• 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

Cheating in GBG

UnStopaBull

New Member
Diamonds will be spent where there will be competition in GBG but if guilds will team up and use each others siege camps and won't allow other guilds to fight who and where diamonds will be used. Inno must think about this issue in terms of their profitability also:)
diamonds are spent all over our map..we diamond many SCs to use against you. of course we win them from BG all day as well
 

UnStopaBull

New Member
Let’s go back to original design..I could battle endlessly without any SCs. As far as farming , think it’s pretty good for my guild ..questing is a lot like farming and all my guild had chance to get the Space Carrier for cheap because of my farming/questing. We also have a few powerful arcs partly from farming which has allowed us to give 1.95 on some GBs ro our guild so they benefit as well. Try again on explaining how farming is bad for my guild.
 

Emberguard

Senior Ingame Moderator
At least someone understood my point. In my opinion GBG should be moderated like GE so that alliance among guilds is not possible and fair play can be played and deserving guild wins
GE balance isn’t any better then GBG. I regularly get a couple guilds do 100%+ and the rest get 2-8% each week

Random isn’t going to stop your guild from being unable to compete. It’ll just make it so you're not matched based on the capabilities of any of the guilds
 

DeletedUser17813

GBG was iintroduced in the game with an idea that smaller players and guild who are not able to compete in GVG can also enjoy fights in the game but all this idea is of no use. In GBG few big guilds are teaming up and making alliances. They take over whole map rotate tiles among themselves and not allowing smaller guilds to fight. They hold tiles at 150-159 fights and take as they see other guilds hitting that tile. Also they use each others siege camps so that they have to spend less of diamonds and goods. Now smaller guilds don't want to try for higher leagues as they won't be able to fight with these alliances of bigger guilds. Bigger guilds are becoming more bigger as active players of smaller guilds leaving those guilds to join those big guilds so that they can play games. In the end all this thing is not making smaller players to enjoy the game and lossing their interest in game so this issue must be taken care of ASAP
I find this thread to be extremely ironic considering the OP is/was in a guild that did exactly this and that guild bragged about it and loved doing it and even ran their mouths about being able to do it. Holding smaller guilds to their HQ only and holding tiles etc etc...They didn't have any problems doing that when they were able to but now that they have been destroyed and have fallen apart now they seem to have a problem with it. You reap what you sow Vengeance players. You threatened guilds that didn't help you, you threatened guilds that helped us and you bragged about it the whole time. Go home OP and get your paci out of your mouth and work on improving your own city and your own guild instead of worrying about anything else. You all are getting what you deserve. You bullied other guilds and now you're the ones getting destroyed. Now you wanna change the rules because it is happening to you now? Where were you when you were doing it to other guilds? Pretty pathetic OP. What must be taken care of asap is your whining about what you all did to your so called "smaller guilds". You are the problem with FoE. You come on here and complain and cry until Inno can't listen to you anymore and just wants you to shut up. So instead of leaving a system that works fine, they cater to people like you because you cry about it the whole time. You wanna weaken the game because you are weak and your guild is weak. Grow stronger like everyone else that doesn't cry about it does and quit trying to force inno to weaken the game.
 

DeletedUser40143

I find this thread to be extremely ironic considering the OP is/was in a guild that did exactly this and that guild bragged about it and loved doing it and even ran their mouths about being able to do it. Holding smaller guilds to their HQ only and holding tiles etc etc...They didn't have any problems doing that when they were able to but now that they have been destroyed and have fallen apart now they seem to have a problem with it. You reap what you sow Vengeance players. You threatened guilds that didn't help you, you threatened guilds that helped us and you bragged about it the whole time. Go home OP and get your paci out of your mouth and work on improving your own city and your own guild instead of worrying about anything else. You all are getting what you deserve. You bullied other guilds and now you're the ones getting destroyed. Now you wanna change the rules because it is happening to you now? Where were you when you were doing it to other guilds? Pretty pathetic OP. What must be taken care of asap is your whining about what you all did to your so called "smaller guilds". You are the problem with FoE. You come on here and complain and cry until Inno can't listen to you anymore and just wants you to shut up. So instead of leaving a system that works fine, they cater to people like you because you cry about it the whole time. You wanna weaken the game because you are weak and your guild is weak. Grow stronger like everyone else that doesn't cry about it does and quit trying to force inno to weaken the game.
Real classy Toe
 
I find this thread to be extremely ironic considering the OP is/was in a guild that did exactly this and that guild bragged about it and loved doing it and even ran their mouths about being able to do it. Holding smaller guilds to their HQ only and holding tiles etc etc...They didn't have any problems doing that when they were able to but now that they have been destroyed and have fallen apart now they seem to have a problem with it. You reap what you sow Vengeance players. You threatened guilds that didn't help you, you threatened guilds that helped us and you bragged about it the whole time. Go home OP and get your paci out of your mouth and work on improving your own city and your own guild instead of worrying about anything else. You all are getting what you deserve. You bullied other guilds and now you're the ones getting destroyed. Now you wanna change the rules because it is happening to you now? Where were you when you were doing it to other guilds? Pretty pathetic OP. What must be taken care of asap is your whining about what you all did to your so called "smaller guilds". You are the problem with FoE. You come on here and complain and cry until Inno can't listen to you anymore and just wants you to shut up. So instead of leaving a system that works fine, they cater to people like you because you cry about it the whole time. You wanna weaken the game because you are weak and your guild is weak. Grow stronger like everyone else that doesn't cry about it does and quit trying to force inno to weaken the game.
I was waiting for Toe and Bull's replies:)
 

Dominator - X

Active Member
GBG was iintroduced in the game with an idea that smaller players and guild who are not able to compete in GVG can also enjoy fights in the game but all this idea is of no use. In GBG few big guilds are teaming up and making alliances. They take over whole map rotate tiles among themselves and not allowing smaller guilds to fight. They hold tiles at 150-159 fights and take as they see other guilds hitting that tile. Also they use each others siege camps so that they have to spend less of diamonds and goods. Now smaller guilds don't want to try for higher leagues as they won't be able to fight with these alliances of bigger guilds. Bigger guilds are becoming more bigger as active players of smaller guilds leaving those guilds to join those big guilds so that they can play games. In the end all this thing is not making smaller players to enjoy the game and lossing their interest in game so this issue must be taken care of ASAP
I guess I look at it differently. I have been on the inside and the outside of these agreements. However, when I find myself on the outside, I try to make arrangements with other guilds that are also struggling, with the goal of making some headway. Sometimes it works, sometimes it fails. However, I can't fathom asking the game developers to change the parameters, to make it.... more fair. Maybe I am a glutton for punishment, but I enjoy trying to apply different strategies to overcome obstacles, even if they fail. We figured out how to get to the Diamond League with low participation, while the majority of those who do participate are under 10 points a season. Some eve at 1. I am sure others can say the same thing. We may not stay in Diamond perpetually, but we sure won't be asking INNO to change things so we can stay.
 

Dominator - X

Active Member
After thinking about it for a bit, maybe point deterioration would work, diamond only. This leaves GBG feasible for smaller guilds in lower tiers but makes holding tiles without taking them more difficult in diamond.

Doesn't have to be these numbers exactly, but something like losing half the points on a tile for each hour that passes seems like the kind of challenge diamond tier guilds should be able to manage.
Point deterioration would just let us hold the tile longer and give more opps to farm it. I like it. ;~}
 

BruteForceAttack

Well-Known Member
Point deterioration would just let us hold the tile longer and give more opps to farm it. I like it. ;~}

Exactly...make it easy to farm and make it unlimited mine.... So guild A flags a sector to 150/160 with 0 attrition loss....Game over 1hr reduces to 100/160.....Guild A again without loss of attrition bumps the flag back to 150/160....lol:cool::po_O:rolleyes::oops:
 

Dominator - X

Active Member
Exactly...make it easy to farm and make it unlimited mine.... So guild A flags a sector to 150/160 with 0 attrition loss....Game over 1hr reduces to 100/160.....Guild A again without loss of attrition bumps the flag back to 150/160....lol:cool::po_O:rolleyes::oops:
I like LadySansaStark's proposal better: Cut the points in half, which would give us more advances. :~}
 

mangelwurzel

Active Member
I'd suggest getting rid of Siege Camps (and Watchtowers), and also make attrition have no upper limit. That would reduce the personal rewards that any player can gain, while still allowing people with stronger cities and stronger guilds to get more rewards. Other side effects might include... Large guilds would have more of an advantage over small guilds than they already do. Traps and fortresses might need to be re-balanced with each other. There'd be less fighting, and fewer tiles changing hands. The overall pace of GBG would slow down, and become less frantic.

An alternative would be to get rid of Siege Camps, but still keep Watchtowers. So there'd still be ways to reduce attrition, but there would almost never be any attrition-free tiles.

As an analogy, if there were a way to gain true immortality by harvesting other people's organs, bad stuff would happen, because the temptation would be too great. But if you could only gain a few years of life, no matter what horrors you performed, then fewer people would do it. It's hard to hold out when all the incentives are pulling you into doing something.

Lead us not into temptation.
 

Vger

Well-Known Member
I think one of the better ideas proposed to address this problem was made way back in Dec. 2019 in this post on the Beta forum by @dontwannaname.
'The Dance' hadn't fully evolved yet, but I give credit to dontwanna for seeing it coming.

This is just a copy paste from beta. Just curious what people think of this proposal 6 months later.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Proposal:
Change the probability of Siege Camps and Watchtowers to do multiplicative stacking instead of additive stacking. In order to maintain balance, it might be necessary to also change Decoys and Traps to use multiplicative stacking.

Reason:
According to The Envoy:
If it was possible for a player to play all day, it means that those players could contribute so much that all players with normal contribution amounts (let's say ~20 advances) would feel as if they are not contributing at all. Just imagine if someone who "broke" the 1750% attack penalty wall could go to 1000+ attrition. How would the small guild member who "only" contributed up to 20 attrition feel in comparison?
I take this to mean that players should not be able to do almost unlimited encounters a day. And yet the placement of multiple Siege Camps allows provinces to be conquered while accumulating 0 attrition. While Siege Camps can counter the effect of Traps, there is nothing to counter the effect of Siege Camps. An effective Siege Camp strategy allows guild members to engage in almost unlimited encounters.

Details:
Currently, the abilities of province buildings stack additively. One Siege Camp provides a 24% chance of 0 attrition. Two Siege Camps provide a 48% chance of 0 attrition. Four Siege camps provide a 96% chance of 0 attrition. And with over 4 Siege Camps, no attrition accumulates.

With this change, one Siege Camp would still provide a 24% chance of 0 attrition. Two Siege Camps would provide a 1 - (1 - .24)^2 or 42.2% chance of 0 attrition. Four Siege Camps would provide a 1 - (1 - .24)^4 or 66.6% chance of 0 attrition.

In order to maintain balance, Traps and Decoys may also needs to undergo the same modification. The costs of the buildings may also need adjustment.

Summary:

As currently implemented, Siege Camps can be used in a way that appears to violate the intent of the game designers. This proposal is intended to restore the intent without eliminating the usefulness of the Siege Camp.
 

DeletedUser34893

If the Fps, diamonds, SoH fragments, goods, and all the other rewards would be all put in the league placement chests. then guilds would be fighting 100% for placement, and not farming. it would make GbG the way it was intended to be played....
This is a radical thought. I like it! Now divide the winnings up equally among all guild members and see how fast fingers are pointing to those accused of not doing or paying their share and guilds booting or members leaving. This would make the game so much more enjoyable as all the drama plays out.
 

DeletedUser16744

Why don't we just change the title of this thread from "cheating in gbg" to "my mom told me to cry a lot because there are people out there who are better than me". So many people trying to come up with ideas to have the host of this game punish those players who have built their cities to the point that they can fight almost endlessly. They want Inno to do it for them instead of doing it themselves. The first and simplest answer to the whining is to advance your city to the same level as those you are competing against. 5-6 ideas on how to restrict players from doing well instead of just becoming advanced enough on your own to compete against and stop them.
 
Only way I could see the Siege camp use be nerfed would be instead of the SCs accumulating first that the total SC percentage amount be reduced by total decoy or trap amount placed and the leftover amount be the attrition chance. Example at the moment is you can place 4-5 SCs and never worry about any traps placed. Nerfed way of 4 camps giving 96 going against 3 traps giving 135 percent double attrition should be no chance at not gaining attrition, 39% chance at double and 61% at normal attrition. I could see that as a way to possibly balance the whiners but I do like the current set up as I eat like a pig in GBG.
 

mamboking053

Well-Known Member
I do agree there's a problem with the farming dance. I can't imagine this is what Inno ever envisioned GBG becoming. It's become a problem with the guilds that engage in it, as well as the guilds locked out because of it.

The root of the problem are the rewards and the people fighting to get those rewards. Between guilds, two guilds locking out the others means two guilds suck up most all the rewards. Worse, is that inside those guilds, the strongest members race to suck up the rewards before their weaker guild mates.

The biggest guilds get bigger at the expense of the smaller guilds, the biggest players get bigger at the expense of their smaller guild mates. More for me, less for thee. Greedy pigs feeding at the trough, for whom more than enough is never enough.

I shut down my city on R because of this, and just left my guild on W because of this. In both worlds, I was in guilds at the top doing the farming. In both guilds I was also at the top earning rewards. In both guilds, I had the capacity to push harder to earn even more. But to do that, I'll have to become a greedy bastard like the players I now loath. Becoming the player I hate, is something I'm not inclined to do.

I've had my fill of the strongest players refusing to touch any province with less than 4 Siege Camps for fear they'll take attrition and miss out on more rewards later in the day. I've had my fill of those same players, leaving the crap provinces for the smaller players, forcing those with the least capacity, to take the most attrition. I've had my fill of seeing the players who could use a hand up, get stomped down by their own guild mates.

On W, in the first round of GBG, we were in Silver League. We worked together to grow our capacity, our abilities, and our guild. We worked our way up through Gold, through Platinum, and finally to Diamond. Our first round in Diamond we were invited into a farming alliance. Once that happened all guild cooperation went out the window.

A mere 5 days in and the big boys now refused to touch any province with less than 4 Siege Camps. A mere 5 days in and the big boys were now complaining about the junior members not 'stepping up' to take the provinces with only 2 or 3 Siege Camps they now refused to touch. Provinces that needed to be taken to set the big boys up for the next provinces with 4 or more Siege Camps. A mere 5 days in and the big boys were now racing each other to fill the flags as fast as possible, lest another guild mate get the rewards first.

Now there's no going back. Pandora is out of the box, and reeking her havoc. Havoc I want no part of.

I'm not sure what this means for me moving forward. For now, it means taking a break from the game to reassess. To me, GBG is irreparably broken, for me GBG has broken the game. This behavior has sucked out all the joy and left me filled with angst. With this now the game, for me, it's likely time to move on.

As a free to play player, my leaving has no financial impact on Inno. Good riddance from their perspective, I'm sure. For me, with no financial investment in the game, the only loss is the time invested, time already lost anyway. Time that moving forward can certainly be invested in more fulfilling activities, activities that give me joy.

I'll give it a few weeks to see how I feel then. Either continue under a broken system, or delete my cities and move on. I'm still on the fence, we'll see.
A solution to this might be to make the rewards received proportionate to the amount of attrition reduction. Meaning the less amount of attrition, the less amount of rewards. The more the attrition, the more probably you are to receive the rewards.

Seems fair because 0 attrition is basically "easy mode" and since when does easy mode grant you the most rewards in a game?

It also doesn't ruin the function of sieges, which is to make it easier to claim a sector and gain points to win the game. This will give the player the choice to either farm or win. Can't be helped if they can do both though, lol.
 
Last edited: