I applaud all of the proposed changes, but do have some questions and comments, and would like to see some additional changes as well. So here goes:
1. I agree with many of the sentiments on here about point farming. If dropped sectors revert to all SAM troops, that makes point farming easier. I think random from any age does make sense and keeps the AA map more accessible to weaker guilds. Some of the point farming that occurs is in breaking sieges and not just sieging sectors, so this rule doesn't address that, either.
2. Why 6 resets per/day? I agree that more than 1 is definitely needed, but I think 3 to 5 would be better. Maybe have a reset every 5 or 7 hours? I would like to see it as something that is not divisible by 24 hours... so resets are not always at the same time everyday. If you do one reset every 5 hours... that comes out to just under 5 per/day, but also naturally changes the time that reset falls at from day to day (making it harder for certain guilds to take advantage of players that are online at specific times of the day). I've long said (and I think a few others here have also echo'd the same thought) that there really is no need to have reset at all (except for point collection, and things like resetting HQ moves and sector drops). Just have each sector have its own reset timer - 24 hours from when it's taken. Although I think reducing that to 8 or 12 hours like somebody else suggested would be even better, but reset timer per/sector might be better than multiple resets per/day. But multiple resets per/day would be better than what we have now.
3. Also, if we have 6 resets per/day, does this mean GvG will generate 6 times as many points per/day as it does now? I.E. will each reset produce the total points a sector is worth, or only 1/6 of them? I think GvG needs to generate more points, but 6x might be too much. If we adopted the reset per/sector option I talked about above, and maybe do 2 or 3 collections per/day (just for the points - so GvG generates 2x or 3x the points as it does now per/day) that might be the perfect solution.
4. However, I think we also need more Guild levels (and I haven't seen any talk about that) - most top guilds are at (or very close to L75). Will we also be seeing new Guild levels with this update? I sure hope so. And rather than just more of the same awards, why not introduce some new things? One thought I had was additional support for sectors available as awards for Guild levels beyond L75. Maybe in increments of 5%. So your HQ can go to 80% (instead of 75%) and your other sectors to 55% (instead of 50%) - still coming from the same support pool. And then it keeps going up from there to maybe double what it is now (150% for HQ and 100% for non-HQ, obviously some of the lower ages will be even lower). One of the major problems with GvG that was created naturally over time is the fact that most players have an extremely strong attack, but the GvG support bonuses are so low. Even GE is much higher than GvG - and this needs to be changed for GvG to really improve. And why not allow guilds to be able to fill in more than 8 DAs per/sector, too? Maybe 10 or 12 (at higher costs)... would make it more challenging - and more about strategy and resource allocation than just hack and whack.
5. I think the siege cost on the AA map needs to be addressed and probably the medal cost to unlock DAs there, too. It needs to go up to make it so one guild cannot hold 90 to 100 sectors at a time.
6. I think the removal of BA troops is awesome and I would not change this. It's irrelevant that it's called the AA map. As some have said, there is no BA map in GvG. The really issue is sticks can be produced in 20 seconds (less if you have a Traz) whereas troops of any other age take considerably longer to make. That is what makes them overpowered more than anything.
7. Lastly, I think ghosting is a problem that should be addressed. I applaud the 96 hour timer, it was a great change, but that doesn't solve all of the problems. One simple solution would be to only allow a Level 0 guild (i.e. a new one) to enter GvG on the Iron map. Until they move up to L3, for example, they don't gain access to the EMA map. L6 for HMA, and so on. A guild would need to reach L36 before they can enter the AA map. This would stop strong players from going out and creating a 1-man (or 2 or 3 player) ghost guild - with the purpose of entering the higher level maps (AA, FE, TE, etc.), where the points are highest, with the sole purpose of hurting other guilds. GvG should be about large guilds working together towards a common goal - not about people using gimmicks & tricks and taking advantage of the extremely low siege cost - just to wreck havoc and use GvG for personal beefs or grievances. You could then lower the 96 hour timer to 24 or 48 hours even... to allow people to visit friendly guilds and not sit on the sideline for so long. The rule needs to stay, but if level limits are placed on GvG maps - it eliminates the need to have it be so long.
Well, these are my thoughts, for what they are worth and I welcome anyone's feedback on them!