GVG Releasing HQ

[DeletedUser12313]

Now that they have got rid of the aggressive NPC's you can no longer allow your HQ to just waste away in order to land elsewhere on a continent map This is crazy. If your lucky a neighbour will take it, but sometimes that is not possible leaving you utterly stymied. The inability to release an HQ was always a silly rule and now it is just ridiculous. When the designers decided to get rid of aggressive NPC's they should have followed the logic through and allowed the release of the HQ. As things stand the inability to release is just an unnecessary and frustrating annoyance that spoils the flow of GVG. It also penalises smaller guilds who when trying to land need to do so several times before they can find somewhere some scope to move inland from an otherwise uncontested LZ sector. It needs sorting out.

 

[DeletedUser98461]

Now that they have got rid of the aggressive NPC's you can no longer allow your HQ to just waste away in order to land elsewhere on a continent map This is crazy. If your lucky a neighbour will take it, but sometimes that is not possible leaving you utterly stymied. The inability to release an HQ was always a silly rule and now it is just ridiculous. When the designers decided to get rid of aggressive NPC's they should have followed the logic through and allowed the release of the HQ. As things stand the inability to release is just an unnecessary and frustrating annoyance that spoils the flow of GVG. It also penalises smaller guilds who when trying to land need to do so several times before they can find somewhere some scope to move inland from an otherwise uncontested LZ sector. It needs sorting out.

+1 !!!!!!!!!!

 

[DeletedUser105544]

Right. Especially when small guild stuck surrounded by big enemy guilds. They can easily reduce it's territory to HQ hex only and than lock it in there for indefinite time. This issue can cause a lot of unfair play in GvG.

 

[DeletedUser99445]

Now that they have got rid of the aggressive NPC's you can no longer allow your HQ to just waste away in order to land elsewhere on a continent map This is crazy. If your lucky a neighbour will take it, but sometimes that is not possible leaving you utterly stymied. The inability to release an HQ was always a silly rule and now it is just ridiculous. When the designers decided to get rid of aggressive NPC's they should have followed the logic through and allowed the release of the HQ. As things stand the inability to release is just an unnecessary and frustrating annoyance that spoils the flow of GVG. It also penalises smaller guilds who when trying to land need to do so several times before they can find somewhere some scope to move inland from an otherwise uncontested LZ sector. It needs sorting out.

As most of the changes in GVG have been influenced by the Big Successful guilds and are basically designed to safeguard them..........Need I say more?
+1 for releasing the HQ

 

[DeletedUser9614]

-1
another feature that would favor 1-2 player guilds to play a hitman

 

[DeletedUser7719]

-1
another feature that would favor 1-2 player guilds to play a hitman

I thought 1-2 player guilds could already do this by dissolving their guild? That being said, I don't think I've ever seen a small guild purposely land near raiders then allow their HQ to be eaten by them so they could land somewhere else. Has anyone else ever have seen this?

 

[DeletedUser12313]

You are incorrect Pawelp. How would it help one or two person ghost guilds. Once they have fulfilled their purpose such guilds simply dissolve and their sectors just turn to NPC. In fact arguably it does the opposite, encouraging guilds to create a ghost just to take their own HQ so they can move elsewhere.
The problem is most acute for smaller guilds who often have to land several times before they can find an area where they can expand a little. If you have not noticed guilds in the past leaving their HQ to wither Byeordie I am surprised as it was a common occurrence, perhaps you come from a big guild who has never had to bother about such things.
The bottom line is that there does not appear to be a single coherent argument as to why a HQ cannot be released, hence and unless someone cannot come up with one, this silly superfluous and irritating rule should be abolished.

 

[DeletedUser7719]

If you have not noticed guilds in the past leaving their HQ to wither Byeordie I am surprised as it was a common occurrence, perhaps you come from a big guild who has never had to bother about such things.

I still check the maps often even if I'm in a big guild since we are sieged pretty often. I've seen small guilds leaving HQs in all by itself, but if a guild is removed from the map, it is specifically mentioned in the Event log. I've only seen a few times that message pop up and that's due to a ghost guild (and sometimes a big guild) removing another guild off the map. Never from the raiders.

 

[DeletedUser2989]

I understand that on occasion a guild will pick somewhere to land, take the first sector but then find it a lot harder to make any more progress. In that case it's very reasonable to think that they should have an opportunity to leave and try somewhere else, but there are a few things that need to be considered as a whole. You can't just add a "release HQ" button without restrictions because it'd re-introduce HQ hopping. If you allow unlimited "HQ release" then it makes it easier for "ghost" guilds as you won't need to dissolve and reform, just take and drop and take again.

Personally I'd be fine with a HQ release function but it'd need conditions in order to prevent abuse:
HQ can only be released if it is the last sector owned by the guild in the province.
Once the HQ is released you cannot choose a new landing in that province till after calculation. (it won't stop ghosts from dissolving and reforming to avoid this restriction but it doesn't make things easier)

This way guilds are allowed to change their mind and we avoid adding loopholes for ghosts (assuming something more is done to stop them later...).

 

[DeletedUser99445]

Dropping the HQ release and allowing endless Guild Dissolves is madness.

I can hit the TE map today and take out every landing zone and surrounding sectors right across the map and the only thing restricting me is my goods and troop numbers. Both of which I can save up for.
If I band together with a few high powered friends then this becomes way to easy.
This idea sounds like a lot of fun to me. I will give this some consideration. Very tempting.

 

[DeletedUser99588]

There have been a number of suggestions to curb/limit HQ hopping that didn't involve stopping you releasing a HQ so I do not see that as a valid argument. The developers took the lazy way out and just removed the delete defence option. Unfortunately more often that not they seem to take the route of less effort even though it may not be best for game play. They are not bothered if players leave the game because of their decisions/changes because they believe others will replace them and as the game is nearer to the end of it's life cycle rather than the beginning they seem even less bothered.

My advice is just to play the game but don't spend any more money on it as it is a wasted investment when you know they are going to continue to screw things up. You just know that whoever is advising them of changes to make has big guild players whispering in their ear.

I'll be very surprised if they allow us to release a HQ again even with measures to curb HQ hopping. Just to much effort for them. They couldn't sort out GB level points in 7+ months so it's not surprising they are hardly up to the task of implementing positive changes to GvG.

Shameful really and all I can say either the developers are just not that good at their job or they are seriously under resourced and cannot keep up with what is required. Either way Innogames are at fault so keep your wallet tucked away for the foreseeable future if really want to take a stance.

However, if things aren't really that bad for you then keep on spending as that is how they judge whether they are succeeding. If revenue goes up then they can only assume that the changes have been for the better.

I had considered spending on the summer event but will now take my own advice and evaluate whether I think the game is really worth it any more. I'm kind of fed up with half hearted changes being made which have either not had much thought to the consequences and knock on effects or they haven't cared about the negative aspects. Not just recent changes but ones made over the last year or so which get implemented and throw up problems and those problems are ignored.

 

[DeletedUser99445]

Restricting how many guilds a player can join in a month to just ONE would be another step forward in restricting all the ghosting and guild hopping.
As for getting players to spend money......I never understand why they give us Premium Buildings to buy for diamonds but leave the Shrine of Knowledge out of the listings.
Why not make them available to everyone all of the time as they do for Goods, Houses, etc

 

[DeletedUser98461]

Restricting how many guilds a player can join in a month to just ONE would be another step forward in restricting all the ghosting and guild hopping.
As for getting players to spend money......I never understand why they give us Premium Buildings to buy for diamonds but leave the Shrine of Knowledge out of the listings.
Why not make them available to everyone all of the time as they do for Goods, Houses, etc

Very good advice + 1

 

[DeletedUser101925]

I never understand why they give us Premium Buildings to buy for diamonds but leave the Shrine of Knowledge out of the listings.
Why not make them available to everyone all of the time as they do for Goods, Houses, etc

Restricting buildings and making them limited (like during events only) increases the chance of you buying more diamonds. That's not too hard to understand?

 

[DeletedUser99445]

Restricting buildings and making them limited (like during events only) increases the chance of you buying more diamonds. That's not too hard to understand?

Hi Syphon, I don't agree with that as making the Shrine a Premium building would mean spending diamonds to purchase it but as many as you want on any day of the week as in the case of Premium Houses and Supply buildings and Premium Decorations.
I hope you can understand that

 

[DeletedUser2989]

Restricting buildings and making them limited (like during events only) increases the chance of you buying more diamonds. That's not too hard to understand?

Hi Syphon, I don't agree with that as making the Shrine a Premium building would mean spending diamonds to purchase it but as many as you want on any day of the week as in the case of Premium Houses and Supply buildings and Premium Decorations.
I hope you can understand that

Both of you have valid arguments, by keeping the buildings restricted you do encourage an increase in spending specifically during events that offer the building. But if they were to add it to the premium building list to be purchased everyday it'd still encourage as much buying due to it being the one premium building you can buy that makes FP's. The discussion of which one is better though is best off in another thread.

Should bring this discussion back to "how to implement GvG HQ releasing".