• 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.

Time restriction on sieging a sector you've just granted freedom to

DeletedUser100832

Proposal:
Once your guild has granted freedom to a sector in GvG, your guild cannot siege it for 10 minutes.

Have you Checked the Ideas section for the same idea posted by someone else?

briefly, yeah, it sounds sufficiently specific to not have been suggested before

Reason:
(1) It prevents a situation where the defenders are about to lose a sector, but instead of replacing defenses they try to grant freedom between sieges and re-siege themselves. It is a cheap exploit that mainly relies on having a quicker connection than your opponents and on your opponents' fighters simultaneously crashing, which tends to happen surprisingly often at key moments.
(2) It also decreases the effectiveness of the tactic of retaking your own border sectors over the calculation period at timer, which as we all know is a particularly buggy time for GvG.

In short, the main purpose is to decrease the impact of the technical aspects - bugs and speed of connection - on what is after all a strategy game.

Balance:
Tbh I don't see why most 'normal' guilds (ones who try to take and hold as many sectors as they can) would (i) need to release and retake their sectors in a short time-frame or (ii) have the sufficient goods to do so repeatedly, so I see this feature mainly hurting ghost guilds with very few sectors, which can only be a good thing. For most guilds, this change won't be noticeable.

Abuse Prevention:
I can't think of many abuses tbh.
 

DeletedUser96901

Once your guild has granted freedom to a sector in GvG, your guild cannot siege it for 10 minutes.
Click to expand...
10 minutes ???

if a guild doesn't want that sector they shouldn't be allowed to siege it for 7 days
 

DeletedUser15432

More like 24 hours, give the people time to settle down, however, I like this idea so a +1 from me
 

DeletedUser16126

+1
They cannot re-siege until the reset or 24 hours!

Additional reason:
- To avoid that guilds just gain battle points by taking over and over again the same sector without any boost and holding the troops they prefer to battle instead of real fighting.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser2989

This idea very specifically targets a questionable behavior. If a guild holding onto many sectors was to try this the cost of dropping and retaking the sector would probably be a fair price to pay for the "sector shield" gained from it. But obviously all guilds can do this and the ones with the least sectors can do it the cheapest, with not as much to protect maybe it's fair? It still sounds like an abuse of the "sector shield" but I'm not yet convinced enough to support the idea. I'm not sure that with the current state of GvG that it is so easy to defend as to then warrant making it harder. If this was a overall pace adjustment I could probably agree to it, for example:
You must wait 10 minutes between placing a new siege on the same sector or between releasing a sector and placing a siege on it.

It's just if you were to ask me "is it easier to attack or defend in GvG at the moment" I'd say it's somewhat easier to attack, there are of course different scenarios when one is easier than the other but I think more often than not it's easier to attack.
 

DeletedUser99588

-1

Don't see a problem with your reason 1. If the defending guild are that organised that they can break siege, release sector and retake it before the attacker places siege then good on them.

As far as the second reason is concerned then I would agree that this does skew the PvP Towers but there are also other means being used to do that as well. Asking a friendly guild or player to place sieges on one of your sectors is one of them. In fact some guilds have a rotation system where a player leaves the guild for a week to do it.

At least it costs a guild goods to have to retake the sector.

I understand the frustration of the OP and wish I had a better idea to solve it but I'm against making changes that I don't think will actually cure anything. The guilds that release and retake sectors will just rotate the sectors they do it with to get around any enforced delay. Some guilds in Brisgard that do this have many sectors and can still afford the goods on a daily basis.

The bigger guilds that do this are only doing it because they are bored as GvG has become stagnant for them. Other guilds that do this would just revert to hitting landing zone sectors again to earn their points. Weakening guilds sectors purely for PvP points rather than participating in GvG.

The problem lies with the developers for the GvG concept being so simplistic making it easy to target fights just for PvP points.
 

DeletedUser2989

I've given this idea some more thought and will review my vote. Given the idea behind releasing the sector is "I don't want this one any more" it seems to me that allowing it to be re-taken in the same day would be opening it up for other abuses rather than for anything intentional. I don't think releasing and retaking a sector to gain the "invincible" shield or to gain points (personal and PvP) are really things that the release function was intended to be used for and yet it is. I also can't think of any reason to be able to retake a sector right away if I only consider what the "goal" of GvG is (Being to take and hold the best sectors for the most power/prestige to level and rank up the guild), I recognize that the shield can be a very useful tool to protect a guilds large number of sectors (provided other guilds with very few sectors are used to make it) but that seems to abuse the intention of that mechanic to me (I'm actually questioning if the shield should even be a feature...).

So to me, based on the idea that releasing sectors means you don't need it or it's holding you back from taking sectors you need elsewhere, it makes sense to put a time limit (not sure exactly how long though) to prevent the feature from being abused for things it doesn't seem intended for. +1

(Note: I can think of a few other changes that would be more important to get into GvG first and don't think this idea alone would be the perfect fix but I can see it being useful)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser653

-1 the use of shields is part of the game and has been since it started, removing it has a massive impact on reset and will completely change the game.
I would support only allowing a sector to be resieged once per day to stop those guilds who surround a sector and siege it 10 times a day and always win tower because of this.
 

DeletedUser100832

HRC said:
-1 the use of shields is part of the game and has been since it started, removing it has a massive impact on reset and will completely change the game.
I would support only allowing a sector to be resieged once per day to stop those guilds who surround a sector and siege it 10 times a day and always win tower because of this.
Click to expand...

no one is saying get rid of shields. If you want to release and retake, do, but you have to think a bit more about it and do it either in a location no other enemy guild can siege or at a time no enemy guild spots you during the 15 minutes you have to wait.

and yes, the idea _is_ to have a massive impact on reset, to (i) enable people who cannot make it to the reset to take part in GvG and (ii) decrease the lag at reset created by everyone trying to fight/siege at the same time. At the moment, both these problems make GvG pretty much unplayable for a very non-insignificant number of users.
 

DeletedUser653

Medribradrion said:
no one is saying get rid of shields. If you want to release and retake, do, but you have to think a bit more about it and do it either in a location no other enemy guild can siege or at a time no enemy guild spots you during the 15 minutes you have to wait.
Click to expand...
-1 still for me, Ghosts will have such an advantage and will just be able to rip straight into any guild and any sector.

Medribradrion said:
and yes, the idea _is_ to have a massive impact on reset, to (i) enable people who cannot make it to the reset to take part in GvG and (ii) decrease the lag at reset created by everyone trying to fight/siege at the same time. At the moment, both these problems make GvG pretty much unplayable for a very non-insignificant number of users.
Click to expand...
OK I can understand this reason and while its not good for me,I do understand your view
 
The Tominator

The Tominator

Sergeant
Medribradrion said:
Proposal:
Once your guild has granted freedom to a sector in GvG, your guild cannot siege it for 10 minutes.

Have you Checked the Ideas section for the same idea posted by someone else?

briefly, yeah, it sounds sufficiently specific to not have been suggested before

Reason:
(1) It prevents a situation where the defenders are about to lose a sector, but instead of replacing defenses they try to grant freedom between sieges and re-siege themselves. It is a cheap exploit that mainly relies on having a quicker connection than your opponents and on your opponents' fighters simultaneously crashing, which tends to happen surprisingly often at key moments.
(2) It also decreases the effectiveness of the tactic of retaking your own border sectors over the calculation period at timer, which as we all know is a particularly buggy time for GvG.

In short, the main purpose is to decrease the impact of the technical aspects - bugs and speed of connection - on what is after all a strategy game.

Balance:
Tbh I don't see why most 'normal' guilds (ones who try to take and hold as many sectors as they can) would (i) need to release and retake their sectors in a short time-frame or (ii) have the sufficient goods to do so repeatedly, so I see this feature mainly hurting ghost guilds with very few sectors, which can only be a good thing. For most guilds, this change won't be noticeable.

Abuse Prevention:
I can't think of many abuses tbh.
Click to expand...

like u said its a strategy game . granting freedom and re-shielding is a strategy.that allows a guild to be shielded which is a great way of either making u release or do the same thing ..because they still have an HQ move..which puts u in danger. i have also seen this move by a guild surrounded by enemy and they need a re-shield in more than 1 place....so -1 for you
 

DeletedUser96869

-1 from me at the moment on this considering the CURRENT state that GvG is in, if inno did a overhaul of GvG then I would support it 100%. The concept of GvG fundamentally is to gain prestige by holding onto more land than other guilds, thus making you the best guild. Times have changed after the points change as any LZ in FE is soon brought down to 1x DA by those looking for battle points and paving the way for ghost or spoiler guilds.

The ability to drop and capture sectors is a valid strategy for those guilds wanting to defend and hold ground and if they can afford the goods then fair play to them! It is a viable and useful tactic at your disposal especially as it is a lot easier to attack a sector rather than defend a sector; no matter how many people are defending its far easier to attack than it is to defend. If it wasn't then how could a guild with one main fighter take sectors from a guild that usually has at least 10-15 fighters online at reset, 1 player should not be able to take a sector with that many defenders online yet it happens quite a lot; and even though I would like to say it is my own skill it clearly isn't.
 

DeletedUser653

NormadRob, your right and its well know that given low siege costs for a ghost 1 person on their own could take a sector with 10 people defending it, It would take a lot of sieges but its possible.

if a guild loses shielding rights at reset ghosts will be able to march in at reset with pretty nothing much to stop them.
 

DeletedUser11930

I agree with the timer for not retaking but then that only opens up what is already happening to further abuse ie more ghosting.
We see numerous players doing it now ie they get a 1 or 2 man guild then claim to be having fun and getting points only yet is shocking to see also guilds swapping sectors to keep protected ones any behaviour like this should warrant some kind of restrictions ie guilds should have to be formed for a minimum of 14 days to participate in GvG and consist of a specific number of players,furthermore if a pattern of ghost guilding then handing sectors to a guild you've left becomes apparent that should also warrant restrictions on the offender and his/her guild they are abusing how GvG was designed to be used
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top