Guild Battlegrounds Feedback

[Algona]

Some questions and answers from EN forum..

Best post in this thread. Thank you. Answered almost every question that I've seen and covers a lot of ground no one here thought of.

All we need is some details from INNO on mechanncs and estimated costs and we're golden.

Some idea of the costs of Negotiations, will one GBG Negotiation be more or less expensive then one GE Negotiation?

How much will Province Buildings cost? Are they always Goods of the Era of the highest Era player in the Guild or will they be based on the highest Era player that fought in that Province?

How many 'wins' does it take to get a Priovnce? The picture seemed to indicate it's in the hundreds. Does that change based on the number of Provinces controlled?

One concern the potential lag around resetting Attrition. Will INNO be doing something to make sure we don't see that become a problem ala GvG?

Some idea of the different League Rewards would be nice.

More detail on the individual prizes. Will individual prizes be like GE or solely FP based? In GE the individual prizes are a major incentive for players to participate, hopefully the same will hold true for GBG.

As far as suggestions go:

I agree with some other folk re Obs, Deal, SBC. Support Pool bonus should be factored in somehow into GBG. I understand there is no defence, maybe they can be used in some other way. No good idea yet what that might be.

Sure would be really nice to be able to select which Era Treasury Goods are used for GBG. Sliding scale?

Hoping tomorrow's briefing will yield more details.

 

[DeletedUser6574]

Currently, the top guilds are on top because of GvG, and the top players work together within their guilds, as a team, to support GvG. No, not every member of my guild fights, but they do provide support for it and we all work together to further our guild. As for Inno's statement "Complexity - The current feature is not easy to understand and get into for players, especially new players. There is no tutorial, it's a lot of effort for players in earlier ages, and it's not self-explanatory; to name a few weaknesses." To say that GvG is too complicated and not self explanatory is to basically say most of your players aren't smart enough to learn how to play chess, so we're offering them checkers instead. Which would be fine, if Inno also provided for the players who only play because we prefer chess. You know, those of us who have stuck with you for years. If higher age maps were provided then younger, smaller guilds wouldn't have to deal with, or compete with, more advanced players because we'd have somewhere else to go. Of course the AA map didn't do what y'all wanted it to do, why in the world would you expect younger lower age fighters to be able to compete with the higher age more advanced fighters and their higher troops? All of the points made don't point to extensive analysis, they point to extensive confirmation bias.

 

[RazorbackPirate]

I agree with some other folk re Obs, Deal, SBC. Support Pool bonus should be factored in somehow into GBG. I understand there is no defense, maybe they can be used in some other way. No good idea yet what that might be.

I would like to see some use for that as well. Maybe as an offset to Attrition? Support pool bonus gets factored as an extra boost for attackers, or a negative boost similar to infiltration on the C-map?

Either that, or replace the GB support bonuses to something that can be used in Battlegrounds.

 

[* Nicholi The Great *]

Inno already has a war game - Grepolis. As a war game, it is much more engaging than FoE.

Grepolis is the bomb for War games, i loved playing it but it is very time consuming in comparison to FOE. I was a top player in Grepo in a couple different worlds and I switched to FOE after playing Grepo for 4 years so i could still have an aspect of online war but not something that took hours to line up 100 cities to attack and defend a city.

I understand the need for Inno to develop GBG and i think it will probably be a good addition to the game to help mobile players feel like they can contribute back to their guild in some form since they are not able to GVG.

It would be nice if Inno could still improve GVG for the PC players by adding in additional maps and working out the bugs.

 

[DeletedUser]

To say that GvG is too complicated and not self explanatory is to basically say most of your players aren't smart enough to learn how to play chess, so we're offering them checkers instead.

I don't know who said GvG is too complicated. Nothing in this game is terribly complicated. There are nuances here and there that you have to pick up as you play, but none of it is rocket science. I think the myth of players thinking it is too complicated is a rumor started by GvGers.

 

[saknika]

I would like to see some use for that as well. Maybe as an offset to Attrition?

I was also thinking it'd be nice for support pool to offset attrition.

 

[DeletedUser6574]

You must have missed the part about GvG not being scalable (the ability to add more players) or not being able to be ported to Mobile. Not surprised. You need to be smart enough to read. Hopefully, they'll have a video for you soon.

Other than that, way to put down the other members of your guild who've been 'helping' you play GvG for so long. Good thing they're too stupid for chess to realize they're getting played for pawns. Wonder if you'll return the favor to support and help them play and succeed in Battlegrounds? I'm thinking not.

So have fun playing chess when your players who aren't smart enough for GvG start demanding their goods be used for Battlefields. Or will you tell them it sucks and no one's playing it, so you can keep jacking their goods for GvG?

I
I didn't say that, Inno did, I simply used chess and checkers as an analogy of their statement "Complexity - The current feature is not easy to understand and get into for players, especially new players. There is no tutorial, it's a lot of effort for players in earlier ages, and it's not self-explanatory; to name a few weaknesses."

 

[DeletedUser6574]

I don't know who said GvG is too complicated. Nothing in this game is terribly complicated. There are nuances here and there that you have to pick up as you play, but none of it is rocket science. I think the myth of players thinking it is too complicated is a rumor started by GvGers.

It's in Inno's statement "Complexity - The current feature is not easy to understand and get into for players, especially new players. There is no tutorial, it's a lot of effort for players in earlier ages, and it's not self-explanatory; to name a few weaknesses."

 

[qaccy]

@RazorbackPirate I don't usually have an opportunity to do this, but I have to come to Lynnz' defense here as I'm in her guild and can provide some additional insight. The guild is definitely very involved in GvG in multiple ages, but nobody is taken advantage of. Of course, the fighters are the ones consuming the goods, but the fighters are also the ones providing most of them and nobody is compelled or even nudged to contribute anything - GvG is entirely voluntary here. Anyone with questions or who wants to participate gets all the assistance they need with it, including with fighting. I can assure you that every member in our guild is treated fairly when it comes to GvG, no matter how much or how little they choose to participate in it. I'll wrap this part of my post up by saying all of this is intended to be respectful, since there's obviously no way you can know how a guild you're not part of functions.

All that being said, I don't completely agree with what Lynnz is saying either as, despite the high level of most of our fighters, we're still pretty active even in the lower ages. Without some sort of restriction in place to prevent players from accessing maps below their age (or penalizing them for doing so), adding new maps would just be adding new maps. I don't see why adding an AF province would suddenly lead to fewer players fighting in LMA for instance. It'd just mean that they're also fighting in AF in addition to LMA (along with whatever other maps they may be looking at). After all, it's usually the same guilds at the top of the ranking list for each map, with very few exceptions unless there's a current scuffle going on where a lot of territory is changing hands every day.

 

[RazorbackPirate]

I understand the need for Inno to develop GBG and i think it will probably be a good addition to the game to help mobile players feel like they can contribute back to their guild in some form since they are not able to GVG.

GBG is not the consolation prize for mobile players to 'feel like they can contribute back to their guild'. GBG is the future of FoE like it or not.

 

[Jern2017]

I do not play GVG as I only play this game on my mobile device, so I'm very excited about Guild Battlegrounds. I just hope it will not be as time specific as GVG.

I love to fight and can't wait for another way to do it.

 

[Liberty]

GBG is not the consolation prize for mobile players to 'feel like they can contribute back to their guild'. GBG is the future of FoE like it or not. Once GBG goes live few, if any new players will ever touch it again, since few new players even have the ability to touch it now.

"The poor huddled masses who'll never reach our rarefied air, are getting a bone to distract them from knowing, they'll never be like us, the GvG Champions!"

Please, save it. You get no one buys that, right?

It's pretty obvious that YOU do, or it wouldn't tweak you so much.

 

[Godly Luke]

GBG could kill off GvG.

Could? It is!

 

[DeletedUser40383]

Please leave your feedback here in this thread and we'll look into your ideas and opinions. We'll collect feedback for the next two weeks (until 3rd June 2019), integrate feedback into the concept and share an update within 3 weeks (by 10th June 2019). We will also hold a live Q&A on Facebook & Instagram on the 22nd May 2019 at 17:00 CEST (15:00 UTC). We hope you understand the reasons for this step and look forward to your feedback. Forge of Empires is played by millions of amazing players and together, we will make it even better!

Sincerely yours,

Your Forge of Empires Team

I believe keeping the existing GvG and opening it to mobile players would incresease the % of people playing. Active people playing together is a great experience, and to those that can't and haven't been able to do that would be a huge step forward for the true GvG experience.

 

[RazorbackPirate]

@RazorbackPirate I don't usually have an opportunity to do this, but I have to come to Lynnz' defense here as I'm in her guild and can provide some additional insight. The guild is definitely very involved in GvG in multiple ages, but nobody is taken advantage of. Of course, the fighters are the ones consuming the goods, but the fighters are also the ones providing most of them and nobody is compelled or even nudged to contribute anything - GvG is entirely voluntary here. Anyone with questions or who wants to participate gets all the assistance they need with it, including with fighting. I can assure you that every member in our guild is treated fairly when it comes to GvG, no matter how much or how little they choose to participate in it. I'll wrap this part of my post up by saying all of this is intended to be respectful, since there's obviously no way you can know how a guild you're not part of functions.

This is no different than any GvG guild I've ever been in, nor did I expect it to be different in yours. What I am saying is every comment from GvG players always seems to fill the air with this faux elitist aristocracy, "Oh look, the kiddies are getting some checkers to play with, that should keep them busy while the rest of us play chess." This is not the 'less than' addition for the 'less than' players.

This is the future of FoE. Battlefields is the future and GvG is the past. Poo poo it at your peril. Players like me, don't feel we're being taken advantage of, and we're happy to supply the goods because the whole guild benefits. But that changes once Battlegrounds goes live. If I'm not able to use my goods donations to play Battlegrounds I will quickly feel like I'm being taken advantage of.

All that being said, I don't completely agree with what Lynnz is saying either as, despite the high level of most of our fighters, we're still pretty active even in the lower ages. Without some sort of restriction in place to prevent players from accessing maps below their age (or penalizing them for doing so), adding new maps would just be adding new maps. I don't see why adding an AF province would suddenly lead to fewer players fighting in LMA for instance. It'd just mean that they're also fighting in AF in addition to LMA (along with whatever other maps they may be looking at). After all, it's usually the same guilds at the top of the ranking list for each map, with very few exceptions unless there's a current scuffle going on where a lot of territory is changing hands every day.

It doesn't matter what you, me, or @Lynnz123 thinks or has to say about GvG, what should be changed in GvG, or what could help bring others into GvG. After the next tweak, GvG is frozen in time, it will stay the way it is now, forever. The future is Battlegrounds and Battlegrounds is where all future development money is going. Battlegrounds is where your guild members who've not been able to play GvG are going too.

The question is, will you lead them, or will someone else? The spark will be goods. The moment there's a conflict, leadership will have to decide. Good at the future, good at the past, or split the difference and be mediocre at both. The introduction of Battlegrounds will have huge effects through every GvG guild. It's inevitable.

 

[DeletedUser37581]

I believe keeping the existing GvG and opening it to mobile players would incresease the % of people playing. Active people playing together is a great experience, and to those that can't and haven't been able to do that would be a huge step forward for the true GvG experience.

Been there, done that, burned out. After several months of clicking auto-battle for 15 - 20 minutes a day with a top guild, I was ready to give up on the game. It might work for some people, but it's not my cup of tea. I suspect that is the case for a large number of people who play this game.

 

[Dido 815 the Scourge]

For those of you who have OBVIOUSLY not read the actual announcement including additional posts of FAQs, please take the time to do so now.

https://forum.us.forgeofempires.com/index.php?threads/guild-battlegrounds.26088/

GVG isn’t going anywhere. It’s staying as is (possible minor usage upgrades) and on PC only.
Battlegrounds is an entirely NEW guild vs guild format that will be available to all players including mobile.

 

[qaccy]

@RazorbackPirate Although you seem to have a real chip on your shoulder in regards to GvG, I have to repeat that I was simply providing some insight in defense of my guildmate/guild. I know there are certainly forum users who sort of place GvG on a pedestal, but there isn't any of that in our guild so I felt that your attack on her was a bit unwarranted. Again though, I'm not going to fault you for something you couldn't really have known.

As for GvG itself, I'm not really looking to start any arguments about that either, one way or another. For my part, I'm glad that it's going to remain in the game and receive some nominal improvements of some sort eventually, but I'm also pretty excited to see how this new feature turns out and glad that mobile will get to be included in something that looks to be a little bit more engaging than GE, even if it's not straight-up GvG like a lot of its proponents were hoping to see someday.

 

[DeletedUser26263]

Thank you for a positive reply. I am so tired of reading down the list of people who either offer nothing or just sit and complain. They said IF YOU HAVE SUGGESTIONS... not please take the time to complain.

As to your comment, I am not sure they are saying 5% of 84k. I think they are smart enough to use the actual active accounts to base their information. I saw above somewhere that Inno has seen 37% increase in revenue from mobile users. I think they understand where they need to put their extra efforts. But I do agree with you they should tread lightly with GvG players and it would seem from their announcement on here they do not plan to upset them by removing GvG. But they also asked for suggestions. As you pointed out the coding must be insane to try to do it on mobile so what other improvements would people like to GvG that keep it fun? I know I would like to see an improvement to stability during GvG.

I too am with you on them developing a better system of purging old dead accounts. The problem here is if someone played 2 years ago and invested money into the game and had to take time away from the game for any number of reasons but suddenly wants to play again... I am sure you would be quite upset if you had put money into the game and they deleted your account. So I am sure they are trying to tread water with it. But there seems to be a line you could draw with accounts which have not invested any money, who have not gone past a certain level and who have been away for over a year. Start with those folks and see how many they can slim it down.

Much like you, I am glad to see Inno trying to pay attention to us who play the game which is why they have brought us to the forums. Those who often are just game jumpers and only half play dont bother to take the time to join the forums. So I hope more people like you will offer up some ideas and cautions so Inno can make improvements to the game where people enjoy playing.

GvG has always invoked passion in its players and fans and I am not surprised at the occasional vitriol coming at us in this forum. It makes me sad to see many folks feel the need to be negative about this when clearly there is not enough information yet to make a firm judgement on its outcome. Puting all that simply -- why get angry at something that does not yet exist?

Here's the bottom line for me -- Innogames needs to make money to remain a viable business concern. Anything they do to that end we as players should accept. To do otherwise means no more FOE at all, and the entire discussion becomes moot. However I question the optics of what they do at times. It seems sometimes they have this tendency to shoot themselves with their approach to topics like this one. I was concerned at their quoting "5%" and other such statistics because it serves only to incite those who remain GvG fans -- people who I know do spend money on this game and therefore contribute to the profit motive I am describing above. I am also concerned as a Guild Founder about seeing even more new features that will increase the workload placed on us -- the Leaders of guilds in this game. We have enough to contend with as it is. Adding more is -- unfortunate, to put it mildly. Making those who promote this game FOR FREE through guild management do more and more work, degrading our game play time is not good.

All this boils down to one thing -- will the new module increase participation, provide opportunities for those who do like the war aspects of the game but are limited in their ability to engage, add to the experience of FOE? My guess from what I read is that it will. But again - the jury is out. As they address this, I am hopeful it will force the issue on several other things that remain incomplete (HTML5, dead accounts piling up, useless goods in guild treasuries,mobile players feeling like 2nd class participants at times, etc). I think at least some of these issues will be addressed -- they will have to do so to implement this new feature.

Let's all give this a fair chance. Let's also be here for the live discussion if possible (I may not be available but will make sure someone from the MSG Guilds is). The vitriol is unnecessary and I suggest we move on from that. I do not work for Innogames nor do I own stock or have any fiduciary connection to them -- I am only one person with a lot of guilds in my name all over this game. I am here for fun and because I love the people I meet and befriend here. My intent is only to bring a reality check to some of these issues. I hope some of what I have suggested has done so.

 

[RazorbackPirate]

@RazorbackPirate Although you seem to have a real chip on your shoulder in regards to GvG.

No chip. Just tired of GvG players putting down non GvG players. If that wasn't her, then the comment doesn't apply to her. However, there are many for who it does apply, especially on the forum, in regard to mobile players, but especially anyone who doesn't GvG, no matter the reason.

Thankfully, that attitude doesn't exist in either of the guilds I'm in and so far this announcement has been hardly a blip. Something new coming to keep an eye on. Don't even think anyone's been by to comment, and nary a comment in our threads.