• 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 versus Guild

DeletedUser100341

My biggest complaint about GvG is the fact that not everyone in a guild can participate in combat. It takes a sizable group of guild members with specific era troops to defend sectors and to mount an offensive.

I would very much like to fight in GvG but it always seems to be drifting away from me. Originally I was fighting in EMA although my city was almost in HMA. I held on to EMA stuff as long as I could but the other members who were fighting alongside in EMA decided they wanted to move on. So I did the same. Unfortunately there were few members coming up in ranks interested in taking up the fight for EMA. EMA is slipping away.

Our guild never got a foothold in HMA and I couldn’t muster enough interest to try anything.

Similarly we had a position in LMA but again the members moved on. LMA is also slipping away and again I can’t seem to get enough interest. I send out a message to the guild and get only a couple of replies. That’s not enough to do any serious damage in GvG. The era or age specific requirement is what’s killing it.

There was talk among the guild about trying for Colonial but it didn’t go very far.

Most of the members who participated in GvG are still in the guild. It seems no one really cares about GvG.

If there were some way for everyone to participate and get PvP points GvG would be more attractive.

If you’ve played Clash of Clans you’ll notice everyone can participate in the clan wars. You pick an opponent you think you can beat and if you do you get a reward and your clan gets a reward. Of course you can beat up on a weaker opponent but then your reward is less.

Maybe I should just forget about GvG and tend my farm.
 

DeletedUser

Is there an up-to-date GvG guide somewhere? I've located this one:
http://forum.en.forgeofempires.com/showthread.php?24371-Guild-Vs-Guild-Full-Guide
but it isn't up to date (the calculations for the distribution of the "support pool" are obsolete).

Meanwhile, maybe someone can help with what I was specifically looking for a guide for: What do the "daily top 3 power rewards" do? If a guild gets "5%" in that, what is it 5% of - power? prestige? support? level?

And: What is "prestige", anyway - does it increase our level, boost our defense, put food on the table, pay the bills, or do anything at all?

Thanks for any available clarity.

These are all the available GvG Guide topics at present:

GvG - How to donate goods to the Guild Treasury via a sector defence slot
GvG - Goods costs per siege
GvG - Guild continent map
GvG - Guild levels
GvG - Guild rights and treasury
GvG - Terms
GvG - User Guide

If other GvG guides are needed, they will have to be made by someone first....
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Can't someone update the "GvG full guide" that I linked to? That's very needed.

Actually there's a lot that needs updating, including that particular guide. Surge has kindly worked on an updated Glossary of Guides which has quite a list of outdated guides, as well as guides that could do with being kept up-to-date with the latest changes. Further discussion of what needs updating as far as guides go should probably be done in another thread, but this is just to point out that there is an awful lot of 'very needed' information to add.
 

DeletedUser14664

why does the GvG event log just says nothing. 1 minute there was information who attacked us, the next - nothing ........
 

DeletedUser2989

The GvG event log is still not too useful, I've noticed several problems with it and hopefully we'll be able to get a detailed and stable event log for GvG. As it stands we have to accept that information may or may not be there and it may or may not be detailed/accurate.

@TheWizEd, it sounds like your guild is just having some co-ordination issues. All guilds can have this and it just comes down to working out a way of getting enough people on the same page. Once you have the sectors you either have to dedicate people to maintain them (or work out a rotating roster?) or accept that you'll loose them over time. It's unfortunate that your feeling left out but it does seem like GvG favors those who are active or those who have finished everything else in the game, just the way it is I guess.

As for participation, I touched on it a bit before, it really comes down to co-ordination. If your guild picked ages where everyone can join in (so the age of the least developed town) then you'd be able to really start co-ordinating everyone into a single effort. You'd also need to work in your own progress as well but it's up to you (and your guild) to work out that balance.

(A small note, PvP points are already handed out for GvG attacks. Personally I think they shouldn't but they are still given out, so you'd need something more if there isn't already enough motivation.)
 

DeletedUser100341

@Tankovy, its not coordination. God knows I've tried. Its interest. Goods are not a problem, especially now with the Observatory. Most don't want to be stuck with particular era troops or goods production when their city is advancing. GvG should have been designed so a player can continuously be engaged and continue with their city development.

We just recently added new members but all are of an era in which they can't help in the eras we have positions. I think a lot of players would like to help but can't. Myself included.
 

DeletedUser97768

If you ask me, I think they've got GvG backwards. It would make more sense for the 1st siege to cost the most and every successive siege to cost lesser, upto a certain point. (Forget real life and history - we're talking about a game here;)
Not only will this require strategic planning on the part of guilds as to where to enter the map, but contests among even sized guilds (in terms of sectors owned) would be evened up, making it more exciting (and frequent!). This would obviously keep player interest. Attacking a top ranking guild will therefore require more strategic planning in accumulating sectors such that by the time they go head to head, the amount of goods required for siege and counter-siege would not be as high, making it more lively. As it stands right now, if a battle between evenly matched guilds has to occur, each guild has to wait an unreasonable amount of time for the next siege, which usually results in ghost guilding which is bad for the overall structure of the GvG (But obviously not for INNO's bank balance ;) This would also cut down on ghost guilding completely, and yet allow for guild hopping to help out allies...

Just a thought;)
 

DeletedUser2989

At first that didn't make sence but I think it does now... obviously we'd need a rasonable start price and minimum price (what they would be I wouldn't know) but apart from that it makes sense. It runs into a bit of a problem if there are not enough landing zone sectors that are not either controlled by or near to a "large" guild. You could have the situation where large guilds are "camping" all the landing spots blocking others from getting on the map.

So I really can't say this wouldn't work but there are the concerns of what is a reasonable starting seige price and what's a reasonable minimum seige price (can't exactly just flip the numbers we have now as there deosn't seem to be a limit to seige cost, thus an infinite starting seige cost would be silly). Second there would be the concern of "large" guilds camping/blocking others from the map. But really we have these concerns now :) So I can't really say I like the idea, but I don't hate it... :confused:
 

DeletedUser97768

@Tankovy: Agree on the 'camping' issue. That can easily be sorted by restricting a guild to a max of say 3 landing zones ;)

As for a start price, I think 3k~4k of each good would make it possible for smaller guilds to compete as well. Any higher and it will stop GvG altogether. This will rule out ghost guilding, and ensure that only well prepared guilds enter the fray.

As for minimum, I would say 100~200 of each good. As for how many sectors before you hit minimum requirement - that's left to be seen. This would make things more competitive, and more importantly - sustainable. Right now, you are 'punished' if you want to increase you domain size due to the costs involved and poor returns for it. What this does then is it makes larger guilds attack low Age maps simply for ranking points.

As it stands right now, guilds are restricted on the size of the domains simply due to the huge cost of goods involved. And if you loose a sector or two through ghost guilding, it is a huge blow and almost impossible to re-cap lost sectors. It also means people get fed up waiting for treasury to build up and quit GvG altogether....GvG will loose its appeal and stagnate...(as if it hasn't already lol)..
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser2989

Restricting landing zone ownership like that makes the initial landing zone (3 deep) a large hazzard, and even then I'm not sure it solves the "camping" I'm concerned about. But I can't be certain camping would be a problem with the new system.

That's a very high start price, that is equal to (currently) owning 34+ sectors. I think a more reasonable start cost would be 1000-2000 of each (5000-10,000 total for your first sector) which is equal to (currently) owning 23-29 sectors. That might be just me though.

I will say that Inno intended the seige costs to restrict guild expansion in a single age. I think they took it too far as it restricts guild size and activity, not just size. So I guess this idea lifts the restrictions on activity (imposed by excessive seige costs) but also unrestricts guild size which would be against what Inno have intended for this feature (I'm not sure why but they want to restrict possible guild size without setting a strict limit...)
 

DeletedUser

Just make all sectors landing zones. I think that might make GVG a lot more exciting.
Nowhere to go. Nowhere to hide.
Having landing zones in just a few places contributes to the lethargy of GVG. Take a sector in the landing zone, put your HQ there, and then start advancing inland. Then go to sleep because nobody can bother you anymore.
 

DeletedUser

Having begun playing FoE when the original Beta game was released, and being one of the original members of our guild, ultimately gaining founder status, I have quit the game. My reasons for this are my disgust at the intransigence of the developers and support on the topic of ghost guilds, or more specifically, demolition guilds. In East Nagach a demolition guild called The Elite had been set up with the sole aim of spoiling the game in an attempt to have GvG restructured. They complain about stagnation on the maps, and use hit and run tactics to free up sectors across the map. A fair enough complaint, but a very unfair approach. Many players have invested a great deal of time and money in the form of diamonds, in building up their territories. What they have, can be destroyed in minutes by powerful and relatively low cost attacks by The Elite, who in the interim are gathering PvP points, but not holding on to newly won sectors in order that their attacks remain low cost. OK, its a war game, but its Guild v Guild, and it is very noticeable that they do not attack the guilds that they originated from in their quest to enforce their point. Their original guilds are undeniably suffering at the defection of their top players, but it seems hypocritical that the demolition guild is attacking those guilds who stand to gain from their original guild's demise, and are not offering up their territories as free sectors. I contacted support regarding this issue, and was told to post here, apparently there is no breach of rules where a rule does not exist, and so contacting support is invalid. Posting here seems a pointless exercise, since many valid points become lost in argument and abuse in this forum, and relatively few are taken notice of and actioned unless it is a programming issue. This is my final input to FoE, since I have followed my own advice to those who complained about unpopular changes in the structure and gameplay of FoE; if you don't like it don't play. To the instigators of spoiling tactics I give the same advice, and to the developers I say it is your responsibility to ensure that your production meets the needs of your customers, you should ensure that it is played fairly, and provides enjoyment and entertainment. If you don't meet the basic needs of your customer base, you will lose them. Take note.
 

DeletedUser

Hello guys

So I wanted to drop in here as there are developments going on behind the scenes, there has been a very large amount of player concern in regards to the ghost guilds, and now demolition guilds. We have received a huge amount of feedback from you both here in the forum and via the support system, which we are taking notice of.

I realise at this point it may seem as though we are telling you yes we understand, yet there are no changes so it feels as though maybe it is falling on deaf ears - I assure you this is not the case.

There has been a lot of discussion in regards to this with the various team members on different forge of empires servers not just our own, so I can say at this point the issue is well known, and as such it is being reviewed. You will never see an immediate change of this type as planning needs to go into how a change can be made. Do we alter the game so that certain things can or cannot be done, or do we introduce a rule to prevent this, for example.

So please do rest assured, this is well known at all levels, and a lot of discussion and planning is taking place, but at this point I cannot say yes or no a change will be made as this would be subject to change.
 

DeletedUser103223

Default

Taken from an original post when GvG was introduced.

GvG User Guide

Your guild is fighting against others for survival and power. Your goal is to expand your guild's territory and hold on to it, to level up your guild and gain bonuses and glory for all its members.



Looks like they better rewrite that guide
 

DeletedUser13082

Having begun playing FoE when the original Beta game was released, and being one of the original members of our guild, ultimately gaining founder status, I have quit the game. My reasons for this are my disgust at the intransigence of the developers and support on the topic of ghost guilds, or more specifically, demolition guilds. In East Nagach a demolition guild called The Elite had been set up with the sole aim of spoiling the game in an attempt to have GvG restructured. They complain about stagnation on the maps, and use hit and run tactics to free up sectors across the map. A fair enough complaint, but a very unfair approach. Many players have invested a great deal of time and money in the form of diamonds, in building up their territories. What they have, can be destroyed in minutes by powerful and relatively low cost attacks by The Elite, who in the interim are gathering PvP points, but not holding on to newly won sectors in order that their attacks remain low cost. OK, its a war game, but its Guild v Guild, and it is very noticeable that they do not attack the guilds that they originated from in their quest to enforce their point. Their original guilds are undeniably suffering at the defection of their top players, but it seems hypocritical that the demolition guild is attacking those guilds who stand to gain from their original guild's demise, and are not offering up their territories as free sectors. I contacted support regarding this issue, and was told to post here, apparently there is no breach of rules where a rule does not exist, and so contacting support is invalid. Posting here seems a pointless exercise, since many valid points become lost in argument and abuse in this forum, and relatively few are taken notice of and actioned unless it is a programming issue. This is my final input to FoE, since I have followed my own advice to those who complained about unpopular changes in the structure and gameplay of FoE; if you don't like it don't play. To the instigators of spoiling tactics I give the same advice, and to the developers I say it is your responsibility to ensure that your production meets the needs of your customers, you should ensure that it is played fairly, and provides enjoyment and entertainment. If you don't meet the basic needs of your customer base, you will lose them. Take note.

It sucks, I can tell you that from plenty of experience being on the receiving end of these sort of guilds. However, it seems that the idea I had with The Elite is doing a pretty good job, you're not the first to complain about us and I'm pretty sure that you won't be the last.

The goal is to get the changes needed by proving a point. Yes others suffer from it, even our own guilds suffer from it as they're losing their top fighters and are less able to defend themselves. However the problem has gone on too long. I'm tired of spending weeks on end gathering goods to take a sector with a cost of 1000+ of each good from the age, only to have it taken a couple days later by another guild at a cost of 100 of each good of the age. What we're doing with the demolition guilds isn't fair, it's not meant to be fair, the idea is to give proof that GvG in it's current form isn't fair. Whether ghost guilds, demolition guilds or any other foul play guild tactics are used is completely irrelevant, the game still isn't fair whether they exist or not.

You mentioned that we are only hitting guilds which our former guilds were enemies with, this is not the case. We are a guild who hit any guild on any map at any time, if players want to hit a guild they can do so. Currently the majority of members are from guilds which were enemies of your own guilds, so of course the main targets are your guild line. If members of your guilds came over and joined us then our former guilds would undoubtedly be attacked too.

I've stated on other threads to other complaints that the long term goal is getting enough players in the demolition guild to be able to clear an entire map of all guilds. We're edging closer and closer to that stage, when it comes, it doesn't matter what guild you are in, if you're on the map we attack, you'll get hit.

It has been months and still no change has come, despite the fact that change is obviously needed. The goal for us is to force the hand of developers. Stop wasting time with meaningless stuff like soccer event and a terrible gift which likely took longer to fix than it did to create in the first place (referring to HoF), start doing what matters and listening to customers, as said in the above quote, you will lose them, this is becoming all the more clear as more and more are now leaving due to the outbreak of demolition guilds. These guilds aren't going anywhere until change is made.

Hello guys

So I wanted to drop in here as there are developments going on behind the scenes, there has been a very large amount of player concern in regards to the ghost guilds, and now demolition guilds. We have received a huge amount of feedback from you both here in the forum and via the support system, which we are taking notice of.

I realise at this point it may seem as though we are telling you yes we understand, yet there are no changes so it feels as though maybe it is falling on deaf ears - I assure you this is not the case.

There has been a lot of discussion in regards to this with the various team members on different forge of empires servers not just our own, so I can say at this point the issue is well known, and as such it is being reviewed. You will never see an immediate change of this type as planning needs to go into how a change can be made. Do we alter the game so that certain things can or cannot be done, or do we introduce a rule to prevent this, for example.

So please do rest assured, this is well known at all levels, and a lot of discussion and planning is taking place, but at this point I cannot say yes or no a change will be made as this would be subject to change.

It's been months, from the time GvG was released in beta server, ghosting has been complained about. GvG shouldn't have even been released into live servers in the state it was in. It was pushed out early to steer players minds away from the fact that their hard earned GB levels had just been nerfed. It wasn't ready for release when it came and it still isn't ready now. I don't blame yourself or any other mods, the blame is solely for the terrible design of the feature and the lack of customer recognition where complaints have been concerned.

You mentioned that there are things going on behind the scenes... Why behind the scenes? More and more players leave while they are left in the dark, why not let them know that change is on the way, keep them here until that change has arrived at least. If they don't think change will happen then there's no reason for them to stay.

There are a lot of ideas on these forums for how to fix GvG and make it a fair feature for everybody. I post the link to my own idea a lot of the time cause it's my own idea and of course will be my favourite of the selection available, but there are a lot more than just my own which would all achieve the same goals. There's nothing that even needs thinking about when it comes to ideas of how to sort the problem out. The ideas have already been given.
 

DeletedUser

You mentioned that there are things going on behind the scenes... Why behind the scenes? More and more players leave while they are left in the dark, why not let them know that change is on the way, keep them here until that change has arrived at least. If they don't think change will happen then there's no reason for them to stay.

Actually we have just been told that change is on its way - people are working on it behind the scenes until it's ready to be implemented. Not sure what point you are trying to make here....
 

DeletedUser17514

It sucks, I can tell you that from plenty of experience being on the receiving end of these sort of guilds. However, it seems that the idea I had with The Elite is doing a pretty good job, you're not the first to complain about us and I'm pretty sure that you won't be the last.

The goal is to get the changes needed by proving a point. Yes others suffer from it, even our own guilds suffer from it as they're losing their top fighters and are less able to defend themselves. However the problem has gone on too long. I'm tired of spending weeks on end gathering goods to take a sector with a cost of 1000+ of each good from the age, only to have it taken a couple days later by another guild at a cost of 100 of each good of the age. What we're doing with the demolition guilds isn't fair, it's not meant to be fair, the idea is to give proof that GvG in it's current form isn't fair. Whether ghost guilds, demolition guilds or any other foul play guild tactics are used is completely irrelevant, the game still isn't fair whether they exist or not.

You mentioned that we are only hitting guilds which our former guilds were enemies with, this is not the case. We are a guild who hit any guild on any map at any time, if players want to hit a guild they can do so. Currently the majority of members are from guilds which were enemies of your own guilds, so of course the main targets are your guild line. If members of your guilds came over and joined us then our former guilds would undoubtedly be attacked too.

I've stated on other threads to other complaints that the long term goal is getting enough players in the demolition guild to be able to clear an entire map of all guilds. We're edging closer and closer to that stage, when it comes, it doesn't matter what guild you are in, if you're on the map we attack, you'll get hit.

It has been months and still no change has come, despite the fact that change is obviously needed. The goal for us is to force the hand of developers. Stop wasting time with meaningless stuff like soccer event and a terrible gift which likely took longer to fix than it did to create in the first place (referring to HoF), start doing what matters and listening to customers, as said in the above quote, you will lose them, this is becoming all the more clear as more and more are now leaving due to the outbreak of demolition guilds. These guilds aren't going anywhere until change is made.



It's been months, from the time GvG was released in beta server, ghosting has been complained about. GvG shouldn't have even been released into live servers in the state it was in. It was pushed out early to steer players minds away from the fact that their hard earned GB levels had just been nerfed. It wasn't ready for release when it came and it still isn't ready now. I don't blame yourself or any other mods, the blame is solely for the terrible design of the feature and the lack of customer recognition where complaints have been concerned.

You mentioned that there are things going on behind the scenes... Why behind the scenes? More and more players leave while they are left in the dark, why not let them know that change is on the way, keep them here until that change has arrived at least. If they don't think change will happen then there's no reason for them to stay.

There are a lot of ideas on these forums for how to fix GvG and make it a fair feature for everybody. I post the link to my own idea a lot of the time cause it's my own idea and of course will be my favourite of the selection available, but there are a lot more than just my own which would all achieve the same goals. There's nothing that even needs thinking about when it comes to ideas of how to sort the problem out. The ideas have already been given.

And when your Guild is the only one left playing the game?
 

DeletedUser13082

And when your Guild is the only one left playing the game?

Then the point will be proven that obviously GvG needs changing to avoid those situations.

@Hippo, we have JUST been told change is on the way. You answered your own question.
 
Top