ghost guilding

Status
Not open for further replies.

DeletedUser6569

I have been playing GVG since it has been opened..
I have spent good bit of money on this game which now will cease until the ghost guilding has subsided...
my other friends have decided to do the same..
not worth playing ....
I know a lot of discussion has been about this
and still no answer has been met...
the iPhone should be put on hold until this is fixed or your gonna lose a lot of money

my list of friends who will not spend anymore money

dinnifer
diamondback
tramanor
xshaunx420
bobka
fatal felix
avaguitar
tanktastic
xelynn


and the list of friends will continue


you all know sige cost starts at 300 and at least 20 members to make a guild
 

DeletedUser8944

Raising siege cost and limiting members of a guild is not the best way to stop "pirate guilds" I have said it before and repeat it again the way to slow them is the not allow any sector including HQ to be released under Shield/Protection then the cost of sieges will go up more and more for the first 24 hours also to not allow the HQ garrison to be deleted in order to move the HQ more than once that will hinder "pirate guilds" the best and not hinder or not allow the small guilds from starting in GvG. So please stop asking to raise the siege cost to allow the diamond players and big guilds to rule GvG
 

DeletedUser2145

And for that list of folks who will not spend money, you have a larger list of folks who will spend money because your friends above just opened the window for someone to progress beyond them. Don't take this the wrong way, my point being that if some feature was costing Inno a huge amount of profit, I'm sure they would have made some changes urgently to prevent that. However, people love the game for different reasons. Some folks buy buildings because of their graphics, some enjoy PvP so they purchase units and use diamonds for healing them, some like special event buildings and do extra purchases when an event takes place, and some just don't want to wait for constructions and goods collecting so they use diamonds for instant constructing and researching. And some love the way GvG works now.

Someone new will come across the game and start buying the diamonds you've decided to stop buying. Don't you think it sounds better to add features because they'll make the game more enjoyable and appealing to both old and new players, instead of adding them because someone will stop playing? I'll stop paying is a rather weak argument for making a change in my opinion, one can do so much better than that.

And I believe the topic has been discussed enough to tell us that 1) we don't need an excessive entry cost for GvG or to be forced to be part of large guilds; 2) there are a few existing proposals with some support from the community. I would suggest you support an existing one instead of starting a new one. It will only be harder for a single idea to shine out if everyone starts a different thread for their own.
 

DeletedUser13001

Sadly I agree with dinnifer on this issue. I am not going to hold money over inno's head because I for one haven't spent enough to be of notice. However I do speak for alot of players when I say that the Ghosting is hurting the integrity of the GvG. It has been proven time and time again that no matter how strong the guild and its sectors are, a ghost guild can rip right thru them. That being the case, why even spend goods and try to take them in the first place. Months of work can be undone by a ghost guild in a few hours.

However there are lots of simple fixes. You could place Guild Level requirements to access certain ages of the GvG map. Like add 2 guild levels need per age to fight in that portion of GvG. So example Iron Age requires lvl 0 guild. EMA lvl 2. HMA lvl4 .... PME lvl 16.
OR you could add a few requirements to the 7 day rule. Make it where they can't join/create any guild for 7 days. Also you could make it where sectors under protection cannot be released. Things like this would make it so difficult no one would want to ghost.
 

DeletedUser8944

I have a feeling this is going to end up like the hood merge system when no one can agree with anyone else, as some want to gut the whole system and some that just want to leave it as is and to many in the middle for anyone to agree on one thing that could actually help. But raising the initial siege cost and limiting the number of members will ruin GvG and leave it stagnate but that seems to be what that big guilds want and apparently they are the only ones that should be happy. BTW I know more people that left the game because GvG and they spent a lot of diamonds too
 

DeletedUser13003

I find it VERY ironic that a post concerning "ghosting" and a list of those that would like to protest such "ghosting" includes multiple individuals that particpate heavily in "ghosting". It's easy to watch the maps on a daily basis and identify who is responsible for or active in ghosting and it just so happens that some of those individuals actively ghosting are listed with those that are now not going to spend money unless the process is changed. There doesn't necessarily have to be sweeping changes to the game to eliminate ghosting, the individuals that play the game need to change how they operate and play the game in the manner in which the developers intended and stop trying to cheat the system. If you don't like the idea of "ghosting" don't participate in ghosting. Especially don't complain about something if you are one of the overall problems, in that case you have the power to fix it on your own. Just my opinion
 

DeletedUser3088

Well my guild in A world has steadily been in the top 3 in GVG since inception. However, in the recent weeks Ghosting has become the standard attack. As other have said; months of work is undone. The only defense against a ghost attack from a large guild is to pull your sectors and save at least some of your goods.

There is no reason for a guild to act in a cooperative fashion. The purpose of GVG for top 4 or 5 guilds now in A world is to grief other guilds and to gain battle points. No purpose in holding lands.

Our guild has been trying to get this fixed for awhile now; but GVG is pointless now.
 

DeletedUser12455

Agreed, Vrair. As a member in your guild, why would I give away my goods to GvG in support of the guild, when ghost guilds will just come in and wipe all those goods away? There is no incentive for a guild effort in GvG. Thus, GvG is now officially dead (for me, and likely for the guild) until Innos provides a fix.

Longterm, players will get bored with the game and find something else to do. I've already noticed guild members who are less engaged with the game than they were prior to when all this ghosting started.
 

DeletedUser7536

If guild leaders would stop giving trusted rights to everyone then this problem would be solved....If a player doesn't have trusted rights they can't release sectors.....Why is this so hard for people to understand??
 

DeletedUser7647

Heavens no. Stop buying and Inno will listen. Phantom is just a tool of Inno is trying to get you to change you mind. Every cent you deny Inno hurts Inno. If someone is fool enough to spend their hard earned dollar on this unfair game it is their problem. Inno will never stop until more (much more) players stop buying diamonds.
 

Lutek

If guild leaders would stop giving trusted rights to everyone then this problem would be solved....If a player doesn't have trusted rights they can't release sectors.....Why is this so hard for people to understand??
I Agree with Princess Anne, trusted rights should be given only to a real trusted members.

- - - Updated - - -

Heavens no. Stop buying and Inno will listen. Phantom is just a tool of Inno is trying to get you to change you mind. Every cent you deny Inno hurts Inno. If someone is fool enough to spend their hard earned dollar on this unfair game it is their problem. Inno will never stop until more (much more) players stop buying diamonds.
The Phantom is not a InnoGames's tool, he is a great forum moderator, even if sometimes I do not agree with his opinions I respect his points of view.
 

DeletedUser2145

If you actually cared enough to read the elaborate post I've written above, you would have realized you're so wrong your post makes no sense. I'm not changing anyone's mind, I haven't even encouraged anyone to continue spending diamonds, but have simply pointed out that their idea's chance of success would be FAR better if the reason for adding it is to implement something that will be appealing to both old and new customers and bring in more profit, rather than saying here's a list of few folks ready to not give any more money if this isn't fixed. The latter is a demand, it's nothing appealing and if this was my very own business I would point those with such claims to the door. The business would not be yours and thus you're not entitled to demands. You purchase stuff in the game, you do not purchase rights to the game.

But this isn't my business, it is Inno's. They like hearing what their customers have to say. Yet how you say things can still make all the difference in the world and here I am giving advice to OP on how to better construct their proposal so that it's better received by the parties it is aimed at. Tell me, Mr. SFDBN, how exactly am I a tool of Inno? And how exactly is your post constructive or helping to anyone when it doesn't even mention anything about OP's idea?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser5556

Heavens no. Stop buying and Inno will listen. Phantom is just a tool of Inno is trying to get you to change you mind. Every cent you deny Inno hurts Inno. If someone is fool enough to spend their hard earned dollar on this unfair game it is their problem. Inno will never stop until more (much more) players stop buying diamonds.
Without volunteers like Phantom we wouldn't even have a Forum so I would like to start by thanking them all for the work they do on our behalf. It is much appreciated. I have found Phantom's comments very helpful and any critisim from him constructive in nature. Although I don't always agree I usually still gain further insight into topic being discussed.
 

DeletedUser6316

I would think that this abuse problem is easy to solve.
New guilds should not be able to participate in GvG for 30days and a minimum of 15 players in a guild are required and those players must be with their new guild 7 days before they can participate in GvG.

Additionally once you conquer a sector you can not free it for 7 days.

I think that would be plenty to nip the problem.

Keep in mind abusive play is bad for business we come here to have a little fun, if the game becomes too frustrating people will move on.

I'm sure if we put our heads together we can come up with ways to put an end to abusive play without affecting Innogames revenue.
 

DeletedUser8944

I would think that this abuse problem is easy to solve.
New guilds should not be able to participate in GvG for 30days and a minimum of 15 players in a guild are required and those players must be with their new guild 7 days before they can participate in GvG.
Um NO as this would allow only the big guild to control GvG and as I said before they seem to be the only one who want this changed, for the most part

Additionally once you conquer a sector you can not free it for 7 days.
Sounds good to me better than the 24 ban I suggested but does seem a bit long but if you take a sector you should hold it. As a certain guild in F world not mine but not saying who it is but they have removed several guilds from GvG maps and either kept the sectors or or left then for other guilds to come in and take so in short if you don't aggravate other guilds this probably would not happen but I understand too that some just want to attack anyone they see fit and guess what that's there right to. If that's means they have 1 person or 10 people it does not mean they should not be allowed to play on the GvG map regardless of how long the guilds be established, so I think if you don't allow sector to be granted freedom after being taken for how ever long INNO thinks is appropriate would help to stem this issue
 

mousetrap62

I do think a guild should not be able to participate until they have been around a set time. I think two weeks is good. At least test it out. plus the members must be part of the guild for a set time. Say 7 - 10 days. at least this would be a start. There are so many ghost guilds springing up I am starting to wonder if ghost guilds are forming their own ghost guilds.
 

DeletedUser8152

There was never a clear proposal here, and the discussion is perhaps outdated in light of the upcoming change to a guild's ability to move HQ multiple times per day. For those reasons I will close this thread.

Of course, general discussions about GvG, ghost guilding, or anything else are always welcome in the Forge Hall forum.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.