Guild Expeditions competition- question.

[. ICE .]

Could someone explain to me how the groupings are made each week ?
-ie , the criteria .
Ive not seen any , other than guilds with similar amounts of members .
Thats fine ...but is it not possible to introduce a factor , that groups you with guilds that would offer more competition .?
Completing 85 % plus each week , and being in with guilds of really low rank on their worlds , who clearly do little or no GE , seems a bit lame as far as competition goes .
Surely better to test yourself , against other guild of similar strength and activity ?

what do others think ?

 

[DeletedUser104843]

I agree totally. While I don't do GE as much as I would like I have seen my guilds competition over the last coupld of weeks and it left a lot to be desired. Both weeks we had 1 guild that matched us pretty close and 3-4 that basically did nothing. Kinda took the fun out of beating them

 

[DeletedUser1094]

I don't mind this "random" grouping. One week, your guild is the top notch... the next, you don't stand a chance against three #1 guilds from other worlds...and the third week, it's a fair and very close race.
(...and then, of course, the occational groups, where you are a member of two or three of the guilds. Those are fun... NOT)

 

[DeletedUser100065]

I quiet like the idea of only being grouped with guilds that open the same amount of levels as you, that would reduce the amount of non GE guilds that are grouped with the GE heavy hitters and make things a bit more interesting. If a guild opens all 3 levels regularly then it makes sense they spent the goods so they can be classed the same as any other guild that did the same. Would also add an element of tactical thought as you'd have to decide if it was worth trying to compete or stick to a solid lvl2 finish.

 

[DeletedUser653]

All i can see is that by 2nd day we have already done enough to win the cup, so theres no element of competition unless theres better grouping of guilds. This weeks best guild is rated 76th in their world, while we are #1 in ours so its no fight at all.

 

[Greywolf]

As far as I can tell the member count is the main (or likely even the only) criterion used for grouping. My 3-man guild on Houndsmoor gets pitched against guilds who have 3 to 5 members. The range of respective rankings and guild levels is often quite big, but the difference in guild members is always small.

 

[DeletedUser108379]

I think it is good, that the group does not take into account how the guild performed in the previous week(s).

 

[LastWarrior]

70-80 members is the top grouping which is good, I wouldnt fancy taking on a 20 man guild

 

[Andrew420]

The GE has nothing to do with skill its all about how active the players are in your guild
A guild of 30 active players could easily beat a 70 + member guild
All they have to do is for all 30 members finish 48 encounters
Its very rare that all players in the bigger guilds (70+) are active its usually around 80% at most

 

[LastWarrior]

yes we know

 

[Vesiger]

Imagine how we feel, when our best members never exceed 32 encounters and fewer than half the guild are interested in playing at all... and every week we're up against guilds in a completely different league

 

[DeletedUser108379]

But why should a guild where none can reach 48 and not much are interested at all get the first place?

 

[Vesiger]

But why should a guild where none can reach 48 and not much are interested at all get the first place?

Against other similar guilds, we might; if you always create a tournament where three or four welterweights are pitted against a couple of heavyweights, the result becomes a foregone conclusion (and as mentioned above, becomes tediously predictable to both sides).
The way to encourage people to try harder via putting them in competition against each other is to make sure they have at least a chance of coming out towards the top...

Edit: in our current competition, there are four of us battling it out with scores of between 6% and 9% completion, one stuck on 1%, and one running away with a score of 34% already - that's just silly!

 

[DeletedUser108379]

But why should the won with 34% not win against guilds with only 9%? Those with 34% are more active.
And on my main world the first 4 are above 9% now.
Competition does not mean everybody gets a price just because he tried often enough.
If you put the guilds together according to past performance, guild at the lower end of the high tier would get no prices while guilds with much less participation would win a price just because they are put in a low tier. I would think this higly unjust for the first guild.

 

[. ICE .]

But then there is NO competition at all ..so why call it such ?
In most race events ...lets take athletics ...you would have a series of qualifiers / rounds ...then the best would compete in a final .
Maybe this is an idea to develop ?
Each new week could be a qualifier for the following week.where you get grouped with other winners / similar %age completers
Maybe even create a "grand champion" ..
- things could perhaps rest again after that ...and start the process again .

- just thoughts on how we can make this a little more exciting ..before it becomes too tedious .

 

[mrbeef]

Against other similar guilds, we might; if you always create a tournament where three or four welterweights are pitted against a couple of heavyweights, the result becomes a foregone conclusion (and as mentioned above, becomes tediously predictable to both sides).
The way to encourage people to try harder via putting them in competition against each other is to make sure they have at least a chance of coming out towards the top...

Edit: in our current competition, there are four of us battling it out with scores of between 6% and 9% completion, one stuck on 1%, and one running away with a score of 34% already - that's just silly!

But they ARE similar guilds..each week seven similarly sized guilds are randomly selected and brought together into the competition against each other. Now if one of those guilds has many active players who participate in GE and the other six guilds are hardly active at all in GE then where is the complaint?...you are not FIGHTING the other guilds, you are doing the encounters on the GE map - which are the same for all.

 

[DeletedUser109268]

But they ARE similar guilds..each week seven similarly sized guilds are randomly selected and brought together into the competition against each other. Now if one of those guilds has many active players who participate in GE and the other six guilds are hardly active at all in GE then where is the complaint?...you are not FIGHTING the other guilds, you are doing the encounters on the GE map - which are the same for all.

I agree

 

[. ICE .]

you miss the point mr beef .
healthy competition , leads to more involvement from your guild surely , as you compete for the rewards .
winning it hands down each week , will just create lethargy ...and ultimately lower GE involvement.
likewise a low GE involved guild seems unlikely to push involvement , if they see themselves thrashed out of sight each time

 

[DeletedUser108379]

But then there is NO competition at all ..so why call it such ?
In most race events ...lets take athletics ...you would have a series of qualifiers / rounds ...then the best would compete in a final .
Maybe this is an idea to develop ?
Each new week could be a qualifier for the following week.where you get grouped with other winners / similar %age completers
Maybe even create a "grand champion" ..
- things could perhaps rest again after that ...and start the process again .

- just thoughts on how we can make this a little more exciting ..before it becomes too tedious .

But in that case the guilds who performed bad - in comparison to the other guilds of their group - would not participate anymore - in the next rounds - in the championship.
I doubt that this is what is wanted here.

At the moment guilds with a participation rate above average have a chance to win a cup from time to time, and those with a participation rate below average, well, for those the chances a dim. But for me that is fair. It is a competition about participation.

But I can understand that guilds who specialises in Guild Expedition, demanding a high participation of each member, that those guilds want to know how good they are in comparison to other similar guilds.

We have a lot of ranking lists. Why not have a new list with the participation rate of - for instance - the best 50 guilds of the server (participation rate of last week). Could be presented in the forum each week.

 

[shareshark]

what is the highest % that has been seen in GE , I know 100% can be scored but has anyone seen a guild big or small with that?