Forwarded: Idea to stop "Ghost Guilds" - Simple, Much Needed

[DeletedUser]

See my first reply on here

Oh that one? I thought there might be another solution being thought up. That was in the back of my mind when I objected to this idea, as well as the fact that my idea was more effective. Obviously people will still try to get around any new limits, but making it difficult is good.

 

[DeletedUser]

Would you like to provide us with some details on what that might be?

Secrets secrets... Byeordie is close but there's one more "efficient" way

 

[DeletedUser]

reason's for ghost guild: (source of problem and possible approaches for each).
1.) individuals wanting pvp points and can't find enough in neighborhood. (gains individual pvp points)
1a.) Individuals/small group who want points can create ghost attack existing siege for attack points.

2.) Taking down a strength sector so their guild can acquire it quickly once released (saves goods) - group typically

So one approach may be to review the causes of this activity and solve the problem that way.
1.) pvp points
a.) Don't grant the POINTS gained until daily recalculation only if the guild still exists and sector is still owned.
b.) don't grant pvp points for the first sector a guild takes per map era.

2.) goods
a.) make the first sector a guild takes more costly (even 200) ...then second sector can cost the regular amounts

maybe not perfect but just an idea......

 

[DeletedUser2989]

reason's for ghost guild: (source of problem and possible approaches for each).
1.) individuals wanting pvp points and can't find enough in neighborhood. (gains individual pvp points)
1a.) Individuals/small group who want points can create ghost attack existing siege for attack points.

2.) Taking down a strength sector so their guild can acquire it quickly once released (saves goods) - group typically

So one approach may be to review the causes of this activity and solve the problem that way.
1.) pvp points
a.) Don't grant the POINTS gained until daily recalculation only if the guild still exists and sector is still owned.
b.) don't grant pvp points for the first sector a guild takes per map era.

2.) goods
a.) make the first sector a guild takes more costly (even 200) ...then second sector can cost the regular amounts

Well sumed up reasons Points or saving on seige cost.

I'd take your solution to point 1 a step further and remove PvP points from GvG. I personally never understood why you'd get PvP points when your on the continent map (fighting NPC's) and while you are fighting other people in GvG (thus player vs player points would make sense) it is a bit excessive to award PvP points for it. The PvP points go towards a neighbourhood based tornament and it would make sense to me if you only got points that came from fighting your neighbours. By all means you could get points from GvG (and continent map battles) that contribute to your game score but PvP points don't belong there.

As for point 2, I feel that it penalises "real" guilds who wish to enter a new province or GvG as a whole for the first time. It would definilty deal with ghost guilds but adds costs to those doing nothing wrong as well.

 

[DeletedUser76094]

Or as I suggested before, Players leaving a guild have to wait some days
before they can join another one or start a new one!!

I like the OP's idea quite a bit, so a BIG +1 from me. Ghostguilding is rampant in Brisgard where GvG has become so dirty that some of the honest and fair players have started to quit the game because of this dirt.

However I disagree with having to punish a player for leaving a guild. Players often leave their guilds due to various reasons, disagreements/arguments being the top reasons. A player should be able to leave a guild and start a new one whenever he pleases.. But if this idea is implemented, he/she or a small group of players will have to wait at least a week before they can do any real damage.

 

[DeletedUser96867]

I think the reason why there has been no action so far is that there's a difference between how players behave on one world in testing, and how it actually works over many live servers and worlds.

How things work on one world in testing has been 99.99% the same as it works over many live servers and worlds. Even if that wasn't the case gvg has been active on the live servers for about 10 weeks now and we are still waiting for FOE to lift a single finger to attempt to deal with this problem.

 

[DeletedUser8813]

In that case that guild is not a "ghost guild" and we wouldn't be aiming to stop that. I think this is trying to more specifically target those guilds that pop up, take sectors and then disolve and release all the sectors. If your jumping into a sister guild or allied guild and taking and holding sectors with them then that would be fine. Afterall this is to stop "ghost guilds" and we have to be careful that is all it stops.

Now if you used the sister guild to attack and drop sectors (with no intent to keep anything) then there might be a problem. As you'd be avoiding the seige costs that your "home" guild would otherwise be paying, Inno could (yet might not) come up with a rule where the offending guild could get warnings or "barred" from GvG (while being able to continue playing the game as normal).

these guilds are there simply for the take and release of sectors..nothing more ..players leave the mother guild go destroy some opposing guilds land and instantly release it back to the mother guild..not saving the mother guild any less goods but they don't lose the higher amount if the siege is broken a few times before they acquire it..to me that is just the same as ghosting ..no diff really just a guild full of pawns..to be used by the mother guild as it requires it

 

[DeletedUser8813]

I think the reason why there has been no action so far is that there's a difference between how players behave on one world in testing, and how it actually works over many live servers and worlds. Therefore the gameplay on live worlds and feedback on GvG is being considered and options being discussed before something is put into place. As Remorce said in his post elsewhere, it is easy to think up rules and quick solutions, just more difficult to put a workable solution into place that doesn't have other unintended consequences and will then require more fixes to solve that....

i think the real reason there has been no action on the ghosting issue and other holes in the gvg ..is that it is the only thing that now keeps GVG alive ...most guilds are now ghosting to avoid the higher costs..any flaw in the game is being used to keep guilds interested..and that is my 2 cents worth

 

[DeletedUser4879]

I like the OP's idea quite a bit, so a BIG +1 from me. Ghostguilding is rampant in Brisgard where GvG has become so dirty that some of the honest and fair players have started to quit the game because of this dirt.

However I disagree with having to punish a player for leaving a guild. Players often leave their guilds due to various reasons, disagreements/arguments being the top reasons. A player should be able to leave a guild and start a new one whenever he pleases.. But if this idea is implemented, he/she or a small group of players will have to wait at least a week before they can do any real damage.

I left my guild because of this issue and went out on my own!
Wouldn't leave the game over it as fun can still be had playing FOE..
The comings and goings of some members makes one dizzy watching, LOL....

 

[DeletedUser2989]

these guilds are there simply for the take and release of sectors..nothing more ..players leave the mother guild go destroy some opposing guilds land and instantly release it back to the mother guild..not saving the mother guild any less goods but they don't lose the higher amount if the siege is broken a few times before they acquire it..to me that is just the same as ghosting ..no diff really just a guild full of pawns..to be used by the mother guild as it requires it

But it IS saving them goods, the "mother guild" would have to spend a large amount of goods to seige either way but if they got broken all those goods are lost. Using ghost guilds you AVOID loosing all those goods if they can break a few of your seiges.

If your sister guild is doing the exact same thing as ghosting then I'd agree there is no difference but sister guilds are not always used that way. Some of them are legitimately holding sectors to benifit it's permanent members and helping them do that would be fine.

As for your second comment about it keeping GvG alive that is not always true, in some worlds it's killing it. None of the top ranked guilds can really attack eachother as retaliation with ghost guilding means everyone looses sectors and no one gains anything. It's largely paralised GvG for them and the only peolpe they really fight are "easy" targets. People who don't have the resources to ghost guild properly or NPC's (when they appear).

A game can't survive on loopholes, they need to be fixed. Ghost guilds need to be removed and if the high goods cost means guilds loose interest well then they can be adjusted. I'd say my guild would be a lot more bold with it's attacks if ghost guilds were not in the equation and I dare say our neighbours would also consider us targets knowing that we couldn't ghost guild them back.

 

[DeletedUser1081]

People who don't have the resources to ghost guild properly or NPC's (when they appear).

I have tried and failed to understand this part of your post. Could you explain what this sentence means, please and thank you?

 

[DeletedUser]

It's largely paralised GvG for them and the only peolpe they really fight are "easy" targets. People who don't have the resources to ghost guild properly or NPC's (when they appear).

This would probably include smaller and developing guilds that may be able to gain a foothold on a GvG map, but are already stretched with defending the sectors they have gained. They would obviously struggle to defend some sectors and split off into ghost guilds to retaliate, due to lack of resources. Therefore they become easy targets compared to large guilds or guilds that can easily use the ghost guild tactic.

Human nature being what it is, people do often choose the easy and sure victory over the more difficult and not so sure victory against an opponent of similar size. However, this is usually not a fun experience for the easy targets and often results in people deciding not to compete when their victory is going to be turned into defeat within a very short period of time.

 

[DeletedUser2989]

Hippocratia has pretty well explained it, sorry I didn't so a better job myself the first time around. Essentially the top ranked guilds (which have a fairly large presence on all or nearly all ages) target the above described "easy target" guilds or they attack any leftover NPC sectors (orange and white). Once all that is gone they just sit there fortifying because if they attack other high ranked guilds they'll get ghost guilded in retaliation (everyone looses lots and no one really gains).

Also, people who find it easy to use ghost guilds have: High attack buff, Alcatraz, Rogues(if they are ghost guilding many ages).
It's not always true but many of the top ranked guilds have several people with these things. As you go lower down the ranks you'll find guilds with maybe 1 person who fits that, these would be where you start calling them easy targets.

 

[DeletedUser4879]

Dinegu..Gostguilds..
I'm in a guild trying to hold on by our fingernails, and they're breaking off!
We got (had) 6 hexes in ME. Got it back only to find it gone again after
the safe period. When I came today some members tried to fight them,
but lost it ofcourse! How much longer does Inno think this can keep going on???
I've finaly come to the point where GVG is coming of my map!!
And so is the spending of Diamonds! This is to me like flogging a dead horse!!
Brisgard...
Same here, but my guild is a bit stronger here. Still having a bad time...
Arvahall...
Left my guild here, one of the strong ones. The comings and goings of members
there is like a very busy railway station! Guess they're out gostguilding giving
smaller guilds a hard time trying to hold on to their hexes!.....
Wake up Inno and do it soon!!

 

[DeletedUser1081]

... When we use the term "ghost guild" don't we mean a guild that disbands after it's done attacking for the day? So if the guild sticks around, just doesn't hold onto any hexes, I think it needs to be called by some other term.

 

[DeletedUser]

how about splitting the towers?
normal PvP towers will have the score the players gets from map and neighbours.
and GvG tower will have the score from the guild wars.

the proportion betwene the medal rewards from those towers should be set in such a ways so as to discourage such ghost guild tactics and encourage normal old schoold fight-your-hood game (if we take the me tower as of now, pvp could give 800 and gvg could give the remaining 100 medals)

and of course i'm totally, absolutely, 100% for setting timer between switching guilds

 

[DeletedUser7719]

how about splitting the towers?
normal PvP towers will have the score the players gets from map and neighbours.
and GvG tower will have the score from the guild wars.

the proportion betwene the medal rewards from those towers should be set in such a ways so as to discourage such ghost guild tactics and encourage normal old schoold fight-your-hood game (if we take the me tower as of now, pvp could give 800 and gvg could give the remaining 100 medals)

and of course i'm totally, absolutely, 100% for setting timer between switching guilds

Not (only?) splitting the towers. You will also need to cut down on the battle points gained from GvG (that alone could stop some "ghost" guilds)

 

[Amy Steele]

I have deleted several posts in this thread as they were either attacks against a specific named player or were off-topic, in that they were replying to the posts regarding that player. Both going off-topic and personal attacks against a named player are against the rules. I realise that ghost guilding is a contentious issue and that therefore feelings can run a bit high, which is why no warnings or infractions have been given at this time. Please understand that this issue (as has already been stated) is under review by the devs, but that any potential solutions will have to be very carefully considered so that they do not impact on normal gameplay/guild activities.

Please keep this thread on-topic from this point forward and do not comment on specific players, or the posts will be deleted and warnings/infractions issued. Your constructive comments regarding the idea in the OP are of course welcomed and will hopefully contribute towards any potential solution to the issue.

 

[DeletedUser2989]

... When we use the term "ghost guild" don't we mean a guild that disbands after it's done attacking for the day? So if the guild sticks around, just doesn't hold onto any hexes, I think it needs to be called by some other term.

Yes, you would be right, while they are "acting" ghost guild like I guess they aren't technically ghost guilds. It's a rather annoying guild? Really the behaviour of attacking sectors just to release them is annoying but you'd never be able to stop it and we probably shouldn't try to. I guess most of this fustration is born from large/strong guilds having single people or small groups break off and form fake guilds (ghost guilds) to avoid potential seige losses. So not surprisingly any behaviour remotely close to this cops flak.

To clearly define types of guilds we could say:

Ghost guild:

Temporary existance, small membership (less than 10) and never retains control over sectors taken. Avoids the high siege goods losses that might occur, making retaliation strikes easier, thus exists to break the limitations in place.

Annoying/Demolition guild:

Permanent existance, varied membership (could be any number of people) and doesn't intend to retain control over sectors taken. In it for the PvP points or in it to wipe others off the map, not directly trying to break rules for the advantage of one guild over another.

Legit guild:

Permanent existance, varied membership and retains all/most all control over taken sectors (not counting ones forcefully removed) In order to gain rank and power for guild level.
(there may be more traits but I think these at least are key)



So really the OP contains all that is needed to combat the ghosts while not removing any other type, guild must have existed for "x" time period and guild must contain 10+ members. The only problem is that it would penalise annoying/legit guilds with less than 10 members but personally if you have less than 10 people in your guild you really shouldn't be participating in GvG (just like how people in BA can't participate).

@rusty_nail, while some are ghost guilding for PvP points i'm not sure that splitting towers would do anything to stop it... it might actually encourage it (possible increase in medal reward because you can top 2 towers). Personally I think PvP points should be removed from GvG fights as PvP is surpose to be a neighbourhood thing (as I mentioned in an earlier post). But even if they were removed/adjusted it sort of affects all types of guilds and not just the ghost guilds, it'd also do nothing to solve the initial problem of avoiding seige good losses.

(Because this has come up before I'll mention it again here, if your main guild is facing costs 1000+ and uses ghost guilds to remove opposing defenses then yes they are still paying the 1000+ to later take the sector but if any of their "fake" seiges are defeated they only loose 5-20 of each good and not the 1000's they would have otherwise. Thus ghost guilding IS a cost saving method.)

 

[DeletedUser]

This is a great idea, i fully support it, unfortunately it's not already implemented here from the start, but hey, we have seen this game improve step by step and theres still much room for improvement (and always will be) +1 from me