Forwarded: Here I have suggestion to decrease ghost guilding

[DeletedUser4799]

It was well accepted by community that, ghost guilds can do great damage without using much of goods. Now with removing units costs you give more benefit to ghost guilds.
So now player can not return to home guild for some 7 days only, but he/she can ghost guild for example to do damage and/or gain I think unfair PvP points.

Thus to reduce this ghost guild-ing I suggest:
a) for players above ind age bring back the cost of units to place a siege (so like it was before, just now low age players will not be affected, but high ranked advanced players will not benefit from it).

Sure you can discuss age from where it should start, but I guess the limit is already in game since from ind age and above defense slots boost in HQ is the same, that is why I suggest industrial age and above.

b) I suggest to implement minimum number of players of given age to allow guild to access GvG map.
I think guild should have at least 5 players of the age, that players would like to enter in GvG.
For example guild with 10 iron age players 3 EMA players and 1 PME player should not be able to enter PME GvG, but freely can enter iron age.
Same time if guild has 0 player of iron age and has 5 players in PME guild can enter only PME GvG and can not enter in any other age gvg map.
I think this number 5 is important and sure we can discuss it can be increased or no. What is my point is to stop 1 -2 even 4 players for solely private reasons go to GvG map and destroy what 40+ players builded in ages.

Thank you very much for your time on reading and future questions and comments.
kind regards,
Dahich

 

[DeletedUser100956]

Why wouldnt the guild, that has 5 PME players, just recruit 5 newbie IA players? They wouldnt need to look hard for players wanting to join a big guild. Or are you saying that PME players can only fight on PME GvG even if they have enough players from other ages?

 

[DeletedUser7719]

The OP is stating that if that in order to fight in the PME GvG province, you need a guild of at least 5 PME players; in the EMA GvG province, you need a guild of at least 5 EMA players, but any player from any age can fight once you have at least 5 EMA players (assuming you have the units of course).
I thought ghost guilds consisted of group of more than 5 of the same age player or else they wouldn't be doing much damage to the another guild...

 

[DeletedUser7768]

1. the unit cost is resonable. In war when you send units to attack and they get repeled they got killed or wounded. So there is an option that those units could be puled back before 10-th fight and you keep them wounded. If the siege is broken they are killed. Second. It should be implememted if you put wounded units in the siege that they are not healed instantly when sieging. But that defenders fight wounded units as they are.

2. stupid - If a guild of 30-40-80 players can not defend from 5-10 player whou want to have fun then they should stop whining. This game needs dinamic and action. What you propose is more static game and less action and that suits SOX as i see if you upset someone and you are afraid.
If 5 playes can destroy what some guild of 40-50-60-70 or 80 players buillt then souch big guild should not exist. if you can not defend from 5-10 then its better to say goodby.

 

[DeletedUser4799]

Oziris first thx for comment
second, 1-2 PME player can do great damage of any small guild with 15+ iron age sectors, one sector to get buck for iron age guild is huge cost. It is no cost for advanced players.
that is what I mean.
and taking 1 sector in iron age for PME player with max attack gb-s is not a big job, it is just max 5 min.

1. the unit cost is resonable. In war when you send units to attack and they get repeled they got killed or wounded. So there is an option that those units could be puled back before 10-th fight and you keep them wounded. If the siege is broken they are killed. Second. It should be implememted if you put wounded units in the siege that they are not healed instantly when sieging. But that defenders fight wounded units as they are.

2. stupid - If a guild of 30-40-80 players can not defend from 5-10 player whou want to have fun then they should stop whining. This game needs dinamic and action. What you propose is more static game and less action and that suits SOX as i see if you upset someone and you are afraid.
If 5 playes can destroy what some guild of 40-50-60-70 or 80 players buillt then souch big guild should not exist. if you can not defend from 5-10 then its better to say goodby.

 

[DeletedUser4799]

Dear Byeordie,
again thx for clarification and comment.
Just a reminder that 2-3 diamond player can take any age single sector (only 80 auto battles against maximum 50% def boost).
it is again maximum 10 min fight. While the guild that has 20 sectors damage guess you can imagine how much goods is it

The OP is stating that if that in order to fight in the PME GvG province, you need a guild of at least 5 PME players; in the EMA GvG province, you need a guild of at least 5 EMA players, but any player from any age can fight once you have at least 5 EMA players (assuming you have the units of course).
I thought ghost guilds consisted of group of more than 5 of the same age player or else they wouldn't be doing much damage the other guild...

 

[DeletedUser]

I think this number 5 is important and sure we can discuss it can be increased or no. What is my point is to stop 1 -2 even 4 players for solely private reasons go to GvG map and destroy what 40+ players builded in ages.

It would not be difficult to get around this restriction; just make a group of 5 players....

 

[DeletedUser99445]

My guild in Dinegu is 8 players. We like to roam around the PME map hitting any and everyone.
There is another guild in Dinegu who are about 70+ players who do the same thing.
The rest of the guilds play for the stalemate that most players are asking for.

How would this new idea stop the guild of nearly 80 players from playing the Hit & Fun way?

 

[DeletedUser4799]

Dear Gate2
your 8 member guild or 80 member guild do it for long time ?
what i talk about is 7 day leave. just for illustration i can quit my guild SoH, destroy all landings in PME, ME PE and ind age.
2 players can just kill 2 sectors from biggest guilds and it is some damage that u can not put back...
anyway my point was not about PME players hitting in PME, my suggestion is more general.
Plus 5 players going out from guild for 7 days is not the same as 2 players go out for 7 days.
Yes I imagine you have fun there but there are other type of funs also
regards,
Dahich

My guild in Dinegu is 8 players. We like to roam around the PME map hitting any and everyone.
There is another guild in Dinegu who are about 70+ players who do the same thing.
The rest of the guilds play for the stalemate that most players are asking for.

How would this new idea stop the guild of nearly 80 players from playing the Hit & Fun way?

 

[DeletedUser4799]

It would not be difficult to get around this restriction; just make a group of 5 players....

5 players leaving guild or 2 players make a huge difference specially if this 5 are heavy fighters.

 

[DeletedUser99445]

Dear Gate2
your 8 member guild or 80 member guild do it for long time ?
what i talk about is 7 day leave. just for illustration i can quit my guild SoH, destroy all landings in PME, ME PE and ind age.
2 players can just kill 2 sectors from biggest guilds and it is some damage that u can not put back...
anyway my point was not about PME players hitting in PME, my suggestion is more general.
Plus 5 players going out from guild for 7 days is not the same as 2 players go out for 7 days.
Yes I imagine you have fun there but there are other type of funs also
regards,
Dahich

Dear Dahich, We are a permanent guild In as much as we have been together for several months now. The other guild of 70 plus has been together even longer and are top of the guild rankings with no permanent sectors in PME. They are very well organised and defend their sectors in other ages very well. I know this as I attack them in ME & PE now and again.

I think the bottom line is that the current format allows for various ways to play which means it can appeal to more players but it really is a great way to generate more diamond purchases, meaning more funding for the company to pay for the servers and wages etc.
No Diamond or Low Diamond sales will ultimately result in the game shutting down or development coming to a halt.
That's a reality that none of us can escape and we should be grateful for the cash investors.

 

[DeletedUser2989]

I don't mind a minimum guild size for guilds to be able to participate and I see where you are coming from with resticting the guild to ages where they have at least 5 members. But I would only be able to support a minimum size guild restriction, the age restriction goes against what Inno wants players to do. Inno suggests that if costs are too high in 1 age that your guild change to another, so limiting this would be a real problem.

I can support a) fully though Inno would just need to be able to explain that once you start fighting in "x" age and above that you'll need your own units to place the siege. Seems like a good comprimise between "helping new players" and having a game mechanic that makes sense.

As for both in relation to ghost guilds, people will say "neither of these will stop ghost guilds" and really that is the point. The title says "decrease" ghost guilds not "stop". So implementing things to make it a bit harder but not impossible is the point. I'd agree that both will decrease ghost guilds while allowing guilds like those Gate2 used as examples to exist. To the more permanent guilds (those that take and hold) on the GvG map guilds like the ones Gate2 pointed out are annoying/fustrating (take and drop) but they are not ghost guilds so they should be allowed to exist, these changes would maintain that (at least "a" would, I don't really support "b").

Overall +1 to "a" but that is it.

 

[DeletedUser99588]

Ghost guilds or demolition guilds only exist because it is cheap for them. So many problems in GvG have been caused by the cost of sieges. To high at one end of the scale and to low at the other. There are other threads where alternative costs have been discussed so I won't go into that but you can put a bandage over a broken leg but it won't fix the leg. All that happens is the leg repairs itself in the wrong position. You can hopefully still move it but its not working they way it should.

Hope that analogy makes sense to others

 

[DeletedUser4799]

so shall I divide suggestion in 2 posts:
1st for units costs for ind age above
2nd for minimum players for ghost guild ?
I do not have personally anything against killer guilds with 8 or 80 members,
i am against single or 2 player guilds that use cheap siege and no units cost to siege and get pvp points for them, while they do damage small easy going guilds that are not involved in gvg politics and so on.
regards,
Dahich

 

[DeletedUser2989]

Both of these points have been forwarded in a more general nature for the devs to consider as a part of the GvG feedback thread. This thread will thus be marked as forwarded (even though it overlaps somewhat with the other forwarded thread that is only about a minimum guild size to participate in GvG).