• 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

gbg

ReubinDoobs

New Member
What is people's problems with GBG? That post was vague and unconvincing. Somewhat newer player here and it seems like they keep making it worse
 
Just An Observer

Just An Observer

Well-Known Member
If INNO wants fewer diamond bought, they found the secret spice to do it with (nerfing GBG). Might as well call FoE "Friends Only Entertaining" as guilds become mere social clubs. That dynamic is already present in guilds who do not focus on GBG but when Big Dog GBG guilds are as extinct as the dinosaurs and dodo birds, it will be basically all that is left.

May the next headline be "INNO's New GBG Idea is RIP".
 

Pericles the Lion

Well-Known Member
While I don't know for sure I'd guess that only a small percentage of FOE players are in big dog Diamond guilds that are hyper active in GBG (full disclosure, I am one of them). So, the change being tested in Beta will not have a significant impact on most players. While I wasn't playing before GBG was introduced, if I had been, my reaction to this news would be simply "Well, it was great while it lasted". Frankly, grinding out 7K+ battles every GBG season is not a lot of fun. Honestly, I only do it because I can, not because I need to. Nerfing the benefit of SCs will cut my battles by about 75%, that's the bad news. The good news is that it will free up a lot of time that can be spent doing other things. In the final analysis, it will slow down my progression to end game (which isn't too far away in my case) but , so what? I'm not in a hurry to get to SAJM just to twiddle my thumbs waiting on SAT to arrive.
 

Micorps

New Member
This does not get after trying to level competition on servers if that is the objective. Each guild is effected and thus with be equally affected no matter how large or small. Ultimately, an att Cap per guild vice just the player cap now is the only way to make players change. Average a person att and add it to the guild cap like a salary cap. Either way many players disappear from servers. This current change will only affect new players to become competitive without spending money
 
Johnny B. Goode

Johnny B. Goode

Well-Known Member
I would be surprised if many long-term players quit over this. Maybe some who only know FoE with the GBG feature. Those who don't focus on only one aspect of the game will just go with the flow. I mean, if quitting over one feature made sense, I'd have quit when hyper-leveled Arcs became the norm. It's amazing how many times (and how easily) so many players jump to the "I'm gonna quit" refrain. Everyone will be equally affected, meaning no one gets an advantage, or is at a disadvantage, over this change. And that's assuming the change actually makes it to the live servers. No need for anyone to get their panties in a bunch yet. At least wait until you're actually hurt before you go crying about it.
 
MJ Artisan of War

MJ Artisan of War

Well-Known Member
i have only been playing a little over two years... worked my tail off to get into top GBG guilds on both my worlds.
These changes are a total slap in the face if they make it to live...
Predict many players will leave the game in disgust... Not because the farming party is over... but rather, because they worked long and hard to build up the attack/defense stats that high level play requires, only to have Inno wreck the rules THEY have had in place since GBG came on the scene.
Suppose when all the Big Dogs leave they will need to charge the remaining players monthly fees to pay the freight...
 

CDmark

Well-Known Member
Well, I don't see a problem with them placing some limits on GBG. Is 66% max camp support the answer, I guess that is why they have beta. I think GBG is too much, it has taken over the game (my opinion).

I have always felt 11 days is too long, 7 days would be nice.

Will this help smaller guilds? Some say no but I think it will. If 2 to 3 guilds are running the map, the other guilds are basically outer ring so maybe 1 to 2 camps, worse camp support. But then they have to face the big guild which has been doing advances all day, basically attrition-free. Now, those big, dominant guilds will be forced to take on attrition and will lose some power over the course of the day.

I too have built my 2 worlds with maximum A/D. I also built my CFs to L90 and they placed abort limits there. For the record, my CF is still very effective. My military GBs will also, still be effective, making GE a breeze. But, if a 66% cap limit is placed, then all will need those high level military GBs to offset the attrition increase. Basically, a 66% cap will reduce/eliminate farming all day and night.

I think the timing of placing limits would be the main problem. Back when GBG started and farming or map control were seen, that would have been the time to place a limit. Now, you got GBG junkies who are addicted to the FP drug. Don't get me wrong junkies, I am one too. ;)

Running some numbers on a napkin, say attrition L50 is my maximum, that means I can do 150 advances a day, 1650 advances a season. Breaking out my handy dandy Texas Instrument model-GBG calculator, loot 50% of advances, FPs to 35% of loot, 289 FP packs, 2890 FPs for diamond league, about
260 FP/day. L25 attrition max is half and L100 attrition is double. Platinum league is 7 FP and Gold is 5 FP so you would have to factor that in. Residual effects, less fragments and diamonds (goods and troops too).

You could probably take the advances per day and then calculate how many provinces your guild can take in a day. The above data doesn't include traps/decoys. Forts would affect the number of total provinces per day. In some ways, everyday would be like day 1 for attrition, when we race for the center.

So, now that I can look at with numbers. Would I quit? No.
 

Silversage

New Member
Is not nice to change the rules in the middle of the game.
Some players like me we were spending a lot of time(years) and some diamonds(= to dollars in RL) to improve the attacking/defense bonus in order to do more fights on GBG which is the part of the game that I enjoy playing.
Now you’re announcing that I’m going to see my fights count reduced ,just like that.
Let me tell you INNO, no more diamond buying from me.
What’s the reason to do something like this?
I don’t get it,
Yesterday I was enjoying the game a lot,now I’m considering deleting my account.
 
Johnny B. Goode

Johnny B. Goode

Well-Known Member
Having played this game for 7+ years gives one some perspective on things like this. There have been numerous changes to the game over the years that have sparked outrage among some players. Threats to quit. Usually all before the actual changes. Always those who are outraged are also convinced that most players share their outrage, and also believe that those who are obsessed with whatever feature is involved are the main Diamond buyers in the game. Predictions of FoE's demise also accompany every major change. Some players probably do quit, but not enough to make a difference. Change is the only constant in this game. You can get upset over it, or you can learn to roll with the punches.

Having read the announcement about this in the Beta Forum, it appears that Inno has been looking at this for some time. Players took GBG in an unintended direction. It happens. Sometimes in the past, Inno has rushed to "fix" issues and it hasn't gone well. Players rightly criticized Inno for this. In this case, it certainly appears that Inno took a measured and thoughtful approach to what they considered a problem. I think rather than exploding with outrage, players should wait first of all to see if the change even makes it to the live servers. And then go through a couple of GBG rounds and see what the actual effect of the change is. Then, if it is a deal breaker for you, quit playing. Both you and Inno will survive either way.
 
DreadfulCadillac

DreadfulCadillac

Well-Known Member
Honestly, I like this change. GBG is kind of overpowered, as are siege camps. This will balance it a bit. With attrition being more important, it may encourage players to level up attack even more though, lol

Although I get the arguments from people who have built up their cities around GbG... This is the type of change they should have released a few months after releasing GbG, not years later.
 

ChoppingBlock

New Member
Do any of the players here contribute to game development or do developers read anything here?

Consideration: extend tavern bonus for an extra turn on negotiations to GBG just like GE with new changes being trialed on beta as part of the test.
 

thathurts

Member
DreadfulCadillac1 said:
Honestly, I like this change. GBG is kind of overpowered, as are siege camps. This will balance it a bit. With attrition being more important, it may encourage players to level up attack even more though, lol

Although I get the arguments from people who have built up their cities around GbG... This is the type of change they should have released a few months after releasing GbG, not years later.
Click to expand...
omg do you work for inno this will be a disaster f world lost its number one player nerfed his city cause inno keeps coming up with crap like this, if inno goes lve with this a lot of player will fallow suit myself included
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top