• We are looking for you!
    Always wanted to join our Supporting Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
    Take a look at our recruitement page for more information and how you can apply:
    Apply

Guild Battlegrounds Arrival Feedback

  • Thread starter DeletedUser4770
  • Start date

Raymora

Member
Is it possible to move the cancel/auto buttons apart? They're too close together and I tend to have a small heart attack when it happens before hitting the cancel button lol
 

RazorbackPirate

Well-Known Member
1. I think it would be really fun if you could record the map from the beginning to the end of the season and then provide the replay to all the participating guilds at the end. It would be pretty fun to review how the map developed from start to finish.

2. It would be really fun if you could add several different maps so we do not fight on the same map every season. Each map could have its own unique features which would create unique strategic opportunities.
I think both of these are great ideas.
 

Volodya

Well-Known Member
... ita always easy to find those who are content with mindless repetition day after day!!
and it's surprisingly easy to find people who persist in playing a game which makes them miserable and which they apparently despise. Takes all kinds I guess.
 

DeletedUser

If guild power is all u are concerned about have at it! But a couple of HoFs per member, high level Arcs and OBs will return the same guild power without the high costs of troops and goods!
You're joking, right? My guilds will both get over 100k GPP at the end of this first GBG. That's 3 levels or more for both of them. You cannot get anywhere near that with HoFs. And Arcs and Observatories have no direct impact on GPP or guild level.
 

DeletedUser37581

You're joking, right? My guilds will both get over 100k GPP at the end of this first GBG. That's 3 levels or more for both of them. You cannot get anywhere near that with HoFs. And Arcs and Observatories have no direct impact on GPP or guild level.
Actually, a good sized guild can easily get 12,000 or more guild power a day from HoFs. Compared to 100k per 2 weeks...
 

Emberguard

Well-Known Member
Actually, a good sized guild can easily get 12,000 or more guild power a day from HoFs. Compared to 100k per 2 weeks...
My guild (gold) would be 19,500 per day per 2 week cycle from GBG. It’s actually 24,818 per day of activity and then 3 days rest, but that 19,500 of we even it out across the full 2 weeks.

So basically, you’d need endgame players to reach less then that without GBG so those hall of frames are worth placing.

Meanwhile my guild will make 39,000 guild power per day per 2 weeks (or 49,636 per 11 days) once we reach diamond regardless of our ages. Can you make 39k per day? Even if you stayed in copper and only did 4 advances a day to qualify for the last place reward that’s still increasing your output by another 2,792 per day per 2 weeks.

You can either put in high effort for high reward, or stay with low effort for low reward

Also keep in mind the statue of Honor Lvl 1 that multiple of my guild including me are getting either before end of season or with the final reward. In earlier ages its worth almost 2 HoFs one-two ages above our age. Once maxed out it’ll be worth 2 HoFs four-five ages above a LMA owner. It’s not until OF that HoF matches the Statues output. Until then it’s more efficient to have the statue
 
Last edited:

DeletedUser25407

Like all other parts of FOE, Inno has rigged GBG. How can opponent SAM troops hit attacking units with 20% boost, 97% of the time? And attacking troops hit opponents SAM troops with the 20% boost a paltry 17% of the time? During negotiations, when it's a choice between two good picks, which is 50-50 chance, we lose 98% of the time? Inno has rigged FOE to point where the game is no longer enjoyable.
 

DeletedUser27974

I’ve tried to read all 32 pages here. Has anyone determined why they have nerfed the Battle Points versus every other avenue of fighting (PvP, Map, GvG, GE, etc.). Normally, we gain more battle points against higher boosted troops. 1750% boosted troops in GBG give less points than the lightly boosted GE armies. Was there some kind of risk of abuse? Seems weird to only nerf this particular feature.
 

DeletedUser29726

As far as I'm aware, battle points don't depend on boost at all. They have variance depending on the exact types of troops you're facing, and I think there's some oddities wrt 2 wave battles (at one point at least I believe they rewarded double the 2nd wave's points regardless of what was in the first wave). You also gain less battle points depending on how much damage you take which should generally make highly boosted armies worth less than lightly boosted ones.
 

DeletedUser11155

Disappointment so far with GBg. There needs to be changes made which will make this a better experience:

1. In GvG, people have to have the rights to set a siege. We need this here concerning flags and/or allow us to delete flags that were placed by people unknown. When there are flags everywhere it is difficult to coordinate attacks when members come on and fight on their own time.
2. Match up guilds with like-sized guilds. An 80 member guild can overpower an active 20 member guild easily with little participation.
3. Make it multi-world. Some of us don't like having to fight against friends especially when people in the guild can't be tracked or controlled (or even found out). Is a general breakdown in guild relations one of the goals here? Bravo if it is...you accomplished it.
4. Make the map bigger or make the event shorter. There was a lot of activity the first couple days and then it slowed greatly as someone dominated or agreements were made.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

MaranKarma

Member
I see a problem with this - in resources.
Regarding the goods, that is no problem for higher age players. Anything above FE cannot be used for GvG anyway. Same with the treasury. The type of goods needed for the battlegrounds buildings is based on the highest members of the guild (if I understand it correctly) There is no other use for AF, OF, VF, and SAM goods anyway.
What is a problem is the cost of the game's most valuable resource - time.
People playing in more worlds will need to drop some of them. Some people playing in only one world will leave the game when they run out of the time.
Inno was supposed to balance this by reducing the time cost of other game features, such as adding "aid all" and "visit all taverns" functions or user-defined number of fps to add to a Great Building. Do the developers think that is is entertaining to click 4000 fps in by the steps of 10? That is 400 clicks!
This is the same mistake the developers keep doing. Adding new, time-consuming features without reducing the time consumption of the old ones at the same time. (They used to do that a couple of years ago, by simplifying the aid and taverns, but not anymore, why?) Saying that the new features are only optional in an invalid argument because (some of) the competitors would use those for sure. Adding new game features without balancing the time requirements cost you customers. It costs you money, don't you see it?
Honestly, in my opinion, this is not a new feature: it's just a more time, good and military sucking version of GE with worse rewards and one cool looking graphic. If this was introduced as an upgrade to GE that somehow tied in the relics, or rebooted the ToR to tie in, okay. But don't call this new, it's just more if the same old negotiate or battle. I don't like the arena graphic cluttering up my city, either. I'm dissapointed.
 

RazorbackPirate

Well-Known Member
1. In GvG, you have to have rights to place a siege. We also need that in GBg. Someone in our guild went and placed flags on every adjoining sector. Then the people that don't pay attention and don't read emails attack all over the place assuming the flags are authorized and thus, breaking agreements. If you can't make placing a flag a right, allow us to delete flags.
No. This is not GvG. Why are you making agreements?
2. Match up guilds with like-sized guilds. An 80 member guild can overpower an active 20 member guild easily with little participation.
MMR based on actual perfomance in GBG will resolve this in a few seasons.
3. Make it multi-world. Some of us don't like having to fight against friends especially when people in the guild can't be tracked or controlled (or even found out). Is a general breakdown in guild relations one of the goals here? Bravo if it is...you accomplished it.
We don't need it multi world. Why can't you fight against friends? It's a game. Ever play a game with a friend? Ever beat a friend in a game? were you able to remain friends? In other words, grow up if this is a problem for you.
4. Make the map bigger or make the event shorter. There was a lot of activity the first couple days and then it slowed greatly as someone dominated or agreements were made.
If making agreements slowed the play greatly, why did you make agreements? No wonder people are breaking your agreements. You're sucking all the fun out of GBG with them, just like you did in GvG. Stop with the GvG mentality. Learn to fight and stop hiding under other's skirt tails.
 

Robbenn

Member
No. This is not GvG. Why are you making agreements?

It's a war between guilds. Smart guilds create alliances if it helps them reach their goal. Exactly like GVG in that aspect. Why even bring GVG into this? How is it relevant?
Why would I not be allowed to seek an alliance with another guild if it helps me rank higher on the leaderboards? If you're not skilled enough to use the tools at your disposal to guarantee your success, the solution is to get better, not to remove the tools in order to level the playground.
 

ocshooter

New Member
As The direct ranking of Guilds is tied to GVG which everyone claims no one plays, you have to admit that really makes no sense at all,. Id like to know will ranking shift to be based on GBG going forward. Seems only fair as again everyone keeps saying 95% of the players dont even play it.. So how can it possibly be the determining factor of rankings?
 
Top