• 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

Build Battlegrounds has become Guild Partnership Grounds ... how to fix it

Status
Not open for further replies.

K--O

Member
I've seen a couple other posts out there on GBG imbalance but here is my take hoping that Inno will take note and make adjustments.

I'm not as concerned with the ranking as I am that it is now commonplace for 2 or 3 guilds to partner together to control the 2 inner rings thus locking out the other 3-5 guilds from really participating. While it's not cheating it does not allow for the open fighting and competition among the guilds on the map. And because the GBG rewards are really good it keeps the majority of the rewards in the hands of the guilds forming the partnership. It's no longer Guild Battle Grounds ... it's Guild Partnership Grounds

How this occurs is that 2 or 3 guilds agree to partner together to soft lock (150 out of 160 progress on the sector the other partners hold). Then as the locks expire they will finish off the last 10 on their partner's sectors (basically swapping sectors) and start the dance all over. Since 1/2 the progress is lost by any other guild hitting that sector when it is conquered if another guild tries to take the sector, the guild will finish it immediately to lock it and then likely take the sector in the next outer ring the outside guild was attacking from causing the outsider guild to lose all progress on the inner ring and be locked out of the next outer ring.

Here is a map of this happening real time today on B world. Blue, Red, Purple are in a partnership. They control the inner 2 rings and most other rings as well. Green is trying to get in but red will cut them off thus Green losing their progress. Blue, Red, and Purple have soft locks and will finish off their sectors if anyone gets close to taking one of the sectors or when the locks expire. 95% of all these sectors are full of siege camps allowing free fighting without attrition and enabling this to occur. This strategy guarantees that all 3 will stay in the diamond league.

2020-06-17 12_18_49-Forge of Empires (Large).jpg

IMO ... Inno needs to make 2 changes. And I expect all the big shots using the above tactic will provide every reason and rationale why this doesn't make sense so they can keep using this to get huge points and rewards.

1. Get rid of siege camps and watch towers all together. These buildings have become the only building used because they allows fighters to suffer 0 attrition and fight for free all day. This allows for points and rewards abuse because 1 person could literally get in 1,000 or more fights in one day and get all the rewards and game points that go along with it. Getting rid of siege camps will make sector swapping via partnerships very difficult in masses because fighters will run out of attrition.
2. Do not remove the progress of other guilds when a sector is conquered (even if the guild no longer has an adjacent sector). This will curb soft locking and partnerships because you can no longer soft lock a sector knowing that other guilds won't try and take it because they'll lose their progress when the partner guild finishes the last fight.

Do these 2 things and it will go a long way for making GBG more balanced and fair.

Alternatively, if Inno is not going to get rid of siege camps the bonus associated should be dropped to 8% with watch towers being at 2%. Thus the most any province could avoid attrition would be 40% should you have 5 bordering siege camps. At the same time reduce the bonus associated with traps and decoys to 8% and 3% respectively.
 

Agent327

Well-Known Member
Inno does not take note of a random post. They will take note of feedback regarding GBG made in the GBG Feedback thread. Put your comments there if you want them to be noticed.
 

K--O

Member
@Agent327

My apologies. Any help on where I would find GBG Feedback thread as I don't see any subtopic on GBG Feedback under General Game Feedback & Discussion
 

K--O

Member
Thanks but isn't that just for feedback related to the announcement of recent improvements?
 

DeletedUser31499

I like both ideas. We have the 4 strongest guilds in our world partnered together. Having the 4 lesser guilds on the map partner together and compete against them doesn’t work.
One idea I have is reduce the time to build traps from 5 hours to 2. Of course if siege camps and towers don’t exist no reason for traps to exist.

I don’t see Inno modifying GBG any time soon. So whatever suggestions to level the playing field will just fall on dead ears. What happened on korch was the best fighters grouped into the 4 best guilds. None of them will leave because they enjoy fighting and the rewards they win in GBG are just too great to ignore.
 

Aggressor

Active Member
IMO ... Inno needs to make 2 changes. And I expect all the big shots using the above tactic will provide every reason and rationale why this doesn't make sense so they can keep using this to get huge points and rewards.
I think you need to see this a little differently. This happens to my guild all of the time in diamond league. Then, we drop to platinum league and do it to the players there. I believe BG should have open equal opportunities for every guild, no advantages or disadvantages. Using the "Soft Lock" strategy is very brilliant, and is completely fair. If you get demoted to platinum, take advantage of the strategy there! No use being angry at, use it to your advantage!
1. Get rid of siege camps and watch towers all together. These buildings have become the only building used because they allows fighters to suffer 0 attrition and fight for free all day. This allows for points and rewards abuse because 1 person could literally get in 1,000 or more fights in one day and get all the rewards and game points that go along with it. Getting rid of siege camps will make sector swapping via partnerships very difficult in masses because fighters will run out of attrition.
I don't think Inno will do this. Siege camps and watchtowers are VERY popular, and I know a ton of people would be angry over this, probably more than are angry at the top guilds banding together.
2. Do not remove the progress of other guilds when a sector is conquered (even if the guild no longer has an adjacent sector). This will curb soft locking and partnerships because you can no longer soft lock a sector knowing that other guilds won't try and take it because they'll lose their progress when the partner guild finishes the last fight.
This may help you, but it would highly damage guilds of lower leagues, and make a whole new issue for you, worse than before! Think about it:
A gold league guild wants to jump ahead of an enemy. They take the sector that the enemy is working on. Just a few hours later, the enemy can continue advancing, undamaged! All that this did was delay the enemy progress a few hours, which isn't a big deal. Then, the guild that jumped ahead of their enemy wasted progress, because their enemy is able to take that sector back like nothing happened!
And in higher leagues, this would create a new type of soft locking, a worse kind. As soon as a flag would be set in a sector, nobody would want to take it because it would probably end up being wasted efforts. It could end up becoming an easier to accomplish version of the soft lock you are complaining about! Just imagine, Guild A and Guild B are in an alliance. Guild A can do half of the attacks to conquer a Guild B sector, and then Guild C would not want to take it, because in a few hours their efforts and attrition would be all for nothing when Guild A finishes their progress.
The cost of this idea is far worse than what is going on right now.
 
Last edited:

barra370804

Well-Known Member
They will take note of feedback regarding GBG made in the GBG Feedback thread.
I'm gonna disagree on this one, GBG has been out long enough that suggestions should take form as a proposal and not feedback. The feedback thread is mostly dead. It's been months since it was released.
 

Agent327

Well-Known Member
I'm gonna disagree on this one, GBG has been out long enough that suggestions should take form as a proposal and not feedback. The feedback thread is mostly dead. It's been months since it was released.

Not the feedback thread I referred to. That is still very much alive and although it is about improvements the points raised here have taken over that thread.

I said it before and I say it again. Fastest way to reach the devs is through the feedback threads. Especially if they are still active.

Anything you put in a proposal will go through the proposal proces and when voted down will never reach the devs. Feedback always does.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top