This. I have been monitoring the changes on Beta and think, despite the complaints, this is a net improvement. Despite having the A/D boost to fight through all of GE and the goods to negotiate all of GE as well, I've been exclusively negotiating in GBG.The Guild Battlegrounds' attrition behavior has been re-balanced to improve the overall experience.
I agree it's a bold change in the right direction. GBG favors farmer too much, and I was one of the few who mentioned it. However, consider how many think GBG is perfect balance-wise, we can expect a new round of whining from the fanboys this time lol. I don't know how often it happens, but it's certainly refreshing to me to see Inno not giving way to fanboiz~This. I have been monitoring the changes on Beta and think, despite the complaints, this is a net improvement. Despite having the A/D boost to fight through all of GE and the goods to negotiate all of GE as well, I've been exclusively negotiating in GBG.
...
We'll see how it works in reality, but thanks for having the boldness to change this so quickly after introduction.
Agreed. As I said, I've been monitoring this change on Beta and the complaints we hear are all the same old, same old. I also agree it will be fun to watch the newest round of whining.I agree it's a bold change in the right direction. GBG favors farmer too much, and I was one of the few who mentioned it. However, consider how many think GBG is perfect balance-wise, we can expect a new round of whining from the fanboys this time lol. I don't know how often it happens, but it's certainly refreshing to me to see Inno not giving way to fanboiz~
As a player with an underdeveloped city on beta, I can say that this change balances out negotiation/fighting at the low end. Previously, I automatically did negotiations even though I have few goods because I was getting 2 advances each. Now it is almost a toss-up as to whether to fight or negotiate at the low end because fighting got easier while negotiating got more expensive.GBG is now going to be even less newer player friendly with attrition rising quicker early on, where I felt the first couple of attrition levels should have risen slower to let players get a few more battles or negotiations in during this period, then rise up.
Ya, the balance part of battles vs negotiation is fine. What I'd like to see is for it to be possible to do more battles and negotiations at 0 to 2 attrition to entice newer/weaker players in the guild into playing more. In my guilds the participation is very stratosphered, with less lower ability players participating than in GE. When asked, I overwhelmingly hear it is because GBG is too hard and over way too quick. Everyone would benefit by getting to do a few more encounters overall which would even out across the board, but at the low end players wouldn't feel like they are out of the ability to participate within just a couple of encounters. Likewise, while I like the idea of infinitely increasing attrition at the top end, I feel it increases way too quickly making upgrading your city not feel like a good ROI for those in the end game stage. There is no reason that this feature can't cater to both types of players.As a player with an underdeveloped city on beta, I can say that this change balances out negotiation/fighting at the low end. Previously, I automatically did negotiations even though I have few goods because I was getting 2 advances each. Now it is almost a toss-up as to whether to fight or negotiate at the low end because fighting got easier while negotiating got more expensive.
My question is what is their performance in GE? Are they hitting 8+ encounters a day? If not, is it reasonable to expect that they'll hit 10+ attrition per day? To many marginal players, GE is a stretch. No way these folks are going to put in the effort to either build their cities for GBG, or spend their resources in GBG.Ya, the balance part of battles vs negotiation is fine. What I'd like to see is for it to be possible to do more battles and negotiations at 0 to 2 attrition to entice newer/weaker players in the guild into playing more. In my guilds the participation is very stratosphered, with less lower ability players participating than in GE. When asked, I overwhelmingly hear it is because GBG is too hard and over way too quick. Everyone would benefit by getting to do a few more encounters overall which would even out across the board, but at the low end players wouldn't feel like they are out of the ability to participate within just a couple of encounters. Likewise, while I like the idea of infinitely increasing attrition at the top end, I feel it increases way too quickly making upgrading your city not feel like a good ROI for those in the end game stage. There is no reason that this feature can't cater to both types of players.
They are. The higher attrition you achieve each day, the more rewards you get. The real issue alluded to with this comment is being an over performing member of an under performing guild, being stuck in a lower league with commensurate rewards as a result. I feel you, but that's an issue of guild members not an issue of GBG.Maybe rewards should be tied to your attrition level some way?
Other than to eliminate complaints from those who can't deal with limits, what's the point?Maybe this game just needs a flat out single player king of the hill slug fest feature added for fighting. Maybe similar to GBG, but with no or very slowly increasing attrition, and more players and sectors per map.
But that's not what's happening. It slows attrition for earlier fights and accelerates attrition for early negotiations. At attrition 35, old and new negotiations are the same, at level 90 old and new fights are about the same. The adjustment is to make fighting as favorable as negotiations in the early stages of attrition.Hmm, if the attrition changes make it harder at the beginning, particularly for newer players, I have to agree that's not really a good thing. It's like I've been saying over in the GBG thread, one of the problems with GvG is that it isn't friendly to newbies. If it's too hard for the new players to make any sort of meaningful contribution to the game, then we run the risk of them not bothering with the feature. It's not good if GBG ends up getting like GvG where only a tiny number of die hards bother with it.
As for the AD, are those buildings right? I know I've seen the Carousel in there, and I'm pretty sure I've seen the Tholos. Trees of Love? Lol.
But that's not what's happening. It slows attrition for earlier fights and accelerates attrition for early negotiations. At attrition 35, old and new negotiations are the same, at level 90 old and new fights are about the same. The adjustment is to make fighting as favorable as negotiations in the early stages of attrition.
As far as the AD, some of the items are moving from the shelf only to the shelf and auctions.
I like the idea, it makes player interest and guild interest align more, like GE. But you'd also have to change how traps/decoys and siege camp work.Maybe rewards should be tied to your attrition level some way?
Details are still being tracked down. But here is a table posted by andreab on the beta forum:Where can I find the actual change to the attrition behavior? Hard to comment when there's no detail provided.
Before | After | |||
Attrition | Military | Negotiation | Military | Negotiation |
5 | 10% | 1 | 12% | 2 |
9 | 30% | 2 | 27% | 3 |
15 | 70% | 3 | 61% | 4 |
23 | 200% | 4 | 126% | 5 |
30 | 340% | 6 | 203% | 6 |
34 | 420% | 7 | 255% | 7 |
42 | 580% | 8 | 378% | 8 |
49 | 720% | 10 | 507% | 9 |
90 | 1540% | 18 | 1740% | 20 |
100 | 1750% | 20 | 2275% | 22 |
106 | 1750% | 20 | 2569% | 23 |
113 | 1750% | 20 | 3056% | 24 |
That isn't quite the case.And as you can see, In the first 5 attrition the battles and negotiations are all tougher.
Attrition | Old Atk | New Atk |
---|---|---|
0 | 0% | 0% |
1 | 2% | 2% |
2 | 4% | 4% |
3 | 6% | 6% |
4 | 8% | 9% |
5 | 10% | 12% |
6 | 15% | 15% |
7 | 20% | 19% |
8 | 25% | 23% |
9 | 30% | 27% |
10 | 35% | 32% |