Of course, please feel free to discuss the Guild Battleground Update topics here!
Your Forge of Empires Team
Your Forge of Empires Team
Agreed, variation is the spice of life in these things. The lack of variation I think is why GE gets dry, and I don't want to see GBG get dry in that way.I'm excited Battlegrounds is coming, I'm disappointed it will take so long.
One addition to the wish list if it's not too late, please make multiple maps for different numbers of guilds with multiples of each. This will also help to keep each round exciting and different. It was said previously that 5 - 8 guilds would compete in a single round. Instead of having one map set up for 8 guilds with one or more empty starting provinces in a round, with one map played over and over again will get quite boring.
Please make one or more maps with 5 starting zones, one or more with 6, 7, and 8. Map variance, along with guild number variance, along with starting zone variance, along with province battle variance will help to keep BG engaging round after round.
I also hope they keep us updated as things progress, even just dropping some more artwork. The next big opportunity for players to comment is when it shows up on beta. I expect with a new feature of this magnitude, it will change some there, and if settlements are any example, possibly for months after going live.I'm fine with INNO taking as long as they need to get GBG right,
This was a fine update, I appreciate the information.
I don't agree with the rationale behind not using the Support Pool GBs' ;tis a flimsy argument at best. I suspect that instead of using the GBs we have and making them more attractive we'll be getting new GBs for GBG. Which prosoect could be said is giving me the heebie geebies... Sowwy.
I hope this isn't the last update. I'd like to see mointhly(?) progress reports with updates on further design decisions and whatever details can be shared so we can continue to see ad give feedback on what's going on.
Although given the feedback for this update, maybe INNO has either nailed it or folk don;t care because it is 6+ months out?
That's because GE is fairly predictable. This won't be with players directly affecting the outcome.The lack of variation I think is why GE gets dry, and I don't want to see GBG get dry in that way.
Yeah but it'll likely be the big GvG guilds facing off against each other after the first few weeks depending on how much they want to participate. You won't have them swamping a map with smaller guilds that won't be able to win against them. They'll have the best overall rankings, but guilds who do put the effort into GvG, GE, and this deserve to have the higher ranks because they earned them. Meanwhile, the smaller guilds can make progress by taking on guilds that are more their equals, and maybe it'll generate more interest than GvG has.Also from the looks for it, GVG guilds will still dominate the guild ranking.
Personally, I don't want any formalized alliance function. If guilds want to create alliances, fine, but I don't want an embedded system that encourages or systematizes alliances.Eventually maybe when/ if alliances are added, the total amount of sectors controlled would be distributed amongst the guilds allied.?
Agreed. Players who enjoy forming alliances already have GvG which is not going away. I don't think it's necessary to add even more complexity to guild management.Personally, I don't want any formalized alliance function. If guilds want to create alliances, fine, but I don't want an embedded system that encourages or systematizes alliances.
It's not even going to be on beta til near the end of the year. In the meantime...Disappointed that GBG is not multi-world, single world will become boring, maybe not as bad as vikings.
I also hope Inno bumps up attrition even when the player loses a fight/negotiation.
Also from the looks for it, GVG guilds will still dominate the guild ranking.
In anycase, I hope more folks join beta and test.