• 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- when will it get balanced?

DevaCat

Well-Known Member
Shoot, even if all our members were so studly as to clear 100 battles each, it'd still only be 700. Nicholas002, I hate to burst your thought bubble, but even when we were competing at a lower level, the same issue was and still is there. That being match ups in GBG are supposed to be based on ACTIVE members. in no way, shape or form will 7 active members ever defeat 79 active members.
And again you repeat the false statement that match ups in GBG are supposed to be based on active members.

This has not been the case for quite a while. Wanting it to be so does not/will not make it so.
 

Nicholas002

Well-Known Member
Shoot, even if all our members were so studly as to clear 100 battles each, it'd still only be 700. Nicholas002, I hate to burst your thought bubble, but even when we were competing at a lower level, the same issue was and still is there. That being match ups in GBG are supposed to be based on ACTIVE members. in no way, shape or form will 7 active members ever defeat 79 active members.
As has been said many, many, times in this thread, and will be said again, since you seem to just not get it, matchups are based not on the number of active members, but on performance: perform well, and you are matched up with other guilds that performed well. Perform poorly, and you will be matched up with other guilds that performed poorly. see?
 

DreadfulCadillac

Well-Known Member
Shoot, even if all our members were so studly as to clear 100 battles each, it'd still only be 700. Nicholas002, I hate to burst your thought bubble, but even when we were competing at a lower level, the same issue was and still is there. That being match ups in GBG are supposed to be based on ACTIVE members. in no way, shape or form will 7 active members ever defeat 79 active members.
recruit more active members.
or if people arent joining because there isnt easy trading, 1.9 threads, etc thats a cue for you that you have to build up your city, and maybe you should disband your guild and join a active top 50 guild in the meantime.
not trying to be offensive in any way, just a suggestion
 

Algona

Well-Known Member
. That isn't balanced. You do understand the word competition don't you? It means having a fair chance at being able to win vs your opponent

Read this:


"Depending on your guild’s performance, it should move up or down in the league system. Moving up a league also means that the Battlegrounds will become even more challenging, as your guild will face more competitive rivals as it advances. "

"The guild score will then be updated, and its members will see if they have increased or dropped their progress in the League System.

League System

To ensure that there’s no substantial difference between the participating guilds on each Battleground map, we will have a League System made up of five distinct league categories: Copper, Silver, Gold, Platinum and Diamond. Newly arrived guilds will always be positioned in the Copper league. "

Where does the Announcement say anything about number of members, skill of members, participation of members or any other qualifier?

The only qualifier for League placement and moving up and down Leagues is "tour guild’s performance,"

Performance.

That;s it.

Which means your wanting, objecting, questioning, LOLing whatevering are irrelevant to nor reflect what happens in GBG.

But it will effect your Guild as I note above.

Your choices, your problems.
 

Agent327

Well-Known Member
You guys are idiots. Today we took 2 sectors while a 60+ guild took 13 in a matter of hours. How the F is that fair?!?

I say it again. GbG is garbage and F the algorithm.

It is fair cause the other way around is also possible.

Shoot, even if all our members were so studly as to clear 100 battles each, it'd still only be 700. Nicholas002, I hate to burst your thought bubble, but even when we were competing at a lower level, the same issue was and still is there. That being match ups in GBG are supposed to be based on ACTIVE members. in no way, shape or form will 7 active members ever defeat 79 active members.

Only in the initial match ups member numbers have been a factor. After that it has all been Guild achievement in GBG.
 

DeletedUser32439

get more guild member , its not rocket science.

gui;ld vs guild. why would you think a 7 member guild could compete with a 80 member guild....derpo
 

The Lady Redneck

Well-Known Member
All this wailing about GBG (or any of the warring elements of the game) being unfair because of guild size is Fooeey........In the world that has now become my main world. I am in a 3 man guild (Well 2 men and me) 1 guy is in AF and 2 of us in Iron Age. The one in AF is not keen of fighting at all so only does GE. So 2 of us do . GE, GvG and GBG.
We hold top spot in IA GvG (for that we do work with Allies)
We have a 59/0/0 trophy count for GE.
Both the above areas of the game are where we have our serious fun.

Now about how fair GBG is
We are in Gold level in GBG Purely because for the moment that is where WE want to be. GBG is where we go to have less serious fun and get some goodies. This week we are up against guilds with between 3 and 42 members. At the moment we are 3rd. How it will go as yet we cannot say. We never plant any buildings to aid us. If the guilds with more members go FMJ then we will do what it takes to stay in Gold purely by fighting. Or if we end up winning to much we back pedal so we stay in Gold.

And before you say that in that case I do not know what it is like to fight in Diamond GBG. I play in other worlds in guilds that do from no GBG at all to one that is in Diamond and FIGHTS to stay there. So I can make comparisons.. GBG works EXACTLY as it should. It is purely up to the individual guilds as to what joys or frustrations they get out of it.
 
Last edited:

Ctik

Member
I love how so many of you defend INNO in how GBG is 'working' when you are ALL missing the point that it was to be CROSS WORLD, just like GE. IF they do this, we will get matched up against a MUCH closer group of guilds where the battles wont result in alliances between the top 2 guilds wiping the other 6 guilds on their map to all but oblivion.

On the server I play, it has become so boring that most just dont give a crap any more. Its so lopsided its no fun.
 

Algona

Well-Known Member
you are ALL missing the point that it was to be CROSS WORLD, just like GE.

Wrong.

"Add cross-world leagues

Definitely an interesting thing to consider for the future...Unfortunately this would be a huge technical challenge; Guild Expedition leagues only communicate points across servers which is not a lot of data. Having real-time PvP data sent across multiple servers, trying to keep everything in sync would increase the scope of the feature incredibly. "

From the Announcement of June 15, 2019.

A little thought would explain why even if it were technically feasible cross world GBG would be a bad idea:

Older world Guilds with more established long time players would have a huge advantage. Newer world Guilds would have a difficult to near impossible task to make it to Diamond.

This is demonstrated bu INNO;'s reasoning for the timing of the release of the newest world:

"Our newest PvP feature, Guild Battlegrounds, is just around the corner, and we're super excited to deliver it to you! To celebrate this milestone in our game, we will be opening a brand new world on 15th of October! This world will be special because not only will it include all of the amazing features we've introduced over the years, but will be established enough so that when the first season of Guild Battlegrounds begins on the live servers in the coming weeks, you'll all be able to hit the ground running! "

From the Announcement of Oct 11, 2019.
 
Last edited:

Agent327

Well-Known Member
I love how so many of you defend INNO in how GBG is 'working' when you are ALL missing the point that it was to be CROSS WORLD, just like GE. IF they do this, we will get matched up against a MUCH closer group of guilds where the battles wont result in alliances between the top 2 guilds wiping the other 6 guilds on their map to all but oblivion.

On the server I play, it has become so boring that most just dont give a crap any more. Its so lopsided its no fun.

Can you show us how you have come to the knowledge that it was supposed to be cross world?
 

The Lady Redneck

Well-Known Member
On this question The last thing I am thinking of is defending INNO. Cross World would be a disaster. INNO know that

You may or may not end up against a closer group of guilds. And what might look closer to the eye does not always show the true picture. For Example....Take a guild from Birka having to face similar sized guilds from A, D, E, G, K. P and S. If I was in that Birka guild with a mix of experienced players and noobs, all of us still working to build our troop numbers, personal inventories and the guild treasury up and get the basic GBs. And saw that line up, I would be saying OH SH**!!!! OK guys lets just sit this one out. Those older worlds guilds will all have high level GBs and loaded inventories and treasuries. But even worse they will be lead by bunch of old time war gamers who will be teaching and helping any noobs they have to get powerful cities fast. I know some of these guys. Some are friends But war is war. They will chew you up and spit you out before you realized you'd been had.
 

Emberguard

Well-Known Member
You guys are idiots. Today we took 2 sectors while a 60+ guild took 13 in a matter of hours. How the F is that fair?!?
if they took 13 sectors, they have no defence 4 hrs from the time of taking those so you can just mow through the 13 sectors. If the problem is you don’t have the resources to do 13 sectors then fine, don’t aim for #1. There’s 5-8 spots per island. Go for what you can do and spend proportionate to that.

You’re placed based on your proven performance. If you think you shouldn’t be that high in the competition then prove it by performing the way you want to be placed

I think GBG is plenty fair, you get out of it what you put in. Instead of being limited by your guild size you’re able to keep going until you either reach your limits or choose to stop until attrition resets. If you’re actively working to improve yourself in GBG you’ll be pitted against likeminded guilds. If you only want to do the minimum 40 advances you’ll get beaten and put further down the ladder.
 

Graviton

Well-Known Member
You’re placed based on your proven performance. If you think you shouldn’t be that high in the competition then prove it by performing the way you want to be placed

I wonder if this is getting through...I find those kinds of complaints hilarious, actually. "My tiny guild is so good we get matched with giant guilds!" First world problems.
 

DeletedUser3485

Actually, one of the moderators told me it was based on active members, so......As far as based on performance, it can still be set up that matches guilds competitively without getting stuck on a session that stone guarantees getting knocked down a league, not because my guild didn't do well, but because of Inno's sh*tty match set up. Just saying. I'll still be fighting even through all this BS, but it just shows that Inno really isn't paying too much attention to things.
 

RazorbackPirate

Well-Known Member
Actually, one of the moderators told me it was based on active members, so......As far as based on performance, it can still be set up that matches guilds competitively without getting stuck on a session that stone guarantees getting knocked down a league, not because my guild didn't do well, but because of Inno's sh*tty match set up. Just saying. I'll still be fighting even through all this BS, but it just shows that Inno really isn't paying too much attention to things.
And the moderator is wrong, so...

The first round of GBG, Inno needed to assign an initial MMR to each guild. With no GBG history to base it on, the initial MMR was based on GvG performance, and the number of active members. One time, that's it. From that first round forward, all MMR increases and decreases have been based on performance ONLY.

We are 14 rounds in. That initial MMR has long been overtaken by actual performance. But sure, tell yourself what you want. Delusion is grand.
 

Algona

Well-Known Member
As far as based on performance, it can still be set up that matches guilds competitively

Adding another factor makes it easier for Guilds to manipulate placement.

That may or may not be bad for the game.

I'm not going to worry about it, I can't see INNO making such a change barring some really weird circumstances.
 

DeletedUser39339

I'd like some advice. I'm in a top ten global ranking guild of 40 members. Have been in Diamond League for several seasons. One season we actually got to participate in attacking and winning provinces and competing against other guilds in the way I thought Inno intended GBG to be. The other season's 2 strong guilds set up swap schedules and restricted movement on the map to your HQ and if lucky, a neighboring province. After 2 seasons of that, we were glad to be back in Platinum where we could actually compete. And no, we don't always take 1st. We understand MMR and determine our goal based on that. However, farming for rewards by 2 strong guilds seems to have caught on and has made it's way into Platinum. This current season, on day 2, the guild in 1st place told us they were mad that we removed our buildings from a sector they were just about to conquer. So either we keep our buildings in place, they will allow us to take 4th or they will pin us down to our HQ only. Obviously I don't take threats kindly but before my guild could even discuss the option, they rescinded the offer. They have aligned with 3 other guilds, who told me they felt they had no choice, can't fight a guild of 70+ when they all are half the size. And now they have pretty much pinned us in. We won't go down without a fight ... lol. The advice I am seeking is how do you all think a guild can play Battlegrounds and not Farmville. There is little motivation to play a function of the game where the outcome is predetermined and the fights are fixed and you can only hit auto battle for so long before boredom sets in.
 

Algona

Well-Known Member
They have aligned with 3 other guilds, who told me they felt they had no choice, can't fight a guild of 70+ when they all are half the size.

It's a diplomacy race. Can you set up a stronger coalition before the big Guild does?

Stay in touch with those Guild Leaders and other you meet. Next time around work with them to stomp the one Guild.

Assuming the one Guild does nothave a monstrous advantage in quality of players, 4 Guilds of 40 players coordinated properly will kick the crap out of them..

Or sign up with them.
 
Top