• 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.

Simple limit on most primitive ghosting

  • Thread starter DeletedUser9614
  • Start date

DeletedUser7396

Addonexus said:
ah sorry, i forgot that without ghosting, you wont be able to fight for free 24/7, because if you need to pay some goods then you will have to actually start playing and use some strategy rather than just click-click-click all day.
Click to expand...
My ranking was better before Alcatraz and GvG, but i dont know where you were before this nonsence with GB points :o

The point is that stupid button AUTO BATTLE must be removed, but also unreal GB points!!!
I will continue to fight, that is for sure, but will you continue to "collect" without your points and ranking :)

I vote for fair fights, no auto battles and no cheap fights on GvG map, and ofcourse for real points for GBs !!!
 

DeletedUser2989

I think we've drifted a little off the topic, this thread is trying to focus on the "reinstating of the troop cost for sieges". It's acknowledged that there are other things that would be needed/could be done but I think to respect the owner of this thread we should stick to discussing the troop cost and leave the other elements/changes for other threads.
 

DeletedUser7396

As i said before, i vote for NO GHOSTING, and no cheap fights in GvG.
But also notice that i will find guild which is active in GvG, visit my neighbors and will continue to battle. Also i did ask Adenoxus (mr.Collector) will he continue to fill his GB if it does not give him his points and ranking?

Also, auto battle button contribute ghosting very much, lot of ghost only looking easy points by hiting AUTO!!!
So, beside making siege more expencive, devs should "kill" Auto Battle button, that will reduce ghosting too :o
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Addonexus

Addonexus

Chief Warrant Officer
SeanTheGreat said:
As i said before, i vote for NO GHOSTING, and no cheap fights in GvG.
But also notice that i will find guild which is active in GvG, visit my neighbors and will continue to battle. Also i did ask Adenoxus (mr.Collector) will he continue to fill his GB if it does not give him his points and ranking?

Also, auto battle button contribute ghosting very much, lot of ghost only looking easy points by hiting AUTO!!!
So, beside making siege more expencive, devs should "kill" Auto Battle button, that will reduce ghosting too :o
Click to expand...

to answer your question, YES, i will work on my GBs even if they dont give points. The day i stop working on my gbs will be the day i get bored or quit. Ask everyone on Houndsmoor, they will tell you that i was working on GBs even when i didnt know they give points. The points just made it a bit more interesting, and i set myself a new goal, to achieve 1 trillion points by getting my Alcatraz up to level 74. I did the math which level i need when my Alcatraz was level 40 and i hope Inno wont lower the points before i get there, especially since im very close to it. After that, i will still work on the GBs, maybe just not as hard as now, but after 1 year ad a fighter i get bored of autobattles and manual battles, and i decided that leveling up GBs is more interesting for me. I really dont understand why you cant accept that different people can have different goals. I have played this game for more than 2 years, and i can say that every few m,onths i was doing something different, sometimes fighting, sometimes collecting, sometimes GBs, sometimes being regular player, sometimes leader, sometimes leading and planning the gvg... it kept the game interesting, because if i was doing the same daily routine every day for 2 years, i would have quit 1 year ago.
 

DeletedUser7396

I actually understand that, and its ok, what i dont understand is why GBs give so much points when already give so much rewards. I dont understand that and im not the only one!!
 

DeletedUser96745

well, he didnt invent formula for GB points. Go after inno games, not him...
 

DeletedUser106881

Finally the OP said that this would stop most ghost guilds. I agree, most casual or for points ghost guilds. But those ones aren't the problem, are they? No. The problem is from the demolition guilds. Anyone who has tried to single handedly take a CE sector from a fully defended guild knows that it takes a lot of troops to succeed. But anyone who is determined enough to take a sector will hardly notice the extra army or two it takes to take the sector because they already have so many troops prepared to fight. And any guild with a handful of people whose goal is to demo another guild will not notice the troop lost either.

Dear seserous omega,

You state here exactly why I have written that I don't tend to defend when certain Ghostguilds are attacking one of my sectors. Funny enough you give the answer to my statement that I have to sort out my defense better in trying to place replacement armies in between sieges. This would then lead to more losses.
I don't comprehend why you are not in agreement with me as your and my statement seem to be in support of each other.

Your quote reads "they will hardly notice the extra army or two it takes to take the sector". Would that not be a very nice argument to let the attacker loose their 8 units placed in a siege? I am sure they will start to notice then as I will start defending again and I will kill a siginifcant number of their sieges singlehandedly.
 

DeletedUser96745

I think devs are working on solution. It will be soon here. I guess there will be Ghosting Rankings.
 

DeletedUser65431

:confused: Are ghost guilds still causing a major problem? Haven't noticed anything to suggest it is an issue, admittedly I'm only really involved with GvG on three maps of one world, so I could well be wrong. :confused:
 

DeletedUser99588

Well I spotted a ghost guild in Brisgard yesterday CE map. The top guild is top for a reason and they love to either ghost or send fighters to their allies to attack their enemies :)

Shameful really, if they all want to fight together they should merge, especially as one of those guilds members was quite vocal on here about getting rid of ghost guilds but is happy to benefit from it and fighter hopping.

I personally think if you want to get rid of ghost guilds you should stop fighters from hopping around at the same time.

I'm on the fence atm with regards to using your own troops for sieges. I appreciate the arguments put by both sides and haven't seen a suggestion that offers a win-win solution. I would like Inno to explain ALL their reasons for removing it in the first place so we can understand and maybe offer alternatives.

The changes to GvG since released on the live servers have in the main either encouraged ghost guilding or done little to discourage it. The only change to reduce its activity, mainly for smaller guilds, is the 7 day guild lock. That didn't hold back the bigger guilds who can afford to lose some fighters for a week and just encouraged demolition/damage guilds to be formed.

I'm not entirely sure if Inno want ghost guilds to be stopped. There is probably a valid argument that quite often it is the only action to be found in GvG. Maybe they should just say ghost guilding is a valid tactic and just get on with it. Remove the 7 day guild lock and reduce goods for sieges so everyone isn't so frustrated when they lose a sector and let everyone battle it out each day.

That would be a clear sign that ghost guilds and guild hopping is fine rather than pretending to make changes to stop these things in the full knowledge it won't work. They have had over a year to get it right if they really wanted to stop these things. Lets have chaos and anarchy on the GvG maps. At least there would be some activity.
 

DeletedUser

Well the big Fat powerful guilds want to make it harder for the small up and coming to get into the map.
doesn't' any body remember, When you lay siege you need to fight off 80 army's with who know's how much defense boot.
a new guild of 10 people probably has only 1 or 2 fighters. Are the a Ghost Guild? When fighters from a guild jump into a sister guild, Are they ghosting? I've' seen somebody on this thread jumping around in his 3 guilds, Creating many ghost guilds in a week,
Do you think putting a limit on mega players is going to make a difference? NO.
The Big top guilds just need to protect themselves and stop trying to change the game to protect there sectors.
As for ghosting 30 days needed to stay in a new formed guild.
 

DeletedUser102085

I'd like to see the goods cost go way down to encourage more fighting.

On a much more radical front, I'd LOVE to see the goods costs go way down, and the output of power increase BUT the GVG map gets cleared every month. Then the new guilds have a chance and the old guilds can still snatch up as much as they like. With all the NAPs out there, sister guilds can sit in the middle of a comfortable safe locked in zone forever while their main guild encases them and NAPs everything around them. Having every map on gridlock doesn't seem like it fits the spirit of the game.
 

DeletedUser65431

iiendless said:
This is a huge problem right now and I cant believe the developers is doing nothing.
Click to expand...
I've just checked the six GvG maps above the middle ages on my main world. Total of four sectors have been taken over since the previous calculation, three of which - I believe - result from guilds releasing and then retaking. Three maps remain unchanged from the previous calculation. Nothing to suggest that ghost guilds are causing problems or that activity should be further restricted.
 

DeletedUser

I'd like to see the goods cost go way down to encourage more fighting.

On a much more radical front, I'd LOVE to see the goods costs go way down, and the output of power increase BUT the GVG map gets cleared every month. Then the new guilds have a chance and the old guilds can still snatch up as much as they like. With all the NAPs out there, sister guilds can sit in the middle of a comfortable safe locked in zone forever while their main guild encases them and NAPs everything around them. Having every map on gridlock doesn't seem like it fits the spirit of the game.
Click to expand...
Yes, I'd like to make the costs cheaper, too. Those prices are crazy! The whole guild donates every day and it's still so hard to get the needed goods and to be some left for opening defensive armies.MAKE THE COST OF THE SIEGES CHEAP! DON'T MAKE IT MORE EXPENSIVE ! ! !
 

DeletedUser

Most of the people ghosting are the big players. They have unlimited troops and goods. Reinstating the 8 unit per siege will not efect them
 

DeletedUser101441

I agree the best would be to re-add the cost of troops AND also change(or add to it) the 7 day return to your guild to 7 days wait till able to go gvg for any new memebrs(also counting any members forming a guild as "new" when guild is freshly made) thatll stop ghosting the way it is and also hopping from a guild to another every day(cuz even if u cant rejoin ur own u can still join as many others as u like every day).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top