• 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.

Inequality in Guild Battlegrounds

Blitz Epidemic

Warrant Officer
The corporation that bought Inno sure have found their goose that laid the golden egg with this GBG. There is no way they will ever get rid of it, but is there a way to make it less of a pay to win or a way to minimize its effect on the game.
 

Mysty.

Private
battlegrounds was a great introduction to the game and really got me hooked, however a year and a bit later it needs something.

the gap between guilds in the 1000 lp has become too large so all we see now are huge swaps fests and very little fighting. maybe it’s time for a winners round where the winners of each group get placed with each other to fight it out.
what about something to break up these big swap fests as well, maybe a bomb that can be used by a guild once a day to break the lock on any sector next to them ?
 

Ariana Erosaire

Chief Warrant Officer
battlegrounds was a great introduction to the game and really got me hooked, however a year and a bit later it needs something.

the gap between guilds in the 1000 lp has become too large so all we see now are huge swaps fests and very little fighting. maybe it’s time for a winners round where the winners of each group get placed with each other to fight it out.
what about something to break up these big swap fests as well, maybe a bomb that can be used by a guild once a day to break the lock on any sector next to them ?
the league system is indeed broken and all guilds end up in the top league eventually. There should be some changes to leagues and other things like attrition exploits and breaking the pinning/swap fests in some way (bomb idea interesting...)

Battlegrounds has been needing a lot of something for some months now. Put comments in the feedback thread for GBG where it may also be forwarded to developers. There is a long discussion there going on about changes needed to GBG and ongoing issues with playability.
 
I write in reference to en server 8 (Houndsmoor) but I assume the issue is widespread.

My complaint is twofold,
1. Of all the guilds in diamond league on this server, there are only a handful that are deserving. There is a huge gap in GBG performance levels between the top 8 or 9 guilds and the rest. Diamond league on this server does not accurately represent the top GBG guilds.
2. We have been drawn amongst the weaker set of diamond league guilds for 2 straight seasons now. This means we neither face competent opposition nor competent allies. Our activity levels have gone down as a result and the GBG involvement has declined.

This is so annoying because it is neither fair for the stronger guilds nor the weaker/smaller guilds to have to repeatedly face each other repeatedly.
 
Here's an example of what's happening right now - we're in Diamond, 2 big teams have joined forces and are blocking everyone else out of the game. How? Directly in front of our base sector, one of the 2 big teams holds it. It's been attacked by the other big team, but sits at 159/60. The sectors to the left and right of that are the same. The row of sectors in front of those are also the same. There are currently 17 sectors like this and counting - all over the middle and down to the edges which block any other guild doing anything. So note, it's not me have a moan on behalf of our guild - it's all the other guilds as well. Shortly they'll do swaps, where the 2 teams finish off the sectors they've targeted as swaps. When they have swapped, then they'll wait the required amount of time and again put 159/160 on each others. If anyone else attack (can't until unlocked), then they'll just take one early. Result? Only 2 of the teams can do any real attacking. No other guild is able to do anything - This is why it's killing the game and guilds just give up in GBG.

Totally agree, Inno should ban sector swapping between guilds, it it totally ruining the game for those of us who enjoy GBG (or used to).
 

Emberguard

Legend
Totally agree, Inno should ban sector swapping between guilds, it it totally ruining the game for those of us who enjoy GBG (or used to).
How do you plan to police that? What would be the exact criteria? How are you going to distinguish between a slow Guild, a Guild holding off for strategic reasons (in a full blown war. ie: trying to get the timers set to their advantage), a Guild picking which fights they can win and a Guild that's actually swapping?

Somehow I think there would be less problems from the solution to address if instead of banning swapping, the game had mechanic or general function changes that encouraged different player behaviour. Players swap because it's more lucrative than straight up war
 
Last edited:

cyllan

Corporal
Yep, completely understand. I"m just trying to 1) point out the inequalities, 2) suggest a possible solution. I'm not saying that the solution is terrific, but just suggesting something that may address some of the inequaity of the GBG element. Forums are notorious for, and seem to be a magnet for criticising and it's all too easy to do that. It's far better to come up with some ideas that can be knocked around. I'm happy for any possible solutions to be put forward, even if they're knocked out because of sound reasoning and debate, but at least we've thought about them.
So your point is change the game cos you are losing.....?
Maybe we should TAX the big good guilds, so they dont make as much FP, and give it to the poorer guilds......
Cos we all know socialism works in real life
 

KronikPillow

Sergeant
how about you all stop dreaming of being leaders of guilds and become followers and join up with other small/medium guilds aka merge .. so that there would be more equality, instead of crying to Inno about the fact that each sever has a 100+ 20-30 player guilds cuz everyone wants to be their own boss? you do realize how stupid this is right? crying to Inno about the fact that you yourselves created unbalanced competition by refusing to follow others and wanting to do your own thing? there is not enough population on each sever, to support such a big amount of small guilds ... Inno shouldn't rebalance the game, and big guilds shouldn't sink to the level of small guilds, just to make GBG more fair ... instead, small guilds should strive to become bigger, and so that they could compete more, as a end result

this sounds like a really good solution *sarcasm* ... yes, lets ban people for using SCs, because small guilds are to small to fight the big guilds how about a 3rd solution? you merge and form bigger guilds, and then are able to do more then sit in a corner a?

In response to the inequality caused when two or more guilds dominate the Battleground merly not for the fight or to assist their Guild but purely for personal gain, i would like to see INNO address this issue, without their intervention this feature will go the same way as the PVP tower. There are two ways that they can start to address this issue.

1. To remove the SCs from battleground, this will make swapping less attractive to those Guilds that do swap.
2. That INNO police it properly and ban swapping, failure to comply results in ever increasing bans for those guilds that defy the ban.

The alternative is for all the guilds that genuinely want to fight on a fair basis irrespective of their size or ranking to leave battlegrounds or stop taking part and to send complaints via tickets to INNO demanding they act. One or two is not going to make INNO take notice, several Hundred tickets would.

I welcome any thoughts, but please do not be insulting, if you disagree please present your argument in a logical and adult way, I am also open to proper alternative suggestions

this sounds like a valid solution *sarcasm*

lets ban big guilds from the game, so that the little guys can play out of all the stupid illogical ideas, this one wins the
how about you instead stop sitting in a small guild, and join bigger ones, or merge with many small guilds to form a formidable guild, that can actually do more then depend on the mercy of others?

yes you are right, us big guilds, can't wait to stop playing GBG, and to send tickets and sprout the idea of us getting banned, because you dream to be a big boss of a crap guild, and can't fight as a result of it
 

CaptainPots

Private
I find GBG is almost a waste of time. If you happen to be in a certain level and are a small guild( like mine) I find we don't stand a chance against a guild that has so many more players.
 

DJ of BA

Master Corporal
this sounds like a valid solution *sarcasm*

lets ban big guilds from the game, so that the little guys can play out of all the stupid illogical ideas, this one wins the
how about you instead stop sitting in a small guild, and join bigger ones, or merge with many small guilds to form a formidable guild, that can actually do more then depend on the mercy of others?

yes you are right, us big guilds, can't wait to stop playing GBG, and to send tickets and sprout the idea of us getting banned, because you dream to be a big boss of a crap guild, and can't fight as a result of it
I don't want guilds banned, just the right to fight fairly , my Guild is not small, but when two guilds dominate a battleground and swap, keeping all other guilds from playing then that is sheer greed, the fact that many players in these guilds are using scripts or macros just shows how greedy they are and are willing to ignore the rules, this is not for the guild, it is for personal gain, By playing in this way so they will eventually be the downfall of the game
 
GbG is undoubtedly unbalanced, and the introduction of the new map has just exacerbated the situation. young or smaller guilds can not compete against the larger guilds who swap the center of the map for the duration of the campaign.

firstly the issue of two maps. Now we have two sets of buildings to collect. well that's fine in itself, except lower rank players struggle to get pieces if higher guilds are dominating the center and the battles. as a result, smaller players take twice as long to get resources to build important buildings like the SoH.

removing some build options on some sectors was probably an attempt to stop big guilds storming through with 3SC on each sector, they can afford to build after all. But it has backfired, as it hasn't stopped larger guilds from doing exactly as they always have. in fact now smaller guilds cant build enough buildings to reasonably reduce attrition.

Also, in the new map negotiations appear to be biased toward 6. certainly 6's come up more frequently for me than any other form of negotiations on the new map. well, this may have been an attempt to slow bigger guilds down? who knows, but the result is that smaller guilds and smaller players who rely on negotiations rather than fighting are unduely penalised. the time taken to negotiate is penalty enough.

so the new map is pretty.. why not just keep that? but I owuld suggest the following adjustments.
1. reduce the frequency of the harder negotiations. less 6, maybe less 5's and certainly more 4's I believe this will help lower-level players compete.
2, have all buildings available from one map rather than split across two. (you could remove gold and supplies from the list if needs be, we dont need those)
3. timers on sectors could be randomised between 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5 and 4 hour lengths, so it is harder to predict for swapping parties.
4. more building rewards of the elephant and statue for all the lower ranked leagues and lower ranked placing in the final tally.
5. spread the gain for guild reputation so more can be attained by lower placed guilds so they can build the guilds faster.

I should add, I'm in a big guild on D, every season we end up doing a swap and making lots of fps, resources, goods, and building parts. but I am painfully aware this is also preventing other guilds' growth. It seems to be how it was designed to be played so thats what we do... but its un balanced.
 

GreatEvelin

Private
I wonder why FOE didn't make GBG for only 2 guilds anyway, only 2 are currently playing. I am world D in a very active guild, but there is currently one guild that blocks all guilds except its friendly guilds and my people pay less and less attention to GBG with every passing day.
 

legend9182

Major-General
3. timers on sectors could be randomised between 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5 and 4 hour lengths, so it is harder to predict for swapping parties.
Only good idea so far.
1. reduce the frequency of the harder negotiations. less 6, maybe less 5's and certainly more 4's I believe this will help lower-level players compete.
It would still benifit more to bigger players. So no need.
2, have all buildings available from one map rather than split across two. (you could remove gold and supplies from the list if needs be, we dont need those
Naah no need . its good for those who just want one of it .
4. more building rewards of the elephant and statue for all the lower ranked leagues and lower ranked placing in the final tally.
Its alright as now.
5. spread the gain for guild reputation so more can be attained by lower placed guilds so they can build the guilds faster.
Thats not gonna do anything.
 

legend9182

Major-General
this sounds like a really good solution *sarcasm* ... yes, lets ban people for using SCs, because small guilds are to small to fight the big guilds how about a 3rd solution? you merge and form bigger guilds, and then are able to do more then sit in a corner a?
Actually small guild is not the real problem.
Our guild has 70+ members with some in top 100 too aswell. Still we have hard time against one guild just because they have 3 guilds with players online 24/7 and they keep swapping.
Only thing inno could do is make diamond league to be more difficult to be achievable.
So that those guilds can only join it who have either guild alliances or players active 24/7 with good power.
 

FantasticMrFrank

Brigadier-General
No inequality in battlegrounds.. you either can or you can’t fight in the highest league, if you can’t u drop down if you can you can stick around, reference Siege camp support every guild is in the same boat, you spend your goods you get more fights, you can choose to farm with or fight with your opponents, with the map design the devs could add 2 builds slots on front of every HQ so there more equality in that respect..
 

legend9182

Major-General
No inequality in battlegrounds.. you either can or you can’t fight in the highest league, if you can’t u drop down if you can you can stick around, reference Siege camp support every guild is in the same boat, you spend your goods you get more fights, you can choose to farm with or fight with your opponents, with the map design the devs could add 2 builds slots on front of every HQ so there more equality in that respect..
Its inequality just because guilds are making alliances. It is kind of guild pushing
 

legend9182

Major-General
No inequality in battlegrounds.. you either can or you can’t fight in the highest league, if you can’t u drop down if you can you can stick around, reference Siege camp support every guild is in the same boat, you spend your goods you get more fights, you can choose to farm with or fight with your opponents, with the map design the devs could add 2 builds slots on front of every HQ so there more equality in that respect..
And about dropping its by wasting 14 days
 

legend9182

Major-General
Either they could make total gbg time lesser like guild expedition has 7 days.
It will also prevent age up abuse
 
Top