Feedback for the Guild Battlegrounds Update 2023

[Angry.Blanket]

I don't want a gold star, at least not for GBG, that would probably cost me a couple hundred diamonds, have to be motivated, and come with a 14 day expiration. But you have to be aware that the GBG players are not as numerous as the passionate responders in this thread make it seem? There are really an awful lot of foe players that don't play GBG at all.

This is the flaw with this game, everyone playing a different game with different goals. No common goal for all players.

 

[Amitola1]

This is the flaw with this game, everyone playing a different game with different goals. No common goal for all players.

There is a common goal. You can read it in this thread. Everyone wants INNO to make the game better and go back to the status quo. Where big guilds could bully smaller guilds and big guilds dominate GvG so don't take GvG away and replace it with Guild Raid, what is Guild Raid anyway. There also seems to be a group with a common threat. Change the game back, make it better or I quit. In my estimation none of these three things has happened to any great degree.
In game I have seen some adaptations. Many, if not all, big guilds have increased their min GBG hits per season, leveraged their members to level their OS and ARC or be removed. A common theme in most of this type of game, "My way or the highway".

 

[Angry.Blanket]

There is a common goal. You can read it in this thread. Everyone wants INNO to make the game better and go back to the status quo. Where big guilds could bully smaller guilds and big guilds dominate GvG so don't take GvG away and replace it with Guild Raid, what is Guild Raid anyway. There also seems to be a group with a common threat. Change the game back, make it better or I quit. In my estimation none of these three things has happened to any great degree.
In game I have seen some adaptations. Many, if not all, big guilds have increased their min GBG hits per season, leveraged their members to level their OS and ARC or be removed. A common theme in most of this type of game, "My way or the highway".

Exactly, everyone is complaining about not want to compete and insisting that Inno make a league for their guild so that don have to work so hard,
Why not just play the game like it is and stop bitching about big guilds.

 

[Pericles the Lion]

Exactly, everyone is complaining about not want to compete and insisting that Inno make a league for their guild so that don have to work so hard,
Why not just play the game like it is and stop bitching about big guilds.

Not "everyone"

 

[WillyTwoShoes]

Exactly, everyone is complaining about not want to compete and insisting that Inno make a league for their guild so that don have to work so hard,
Why not just play the game like it is and stop bitching about big guilds.

Is that really all you got out of this thread? There have been any number of suggestions, complaints, ideas, observations, and questions that have nothing whatsoever to do with -complaining about competition or griping about big guilds- .

But now that you mention it I will repeat myself on one aspect of "big fighting guilds". Their conduct and actions are largely responsible for the current round of tweaks corporate Inno/foe have undertaken... well that and they are weaseling every nickel and dime they can out of GBG players.

 

[mellofax]

Please refrain from spamming the thread, this is for feedback

 

[Serbian Empire]

Please read about the Guild Battlegrounds Update here and give your feedback below.

This has been a topic of conversation within our guild on numerous occasions and I am sure other higher ranking players in other guilds have noticed the same.

How do you explain this scenario, 2 players from same guild are attacking a tile in GbG, 1st player [Progressive era] attack/defense 1k/1k, 2nd player [Titan era] attack/defense 4k/3.3k the tile that is being attacked has 5 fortified command posts as support, after 40 attacks 1st player only has 2 attrition and changed maybe 1-2 units to prevent loss where as 2nd player who is 4x stronger than 1st player gains 11 attrition and almost every other attack has to change units to prevent loss. After 100 attacks, 1st player has 10-11 attrition and 2nd player has 27 attrition. Keep in mind that we have started with ZERO attrition both.

This to me makes NO sense whatsoever, and I am sure other players would agree. All these building that supposedly provide defense mean NOTHING to a higher ranking player in GbG as the way it looks to me, 3.3k or more defense that higher ranking player has is simply not taken into consideration and is wiped by the AI that you guys are using.
I kindly ask you to fix this as it would improve quality of life for the players. Its really annoying to have to change troops every 1-2 attacks to prevent troop loss. With higher attrition 80+ yeah ok it makes sense that every could of attacks you have to change troops, but not when your attrition is in single digits and under 70-80 attrition.

 

[Orius Maximus]

Sounds like the RNG acting up again.

 

[Amitola1]

At the risk of this being considered spam I will try to make my point. I consider this feedback. After 2 seasons of the championship smaller guilds in Platinum have adapted to the new GBG. Many of them including my guild are now fighting to stay in Platinum using the new buildings to control their VP. I haven't seen the same issues stated above though. So from my point of view the changes are good for our guild and makes it more challenging and fun.

 

[Eadyth]

At the risk of this being considered spam I will try to make my point. I consider this feedback. After 2 seasons of the championship smaller guilds in Platinum have adapted to the new GBG. Many of them including my guild are now fighting to stay in Platinum using the new buildings to control their VP. I haven't seen the same issues stated above though. So from my point of view the changes are good for our guild and makes it more challenging and fun.

I don't mind that I have to struggle to stay in low diamond (reality is I struggle to alternate between high and low). It's hard. I fail a lot at my strategic plan. Failing is expected. Challenge is good. Buying first place is boring and not exciting. The reality that top spots are basically bought by buying diamonds makes top spots not coveted by me. Okay maybe coveted because it would be 1000 feathers in my cap if we ever beat them, but not coveted enough to ignore my principles as a human being: I will not push my guild members to spend money on the game and I will not push them to play beyond what they should. These are my principles. The game itself is designed to get people to break them. I get that Inno needs to get paid. So, I except this reality. I except the reality that being at the top of the leaderboard is only something available to people who spend money on the game and require that their players play more than they probably should (unless they really have nothing else to do).

 

[Amitola1]

There is one concerning aspect of GBG. We have no members in IA and 1 member in BA. That BA member is also listed as a participant in GBG which they shouldn't be. Members are not eligible to participate in GBG until they research Military Tactics which come late in the IA tech tree. Yet GBG is using IA goods. I don't know if that's the way it was before or not but I just noticed it this season. We also have no members in LMA and no LMA goods are being used for buildings. This should be changed so BA members are not being included and/or any IA goods being used in GBG as a result of this until BA member becomes eligible for GBG.

 

[Emberguard]

I don't know if that's the way it was before or not but I just noticed it this season

You just noticed

Because they're listed as a participant they're able to receive the end of season rewards. Also all Bronze Age Guild Treasury buildings will provide Iron Age goods

It also means if they were to unlock the required technology mid-season they'd immediately be able to participate

We also have no members in LMA and no LMA goods are being used for buildings

I would bet someone started the season in LMA and aged up mid-season

 

[Dominator - X]

I would bet someone started the season in LMA and aged up mid-season

If that were the case, LMA goods would continue to be used for the entire season.

 

[Amitola1]

Because they're listed as a participant they're able to receive the end of season rewards. Also all Bronze Age Guild Treasury buildings will provide Iron Age goods

It also means if they were to unlock the required technology mid-season they'd immediately be able to participate

I didn't know this. Thanks

If that were the case, LMA goods would continue to be used for the entire season.

Only true in GE. I have tested this. We had a member that have aged too far and was causing PME goods to be used in GBG. We had to remove member for other reasons and immediately no PME goods were being used in GBG. We did have a member in LMA when this season started and move to CA so with the exception of our BA member and an empty IA goods are not used for empty ages/eras.
To clarify. The PME member moved to PME mid season and a building I was looking at to build was being held up due to PME goods. They were removed also mid season and that building was held up by I believe by IA goods but not by PME goods.

 

[Dominator - X]

I didn't know this. Thanks

Only true in GE. I have tested this. We had a member that have aged too far and was causing PME goods to be used in GBG. We had to remove member for other reasons and immediately no PME goods were being used in GBG. We did have a member in LMA when this season started and move to CA so with the exception of our BA member and an empty IA goods are not used for empty ages/eras.
To clarify. The PME member moved to PME mid season and a building I was looking at to build was being held up due to PME goods. They were removed also mid season and that building was held up by I believe by IA goods but not by PME goods.

All I can say is you are either not seeing things correctly or the goods were not used for the specific buildings when you looked. GBG buildings are built using any goods from all ages that are inhabited by members of your guild at the start of GBG. The exception is if you have a member in BA, goods will be taken from IA. If a member ages up or in some way leaves the guild, those goods will continue to be drawn from that age, regardless if someone inhabits it or not.

 

[Eadyth]

I didn't know this. Thanks

Only true in GE. I have tested this. We had a member that have aged too far and was causing PME goods to be used in GBG. We had to remove member for other reasons and immediately no PME goods were being used in GBG. We did have a member in LMA when this season started and move to CA so with the exception of our BA member and an empty IA goods are not used for empty ages/eras.
To clarify. The PME member moved to PME mid season and a building I was looking at to build was being held up due to PME goods. They were removed also mid season and that building was held up by I believe by IA goods but not by PME goods.

I have heard from others and seen myself that the age mix of the guild changing (by people joining, leaving, changing ages) mid season alters what goods are required to build in GBG. If that isn't supposed to happen, either they fixed it recently or they need to fix it.

 

[Queen Rose Lovejoy]

It looks like with the new rank system GE doesn't raise guild rank at all. Since prestige and crowns no longer have any effect, GE doesn't count at all. Is that going to change?

 

[WillyTwoShoes]

I have heard from others and seen myself that the age mix of the guild changing (by people joining, leaving, changing ages) mid season alters what goods are required to build in GBG. If that isn't supposed to happen, either they fixed it recently or they need to fix it.

Ditto!

As someone who does builds for my guild I know it has happened because I have seen it myself in at least one instance 4 GBG seasons past. After dumping player no shows it significantly altered the amount of goods required for builds in several key Volcano map provinces.

 

[Dominator - X]

It looks like with the new rank system GE doesn't raise guild rank at all. Since prestige and crowns no longer have any effect, GE doesn't count at all. Is that going to change?

GE gives GP which helps increase the guild level. It is very small compared to GBG, but is cumulative and combined with GBG over time helps level up. Guild level impacts ranking in the old ranking system and is also the last (published) tie breaker in the new ranking system. So, GE does lend some, though maybe minuscule weight to the new ranking.

 

[Pericles the Lion]

Ditto!

As someone who does builds for my guild I know it has happened because I have seen it myself in at least one instance 4 GBG seasons past. After dumping player no shows it significantly altered the amount of goods required for builds in several key Volcano map provinces.

If this actually happened it is a bug. The amount of goods required to build a province building is fixed. The mix of the three required goods is dependent on the eras of the members at the time the season began.