Guild Battlegrounds Arrival Feedback

[DeletedUser37581]

This arguing and bickering really cracks me up. It isn't like Inno is going make any decisions based on who wins the debate. Inno is unlikely in the extreme to put controls in place - a new guild right, barriers, or anything that will limit a player's ability to participate. What Inno might do - if enough people ask for it - is provide additional log information (but even then it is doubtful it would be a detailed log with a timestamp for each and every attack).

Right now they are monitoring bandwidth and lag issues. Additional log information will put an additional burden on bandwidth and server usage, so they will want to be very careful how much additional information to provide us.

Argue and debate all you want, but also realize that it's just pissing in the wind.

 

[DeletedUser40996]

Rogue flags are no abuse, they're merely an annoyance. A really big one for you, apparently. Regardless, they've given the needed control over the spending of treasury goods for buildings, as they gave control over opening upper levels of GE for the same reason. Planting a flag costs the guild treasury nothing, so there need be no control.

They want the control to make GbG = GvG 2.0 rather than the GE/GvG hybrid that it was intended to be

Yes, I understand you're asking for controls to make your job easier. I don't want your job to be easier. I want your ability to lead effectively, or not lead effectively to be one of the many differentiators that will determine the success of your guild on the battlefield. Step up, or don't. Succeed, or don't. That, my friend, is part of the game.

I'm willing to bet the house MOST of those wanting the controls on who can initiate a fight on a sector and the ability to remove "Flags" are from GvG Guilds that want the same control over battlegrounds rather than teach teamwork / communication

What you can or cannot do in GvG should have no bearing on GbG. Don't know why those tools are there in GvG, don't care why those tools are there in GvG. All I know is they're there in GvG, and not here in GbG. I like it better this way.

The reason they exist in GvG is because it costs treasury goods to start a fight on a sector .They're not needed in GbG because it doesn't cost the guild anything if person x wants to attack sector y after sector z is conquered. The needed controls for who can spend Guild goods on buildings are already there.

It just may be that you are not cut out to lead in GbG. If that's the case, a smart guild leader will turn over the task of leading GbG to someone else in the guild who can actually lead a team who willingly follows them without controls or restrictions.

You keep calling yourself a leader, yet you don't actually want to lead, you want to control. You don't need tools to lead.

If you have confused players, educate them. That's what actual leaders do. Your ability to do this successfully or not will determine your success in Battlegrounds, or not.

Or the person only knows how to lead by an iron fist rule (The my way or the highway mentally)

I only play on PC and in almost 2 years of playing, I've never touched GvG and have no plans to. Much of the reason is the 'show up and throw up' mindless nature of it. So, there goes that argument.

In my guild right now, attack decisions are being made by consensus with no 'key strategists.' We all have a voice, we all have a vote, and we all work together as a team. Not because we have to, or are forced to, but because we want to. Maybe that's the core issue? No, 'I' in team?

Yep even if I were playing on PC I would have absolutely no desire to do GvG because of the everyone has to be available at the same time mentality of it . I personally am not planning my day around a game I prefer to fit my gaming time in whenever I can .

 

[DeletedUser30312]

I'd love to know how a guild where "anyone can do whatever pleases him/her" could ever have a chance of winning. You do realize in top tiers of BGB the fights can top 200+ with traps. It takes a concentrated effort of fighters to take a tile. Mr. and Mrs. whatever you please probably are not very good teammates.

Teamwork. I already said how my guild learned to coordinate attacks against the most important provinces so our attacks aren't wasted on multiple provinces at the same time. I suppose guilds will appoint people to direct action in GBG if they haven't already, and good guild members will learn to follow their lead. I've seen guilds who achieve results in GE and GvG without resorting to strict controls because the players want to work as a team. Or in simpler terms:

Free people always do better than slaves.

I don't have a problem with logs showing who initiated an attack on a province. I'm against giving only guild leaders the ability to initiate attacks or delete flags they don't want. If the guild leaders can see who's attacking where and they don't like it, let them take action by either telling the player to stop or booting from the guild if it's a problem.

There's also this: Restricting guild leaders to opening new levels in GE is a problem in guilds where the leaders aren't playing actively. It blocks the other players from advancing farther, and it hurts the guild by giving it less ability to advance. GvG may restrict sieges, but that feature seems to be largely locked up in stalemates except for the hour or two after recalc when most people do their fighting. GvG guilds usually don't let a siege sit open for hours at a time from what I can tell, so unless a player is Trusted, he or she has to wait for someone else to start up a fight.

Restricting fights in GBG would mean that a guild won't be able to do anything to counter aggression if none of the players who have the ability to act aren't on at a given time, and since guild ranking is counted hourly, that will hurt a guild over the long run. GvG can park all they want when there's only a single recalc a day. So guilds need to learn to coordinate and how to strategize with this feature.

I also say there's no such thing as "rogue flags". Yes, there might be times when a guild member ignores the rest of the guild and starts a fight in a province that's not worth taking at the moment. But there's also times when you want to switch focus to a different province because the battle lines here are a lot less stagnant than GvG, and it becomes more important to capture a different province. Guilds need to be able to coordinate and communicate when there's multiple flags are up which flag is the most important one at the given moment.

 

[DeletedUser40858]

Nope. You didn't ask. You commanded.

See the last line of my post although that wasn't a hard prediction.

People who ask for help always get it in this forum. People who demand INNO fix something or complain about something they don't understand, well, they get treated a little differently.

I'll toss in a Scooby snack though. Long term frequent posters share two traits:

We can't help but be knowledgeable (not necessarily expert, just well, knowledgeable)) about FoE. We read everything folk post about the game and then argue incessantly. That's actually important because the process of arguing forces you to understand the other's view, or else you lose the argument. Folks who constantly lose arguments don't post very often. Think of it as evolution in action.

We're insane fanbois, else we would not be here. We all love the game. While we all have aspects of the game we don't like, instead of trying to get INNO to adopt the game to our playstyle, we adopt our playstyle to the game. This is based on an inherent trust that whatever INNO delivers will be good for the game.. Sure INNO makes mistakes, but heck who doesn't?

You got a bunch of knowledgeable rabid fanbois disagreeing with you. Maybe instead of dismissing us, you should be asking why we disagree with you so vehemently on this? Fair warning, you will not like the answer.



I explicitly deny twisting statisitics. I merely gave one, that 95% of players don't do GvG. I didn't say why, i didn't attach any meaning to the statistic. Tells a lot about you though jow you reacted to a bald statement of fact.

Ask yourself this question, :What happens if INNO takes a vote on whether to continue any allocation of resources to even continue GvG?

INNO won't discontinue GvG and they don't need to do a vote, they already know what people think. Anyone (like say a rabid fanboi like yours truly) who looks at INNO from a purely business perspective will see they have 15+years history of growing revenue and profit. They are damn good at figuring out how to make money. Once you understand that, you will understand why INNO continues with GvG.

But do you really expect 'the majority' who don't do GvG to support GvG? Are you sure you really want the majority of players opining on anything?

Who said I had droves disagreeing? Actually their are plenty who agree. And I dont get in my feelings about internet posts. And yes you implied that the majority dont do gvg so they must not want gbg to be similar. Not going in circles with you. I made my point. Like you said. Many here just like to argue and make statements that sound good but are not necessarily really good

 

[DeletedUser40858]

Seems like you have some internal guild training to do. You might want to get on that before the next round.

Rogue flags are no abuse, they're merely an annoyance. A really big one for you, apparently. Regardless, they've given the needed control over the spending of treasury goods for buildings, as they gave control over opening upper levels of GE for the same reason. Planting a flag costs the guild treasury nothing, so there need be no control.

Yes, I understand you're asking for controls to make your job easier. I don't want your job to be easier. I want your ability to lead effectively, or not lead effectively to be one of the many differentiators that will determine the success of your guild on the battlefield. Step up, or don't. Succeed, or don't. That, my friend, is part of the game.

Why are you asking about GvG? What you can or cannot do in GvG should have no bearing on GbG. Don't know why those tools are there in GvG, don't care why those tools are there in GvG. All I know is they're there in GvG, and not here in GbG. I like it better this way. It now forces you to gain consensus from your members and not just lock them down to play the only game you'll allow. No more, your way or the highway. That leadership style simply won't cut it in GbG.

It just may be that you are not cut out to lead in GbG. If that's the case, a smart guild leader will turn over the task of leading GbG to someone else in the guild who can actually lead a team who willingly follows them without controls or restrictions.

You keep calling yourself a leader, yet you don't actually want to lead, you want to control. You don't need tools to lead.

If you have confused players, educate them. That's what actual leaders do. Your ability to do this successfully or not will determine your success in Battlegrounds, or not.

I only play on PC and in almost 2 years of playing, I've never touched GvG and have no plans to. Much of the reason is the 'show up and throw up' mindless nature of it. So, there goes that argument.

In my guild right now, attack decisions are being made by consensus with no 'key strategists.' We all have a voice, we all have a vote, and we all work together as a team. Not because we have to, or are forced to, but because we want to. Maybe that's the core issue? No, 'I' in team?

Yes that style of leadership will actually work better. The squads that understand the way following rank will be unstoppable by a guild full of people doing 60 different things. So you like gvg because it CAN destroy the way guild operate? If you dont like the way a guild operates then take the time to build your own instead of trying to change mine

 

[DeletedUser40858]

Yes that style of leadership will actually work better. The squads that understand the way following rank will be unstoppable by a guild full of people doing 60 different things. So you like gvg because it CAN destroy the way guild operate? If you dont like the way a guild operates then take the time to build your own instead of trying to change mine

Gbg* not gvg because it CAN destroy the way a guild operates
As you admit

 

[DeletedUser11427]

This arguing and bickering really cracks me up. It isn't like Inno is going make any decisions based on who wins the debate. Inno is unlikely in the extreme to put controls in place - a new guild right, barriers, or anything that will limit a player's ability to participate. What Inno might do - if enough people ask for it - is provide additional log information (but even then it is doubtful it would be a detailed log with a timestamp for each and every attack).

Right now they are monitoring bandwidth and lag issues. Additional log information will put an additional burden on bandwidth and server usage, so they will want to be very careful how much additional information to provide us.

Argue and debate all you want, but also realize that it's just pissing in the wind.

they provide a log for each and every goods expenditure for GvG, regardless of if its a siege or unlock of a slot. they need to do the same with battlefields.

 

[DeletedUser40996]

they provide a log for each and every goods expenditure for GvG, regardless of if its a siege or unlock of a slot. they need to do the same with battlefields.

So all you want is a log for treasury goods then which I can understand as buildings in GbG can eat up goods really really fast .

 

[DeletedUser38162]

Next time see if the isolated sector is under lockdown or not as that's the most likely explanation (IE their 4 hours aren't up when you isolated sector x)

It was not...However they did have some besieger points on a bordering sector. Could that make the difference on whether they keep the bordering sector??

 

[DeletedUser40858]

The reason I don't want to see them is only guilds that can learn to overcome the issue you're trying to control will make it to the top in Battlegrounds. This is as it should be. You want controls to keep you from having to lead by consensus.

There are no alliances in GbG. No defense. Only attack. Alliances are meaningless as they can too easily be broken. Seems like you'll need to develop some new skills and new strategies to succeed in the new free for all world of Battlegrounds.

Why can't you're alliance guilds be adult enough to deal with the fact that GvG is one thing and Battlegrounds is another. The free for all that is battlefields in the rounds where you are occasionally matched have nothing to do with the alliance agreements in GvG. In GbG, let the best guild win. See you on the Battlegrounds. Seriously, grow up and learn to compartmentalize.

So, no, I am not in favor of GbG tools that will keep your GvG alliances intact. Personally, I'm in favor of seeing your alliances blow up. This might free up the map for those PC members who would like to play GvG but can never get a toe hold. Finally end the locked up, locked out mentality that has dominated GvG for years.

The reason I don't want to see them is only guilds that can learn to overcome the issue you're trying to control will make it to the top in Battlegrounds. This is as it should be. You want controls to keep you from having to lead by consensus.

There are no alliances in GbG. No defense. Only attack. Alliances are meaningless as they can too easily be broken. Seems like you'll need to develop some new skills and new strategies to succeed in the new free for all world of Battlegrounds.

Why can't you're alliance guilds be adult enough to deal with the fact that GvG is one thing and Battlegrounds is another. The free for all that is battlefields in the rounds where you are occasionally matched have nothing to do with the alliance agreements in GvG. In GbG, let the best guild win. See you on the Battlegrounds. Seriously, grow up and learn to compartmentalize.

So, no, I am not in favor of GbG tools that will keep your GvG alliances intact. Personally, I'm in favor of seeing your alliances blow up. This might free up the map for those PC members who would like to play GvG but can never get a toe hold. Finally end the locked up, locked out mentality that has dominated GvG for years.

The same guilds that learned to prevail in gvg can still do so in gbg if they decide. So your reasons not to put controls in place will never be met. Even if it's harder, the ones asking for the controls will still prevail in every tournament. The players that have the sense to ask for the needed controls are the same ones you will never overcome in gbg. Dominating in gbg is not the problem. That issue has already been solved.

 

[DeletedUser40996]

The same guilds that learned to prevail in gvg can still do so in gbg if they decide. So your reasons not to put controls in place will never be met. Even if it's harder, the ones asking for the controls will still prevail in every tournament. The players that have the sense to ask for the needed controls are the same ones you will never overcome in gbg. Dominating in gbg is not the problem. That issue has already been solved.

If they're so sure they can DOMINATE then WTF do they want the CONTROLS in the first place ???? TRUTH is they're not sure and rather than adapt to a HYBRID of GE & GvG they want the battlegrounds to be GvG 2.0

 

[BruteForceAttack]

Battle ground map sometimes doesn't update.
Sometimes get an error saying cannot access battle grounds.
The aqua color on the edges is too close the aqua color that a guild may have. And if your guild gets grey color and when you take those c4 province it looks like province that belongs to aqua color guild.

 

[Harbinger963]

The interesting about the forums is that it ties your username to in the game. So it;s easy to find that I am a 46m player with 35000 fights. Its also easy to see that Havoc Hog is a 127M player with almost 60,000 fights, PackCat is a 167M player with 49,000 fights. When such players who have clearly played the game for a long time, and through their points and fights totals demonstrate that they have intimate knowledge and understanding, their feedback should have more weight than those that apparently spend more time in the forums than they do in the game.

MaliceKooper, you wouldn't even be allowed in our guild. I don't think you have accumulated more than 1M points and 1000 fights across 7 worlds. While you certainly can have an opinion, it counts for little because you don't have the accumulated experience in game to support it. So how about you keep quiet, and I will keep quiet, and RazorBackPete and Algona and everyone else that seems to want to comment on every post also keep quiet and let the players provide their feedback?

I can probably post enough here to get blocked, but thats OK. It's clear there are lot of people in this forum who care more about voicing their own opinion before listening to players that have considerably more experience and hence understanding provide their feedback to Inno.

 

[DeletedUser40858]

If they're so sure they can DOMINATE then WTF do they want the CONTROLS in the first place ???? TRUTH is they're not sure and rather than adapt to a HYBRID of GE & GvG they want the battlegrounds to be GvG 2.0

No truth is we know lol. Why would we ask for controls that made the game better and more fun? Since everyone has the same bad controls, they dont have an edge on us. We are definitely going to win anyways. Care to place a water on that lol

 

[DeletedUser40858]

No truth is we know lol. Why would we ask for controls that made the game better and more fun? Since everyone has the same bad controls, they dont have an edge on us. We are definitely going to win anyways. Care to place a water on that lol

Wager*

 

[DeletedUser40858]

If they're so sure they can DOMINATE then WTF do they want the CONTROLS in the first place ???? TRUTH is they're not sure and rather than adapt to a HYBRID of GE & GvG they want the battlegrounds to be GvG 2.0

The facts make this statement so easily shown to be irrelevant lmbo

 

[DeletedUser40996]

MaliceKooper, you wouldn't even be allowed in our guild. I don't think you have accumulated more than 1M points and 1000 fights across 7 worlds. While you certainly can have an opinion, it counts for little because you don't have the accumulated experience in game to support it. So how about you keep quiet, and I will keep quiet, and RazorBackPete and Algona and everyone else that seems to want to comment on every post also keep quiet and let the players provide their feedback?

Oh so because I've only been playing 3 months and not years my OPINION is worthless . I have absolutely no desire to be in a "top" guild and deal with the BS that comes with it . And who are you to tell people to keep quiet on a PUBLIC GAME FORUM ???

I can probably post enough here to get blocked, but thats OK. It's clear there are lot of people in this forum who care more about voicing their own opinion before listening to players that have considerably more experience and hence understanding provide their feedback to Inno.

Yea feedback wanting to make Battlegrounds GvG 2.0 instead of it being it's own little part of the game

 

[DeletedUser40996]

It was not...However they did have some besieger points on a bordering sector. Could that make the difference on whether they keep the bordering sector??

I don't know I'm obviously too stupid to know anything about the game if you read all the posts bashing me because I'm ABSOLUTELY OPPOSED to the idea of adding in controls that only X Y Or Z ( IE founders / Leaders) can start fights in "new" sectors in GbG

 

[Silvysa]

Where do you see a suggestion that people want only a leader/founder to be able to do this? Anyone I've talked to requesting this is looking to give the permission to a large group, probably 20 plus initially and up to the majority of guild members by the time the first season has ended. I'm saying this to push the point again, but I wonder if there is confusion in what was asked for.

Exactly. Inno gives guild leadership the ability to give people rights for all sorts of things, like even the ability to get a check box to easily send a message to all guild members. That’s a right that I assume pretty much all guilds give time all their members. I can’t think of any guild where guild leaders would want to have to be online 24/7 just so they can start the attack on a new sector. But guild leaders should have the ability grant that right to as many members as they want. I know we would automatically give that right to a whole bunch of people.

 

[Silvysa]

The interesting about the forums is that it ties your username to in the game. So it;s easy to find that I am a 46m player with 35000 fights. Its also easy to see that Havoc Hog is a 127M player with almost 60,000 fights, PackCat is a 167M player with 49,000 fights. When such players who have clearly played the game for a long time, and through their points and fights totals demonstrate that they have intimate knowledge and understanding, their feedback should have more weight than those that apparently spend more time in the forums than they do in the game.

MaliceKooper, you wouldn't even be allowed in our guild. I don't think you have accumulated more than 1M points and 1000 fights across 7 worlds. While you certainly can have an opinion, it counts for little because you don't have the accumulated experience in game to support it. So how about you keep quiet, and I will keep quiet, and RazorBackPete and Algona and everyone else that seems to want to comment on every post also keep quiet and let the players provide their feedback?

I can probably post enough here to get blocked, but thats OK. It's clear there are lot of people in this forum who care more about voicing their own opinion before listening to players that have considerably more experience and hence understanding provide their feedback to Inno.

Thanks for this!