Guild Battlegrounds Arrival Feedback

[Salsuero]

diamond-completed

The most costly way of all.

After the initial expenditure we are saving a boatload of resources this way.

Not much of a battleground that way, but to each his/her own.

I mean, if they want this to replace GvG in the hearts and minds, build on and improve it, don't dumb it down!

What makes you think this isn't a "build on and improve it" result? This might be exactly what THEY wanted. That assumes it's meant to "replace" GvG at all... which I'm not convinced it is.

 

[RazorbackPirate]

In member activity tab please consider adding attrition value.

Why? Why isn't participation enough? You can see the number of advancements. Easy enough to reverse engineer a number if it's that important to you. You might not be exact, but you'll get close.

What value is this information to anyone other than the player? What would you do with this information?

 

[RazorbackPirate]

Not everything is black and white.

Nor static.

I think it was meant to be a less favorable option to combat.

Another reason why they're worth two advances while fighting is just one.

 

[Salsuero]

I see I need to put this into a very simple form for everyone to understand.

No, you don't. No one agrees with you. That has nothing to do with a lack of comprehension. Quit whining and start winning!

Ah.. look at this.. I can spend Diamonds!
I can now win, where I had no choice but to lose in a fight.

You can also quit without spending a single diamond. Same result as the fights in your examples. Enough said. It sounds like you want a way to pay diamonds to continue fighting in a single-wave battle... this is the weirdest "dumbing down" of an explanation as I've seen.

 

[DeletedUser40047]

In my guild it is split right down the middle between those who predominantly fight or negotiate, most of the fighters are also GvG fighters with optimized war GBs and higher level Trazzes

 

[mamboking053]

I negotiate far more than I fight in GBg because goods are much easier to gather than units and it is much cheaper (for me) to negotiate at high levels by gathering enough goods, compared to losing troops due to increasing difficulty. Just because one play style finds it easier to fight than negotiate doesn't mean all of them do. Some will find it much less pricey to negotiate than to fight. Having a high-level Château Frontenac and running lots of recurring quests, you'll have plenty of goods. All of the special buildings and multiple GBs dedicated to giving goods, and the ones like Seed Vault that give you goods for aiding... even more plentiful. There just aren't as many ways to gather tons of units. So, losing units is much worse in my opinion. If I need more goods to continue working on a territory immediately, I can try to trade for them or run some UBQs. Generating new units on the fly isn't necessarily THAT easy.

And let's not forget... negotiations are worth two fights. I think everyone has neglected to mention this as a BONUS to spending those goods.

It depends on how you are set up. With military, it's not just about the number of troops, but their strength. If your troops have high attack and defense, they can fight longer without dying. If you have a large stock of troops, this means all you have to do is keep changing out injured troops with fresh ones, letting those heal, and by the next day they'll be available again. Those that you do lose can be replaced with Traz. Then you have things like AO.

You can also build some barracks to replace the single non-rogue unit you use in combination with 7 rogues. The non-rogue unit heals much faster than rogues and so you can use these multiple times a day by running recruitment. This reduces the attrition on those unattached units like it made in the Traz so that if you ever fight hard enough that you've lost all your attached units, you still have a large supply of unattached ones.

 

[BruteForceAttack]

Why? Why isn't participation enough? You can see the number of advancements. Easy enough to reverse engineer a number if it's that important to you. You might not be exact, but you'll get close.

What value is this information to anyone other than the player? What would you do with this information?

Cant reverse engineer for various reasons.
Attrition resets everyday whereas the count doesn't
Siege Camps/Outpost/Traps/Decoys RNG change attrition

At a glance it is good to know who has attrition value and therefore can fight.

 

[Salsuero]

It depends on how you are set up. With military, it's not just about the number of troops, but their strength. If your troops have high attack and defense, they can fight longer without dying. If you have a large stock of troops, this means all you have to do is keep changing out injured troops with fresh ones, letting those heal, and by the next day they'll be available again. Those that you do lose can be replaced with Traz. Then you have things like AO.

I'm not disagreeing with that. That was my point. I focus on goods, not troops. It's far more costly to me to fight. I can fight up to 25-30 attrition on auto-battle before I'm really paying dearly. I can keep going on manual for a bit, but that's time-consuming. Instead, I can negotiate and keep taking on attrition, even though the goods costs are significant at the point where I'm starting to do so... and increase from there. But it's much less painful to lose those goods because they are far more quick to replace. However, because I have spent so much time accumulating troops using my Alcatraz, I'm good... for now. The problem is, when I tech up to the next age, I'll have plenty of goods (from trading) that I'll be ready to negotiate... but I won't be ready to do much fighting until I've accumulated some troops (which may take a while if I don't race the tech tree to unlock the appropriate barracks) or continue fighting with now inferior ones. Once I've got enough troops, I'll be back to no problem mode. But for me and others like me, negotiating is the cheaper method... and it's worth double for a nice bonus!

 

[DeletedUser40047]

You can also wait to collect Kraken until you are fully attrition-radioactive, then start a manual attack and back out unless K killed one, gives you a few more fights

 

[Salsuero]

Cant reverse engineer for various reasons.
Attrition resets everyday whereas the count doesn't
Siege Camps/Outpost/Traps/Decoys RNG change attrition

Unless you're showing the attrition they have only for the day you're looking at it, the attrition would be cumulative as well. So do you only want to know how much attrition they have on a specific day to ridicule them for not having enough? What if they do all of their battles late in the day? Are you only gonna check five minutes before attrition resets? And then what? Tell them they better hurry and knock out more before it resets... or else? I just don't see how this is good for players.

At a glance it is good to know who has attrition value and therefore can fight.

And what would you do? Start spamming them to tell them they need to up their attrition? What level of attrition is "too much" attrition for a given player? That shouldn't matter to you. The fact that they're already participating isn't enough now? We need to be able to tell players they don't have enough attrition to stop?

 

[mamboking053]

I'm not disagreeing with that. That was my point. I focus on goods, not troops. It's far more costly to me to fight. I can fight up to 25-30 attrition on auto-battle before I'm really paying dearly. I can keep going on manual for a bit, but that's time-consuming. Instead, I can negotiate and keep taking on attrition, even though the goods costs are significant at the point where I'm starting to do so... and increase from there. But it's much less painful to lose those goods because they are far more quick to replace. However, because I have spent so much time accumulating troops using my Alcatraz, I'm good... for now. The problem is, when I tech up to the next age, I'll have plenty of goods (from trading) that I'll be ready to negotiate... but I won't be ready to do much fighting until I've accumulated some troops (which may take a while if I don't race the tech tree to unlock the appropriate barracks) or continue fighting with now inferior ones. Once I've got enough troops, I'll be back to no problem mode. But for me and others like me, negotiating is the cheaper method... and it's worth double for a nice bonus!

Gotcha. With the changes that occurred, is Neg's still the best option for you or do you have to split between that and fighting? Has it changed how you play in any significant way?

 

[DeletedUser40047]

Attrition is for boasting about when you get yours really high, not for browbeating or shaming other members because theirs is low!

 

[qaccy]

@Ctik I'm sorry, I'm having a hard time understanding what your concern is. You seem to have a particular issue with 6-option negotiations, why is that? Diamonds aren't necessary to complete them; as @dontwannaname has indicated over a fairly large number of attempts, provided that you're competent at the negotiation game you can expect about a 50/50 chance of winning in the 3 attempts given. I think that's pretty reasonable. That, and how many options you're presented with is random. This is essentially the same as being presented with random enemy troops when you go into battle, and as Salsuero pointed out, the 6-option negotiation is similar to having a two-wave battle.

EDIT: @ShaughtUp Personally I'd like to see attrition displayed in the activity log as well. I'd like to know which members are only participating in sectors with no attrition gain and which ones are actually contributing when an important sector needs to be taken.

 

[Salsuero]

Gotcha. With the changes that occurred, is Neg's still the best option for you or do you have to split between that and fighting?

I've always split between negotiations and fighting when fighting was negligible in terms of losses, but I never "had" to do so. I can auto-battle most of GE before taking more than a couple Rogue losses. But I negotiate the very end of level 4 to finish things off. Since I don't lose troops, it's faster to just auto-battle. If it were more difficult or in a new age where I couldn't afford to lose any (or didn't have the right) troops, I would just negotiate instead. However, with GBg, it's much better to negotiate. I fight the first 25 or so battles because I don't lose many troops (not enough to complain about given my Alcatraz's ability to replace them quickly). But at that point, I start to lose more than half my troops each battle and sometimes all of them for a loss. At that point, I switch to negotiations and take it up to at least 50, but often near 100 attrition, depending on our guild's goals/needs for the day. The only reason I fight is because it's faster and I don't lose troops. It's not because I can't afford the goods... and with negotiations being worth double, negotiating 100% would actually be worth more to the overall goal, but I'm also not trying to spend all day getting bored playing the negotiation game. I'm definitely able to knock out a few extra negotiations when needed late in the day with a high attrition where it would be literally impossible for me to fight.

 

[RazorbackPirate]

At a glance it is good to know who has attrition value and therefore can fight.

And therein lies the rub. Exactly why I'm a solid no on this. I will play my game when I'm available to play my game for as long as I want to, or am able to play my game. Catching a theme here? It's my game, not your game.

Since, as I suspected, you want my attrition information so you can hound me to play my game the way you want me to play my game, then no. You can't, nor should you, have my attrition information. Rally the troops. Send out the call. I'll respond if I can and want to. On my terms, not yours.

 

[DeletedUser37581]

@Salsuero when you negotiate to high levels of attrition every day, do you have any difficulties in replenishing your previous era goods?

 

[Salsuero]

Personally I'd like to see attrition displayed in the activity log as well. I'd like to know which members are only participating in sectors with no attrition gain and which ones are actually contributing when an important sector needs to be taken.

Ok. So let's say you know. Now what? What would you do with that knowledge? Would you contact the player and censure him/her for wanting to fight and gain personal rewards with as little losses as possible (which still helps the guild), but not wanting to take on as much attrition by attacking your specific target, which would limit their participation? Is the target they are hitting not allowed? If that's so, it sounds like it's basically the same as wanting the logs to know where people are fighting, just wrapped up in a different paper and bow.

 

[Salsuero]

@Salsuero when you negotiate to high levels of attrition every day, do you have any difficulties in replenishing your previous era goods?

I don't negotiate to high levels "every" day. I usually stop at around 50 total attrition on most days. But, no. To answer your question, in my case, I'm able to replenish my goods fairly well using previous age special buildings and by trading down. But I work at that. Other players won't necessarily have the same GBs at the same levels or run the same recurring quests the same number of times to be able to trade down, nor will they plant their butts in an era long enough to build up a hefty stock of goods before aging up. I play a specific way and that way allows me to negotiate a lot more than fight, not that I can't fight (as I've said). I'll probably even build the Star Gazer at some point just to make it easier to collect goods from the previous age. I already have the goods and prints, but since I don't need it right now, I'm using the space in a more useful way.

 

[RazorbackPirate]

@ShaughtUp Personally I'd like to see attrition displayed in the activity log as well. I'd like to know which members are only participating in sectors with no attrition gain and which ones are actually contributing when an important sector needs to be taken.

Really? You think brow beating active GBG members for not playing according to your desires is useful? Stoking internal strife and division doesn't seem like a winning strategy. It's not up to you to run my game.

 

[DeletedUser37581]

I don't negotiate to high levels "every" day. I usually stop at around 50 total attrition on most days. But, no. To answer your question, in my case, I'm able to replenish my goods fairly well using previous age special buildings and by trading down. But I work at that. Other players won't necessarily have the same GBs at the same levels or run the same recurring quests the same number of times to be able to trade down, nor will they plant their butts in an era long enough to build up a hefty stock of goods before aging up. I play a specific way and that way allows me to negotiate a lot more than fight, not that I can't fight (as I've said). I'll probably even build the Star Gazer at some point just to make it easier to collect goods from the previous age. I already have the goods and prints, but since I don't need it right now, I'm using the space in a more useful way.

I'm not having as much luck finding previous era goods. I'm almost at the point of offering current age goods at 1:1 and still not able to get previous era goods in any quantity.