the last person to attack it at least that would help.
 
Cursedveggie

Cursedveggie

Legend
Fulhamguy said:
I so wish leadership get some help with knowing who is not reading their messages. Was speaking to one leader and he has narrowed it down to 1 of 3 people who are not reading their messages by making a note of how many fights each player has done and when a wrong attack has been made checking.

I just get this time and again from other leaders and they are finding it so annoying that we dont know who is attacking incorrect provinces.

I so hope something is done to help. Cant we have something like who was the last person to attack it at least that would help.
Click to expand...
It makes it more interesting this way :D
 

Fulhamguy

Corporal
Cursedveggie said:
It makes it more interesting this way :D
Click to expand...
Interesting for who, the rest of the guild get bored of messages being sent about who is attacking a particular province. Why are they attacking that province do they know something that the leadership doesnt ?

This is in fact stopping some players participating as they are not sure where to attack and so by doing nothing know that they are not attacking the wrong place.
If we know who is attacking where this becomes a non issue.

It screws up the enjoyment for a lot of people sadly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top