Guild Battlegrounds Feedback

[DeletedUser29563]

GvG has too few starting points. A few large guild conquer isolated sections and then do nothing but collect points. Trying to hold section is almost impossible against high ranked guilds. It becomes a field back loop of the strong getting stronger and the rest have no way to catch up. Needs to be some way to level the playing field so everyone can enjoy this part of the game. Most feel locked out and can't play because of the built in advantage to older (higher ranked) players. Maybe restricting guilds to play in only two or three eras, letting younger guilds pick and choose their battles and having some chance of winning.

Two words...defensive strategy

 

[Emberguard]

You ought to be thanking those people and doing everything in your power to retain their business instead of insulting them by calling them "less than 5%", which is a straight up demeaning way to refer to them, and treating them like dinosaurs with irrelevant opinions.

How would you of worded it then?

Inno cares about the GvG players every bit as the rest of the playerbase. It was GvG players that asked for either bug fixes or an entirely new feature to replace GvG. Inno listened to that 5% and chose to do both so everyone benefits! They've even made GvG a priority for the next few months:

over the next few months, we will, however, spend additional time to improve the technical stability of GvG, because the efforts we put into analysis the whole topic made some good improvements visible, that we would like to implement for you.

 

[DeletedUser29492]

I like the concept. With less then 5% of the players playing GvG it does not make sense to put valuable resources into it. I play GvG daily but it has many problems. If this concept is implemented and the prestige points are compatible with GvG so that you could be ranked first doing only guild battleground then GvG will just go away.

 

[DeletedUser]

I have deleted a bunch more off topic posts and posts that strictly were responses to off topic posts. Please restrict your comments to suggestions about the new feature or tweaks to GvG, not personal attacks. Thank you.

 

[DeletedUser31442]

I am quite surprised to learn from so many players who are mobile that they have resented the PC players. This idea is extremely popular. GVG is not the main part of this game that many of us , including myself, thought.

I am a PC player but have heard this from a great many mobile players, however as a PC player I can access global chat and have long since become sick and tired of listening to the endless braying of a tiny % of the user base repeat themselves and their bullying endlessly on global chat so mostly ignore the 8pm period and am glad GBG will become the main 'battle game' for the vast majority of users, then the only thing Inno needs to do is give GBG the Prestige points it will deserve for the numbers and reduce GvG's to the 5% that Inno's states are playing and that will get rid of many of the problems.

 

[Liberty]

First off, With the number of vocal GvG players do you really think they will do away with GvG? So players who worked hard for those attack boosts will enjoy them in GvG which is why the worked so hard for them.

For the umpteenth time, GvG is broken; it needs new maps at the very least. GvG players have been waiting a very long time for these basic things to be addressed.

Second, While you are saying casual players can get an A too... why should they penalize casual players? There are casual players who do dump some money into the game. The biggest factor I have seen is the desire to bring the Mobile players into the fold. They have stated adding GvG on mobile for numerous reasons mentioned and not mentioned would make it impossible. So why keep beating that dead horse? Why are you assuming that Battlegrounds will simply be for the lowest common denominator and not any challenge for experienced diehard players?

We don't care if something is added for mobile players. I have said this before. What we don't want is for what we like in the game and have paid handsomely to play, to not get adequate attention.

Third, If everyone wants a challenge with their high attack boosts and defense... why does GvG end up being a fast auto battle? There is no challenge with super strength using auto battle. It seems the people wanting the easy A, are those who have paid to become lazy. And that is fine if that is what you want. A race to the very top with everything super high and you are now bored with the game. I dont understand why you find that satisfying but that is the great thing about the game Inno has done work to make it fun for anyone willing to play.

Talk to Inno. They are the ones who added auto battle. My guess is they did it as an easy way of getting around the conflicts they were having in the software that resulted with people hitting something at the same time and then getting abended from the game. Personally, I would much prefer not to have auto-battle and Inno fix the conflicts.

Enjoy GvG. Let people who are creative and want to help mold this new feature get their suggestions out.

I am not stopping anyone who is making suggestions for GBG from making their suggestions.

 

[DeletedUser25274]

The appeal of GvG over GE is that there are human players determining strategy and tactics rather than endless battles vs AI. Hopefully GBG will offer that element. Existing GvG can be invigorated by making the reward to the guild for owning sectors the same on all maps. This will spread out the play and create better opportunity for lower level players to engage with their guild. It also would be impossible for a big GvG guild to be on all maps simultneously at reset, so smaller guilds could be more successful. I also agree that incremental cost of siege is not a factor on AA map which is a negative aspect.

 

[DeletedUser30312]

It's possible that they are. Don't know. But, I do remember when they were pulling things off one-by-one, trying to fix the problems. Pulling that one off did nothing from the end user position. The problems that existed before, still existed afterwards. But, you could be right. It was just a suggestion of something that they already had the code for, that would improve GvG.

It's also possible that these long standing bugs could be a factor, maybe a significant one, of why they haven't been able to bring GvG to mobile. Either they don't want to port it to mobile without fixing the underlying problems first, and that's proved difficult, or these bugs caused serious problems when they attempted to add it to a mobile environment.

Or, they could attempt to keep both groups of customers happy. But, like you said, things change and games die.

More like the games either adapt or die.

 

[DeletedUser39339]

GE and GvG are both very different. I play both and I play on the mobile app as well as a pc browser. I play GE for the rewards. I play GvG for the bonding with fellow guildmates that occurs when battling together, strategizing and making friends and enemies with other guilds and players. I play FoE for the social aspect in the game from trading goods with others, fighting alongside with others, and advice on play. If the game becomes more of a single user game much like it is in GE, I might as well just go play SIM City.

I think some wonderful suggestions have been made. GvG ... get rid of reset or rotate the times or add more of them. Reset hinders participation. GE ... don't see any real changes needed there. Very easy as is and I like the diamonds. As to this new concept merging the two, I see positive and negative. Positive ... battle format that mobile can play is a big plus. Negative ... unfair penalties to those who are fighters, having random guilds to fight against that may fight against you or not, heavy emphasis on individual play rather than group attacks. And one final complaint I get from my fellow guildies is that there is just too much to keep up with and if you choose not to try, it is viewed negatively ... by yourself or from other guildmates.

 

[DeletedUser32702]

Will the guilds be grouped based on then number of members like in GE. If so, i assume that guild members that join the guild after the event starts will not be eligible to participate in the event like in GE.

 

[DeletedUser]

Okay, once more I have had to delete/edit several off topic posts. I have done so impartially, whether I agree with the sentiments stated or not. This thread is for suggestions about or feedback on the new feature that Inno is working on, or suggestions on concrete ideas for improving GvG given Inno's stated intentions for that feature. Any and all comments ranting about GvG or ranting about GvGers or insulting/attacking anyone will be deleted or edited out. Stay on topic if you want your posts to remain intact.

 

[-Athena-]

WOW the number of pages...not sure I have ever seen any FOE new content announcements have this much feedback. GvG will always be my first and foremost focus but I would like to know more about the match up of guilds and participation. GE is based on membership #s. GvG is just whoever you want which is the most fun imo.

Four years from now when this is released does every guild start in Copper the first time?

How exactly can a guild with say 10 members compete with a guild with 50 members? Do the 10 members just have to fight more?

"A guild's league will be shown in the global rankings" Is this separate from current global rankings ie. a separate column showing copper, silver, gold? Or does it combine into a guild's global rank as how it is determined now ~ one of the GBG rewards mentioned was "Prestige Points for the ranking"
so to ask more clearly are those prestige points for global rank as it is now or just the rank for GBG League levels?

GE is dependent upon participation of all members doing all levels. How much guild member participation will GBG be dependent on? Is it feasible that say a handful of members can do 50+ fights and still kill it? Or does it really need to be every guild member doing as much as attrition allows them to?

And for kicks I would recommend that there be an option given every so often whereby guilds could request to go up against another guild. There are some historical/long term rivalries that I would hate to see go by the wayside. Potentially they could be matched anyhow because obviously they have been able to go toe to toe on the GvG maps but would the participation factor impact that?

 

[DeletedUser4770]

A few items, first there is no need to go to the EN forum as I place the same exact information into our forum where you find the Announcement
https://forum.us.forgeofempires.com/index.php?threads/guild-battlegrounds.26088/#post-256418
We are trying to bring you the most current information the minute we receive it.

Also, there's getting to be a lot of back and forth arguments between a few players and it must stop. Technically, forum rules limit you to three (3) posts per thread. We've never enforced this rule and I don't want to have to start doing it now so please, be courteous to your fellow players. We are all wanting the same thing- the very best game possible.

For those contributing feedback about the Guild Battlegrounds, thank you so much. That's exactly what the game developers are wanting- to see what you are interested in and what would make it best for you.

Continue on!

 

[Algona]

For the umpteenth time, GvG is broken; it needs new maps at the very least.

Unless the fundamental problem of recalc lag is fixed first this or any other suggestion that would encourage more participation will exacerbate recalc lag.

And for kicks I would recommend that there be an option given every so often whereby guilds could request to go up against another guild. There are some historical/long term rivalries that I would hate to see go by the wayside. Potentially they could be matched anyhow because obviously they have been able to go toe to toe on the GvG maps but would the participation factor impact that?

Outstanding idea.

Guild Battlegrounds could be designed to allow dueling.

How about two or three Guild teams playing against each other?

World Guild Battleground Chamionships? Take the top 16 GBG Guilds and have our own version of March Madness?

Inter world championship? All star teams?

There;s a LOT of design space there...

 

[saknika]

GE and GvG are both very different. I play both and I play on the mobile app as well as a pc browser. I play GE for the rewards. I play GvG for the bonding with fellow guildmates that occurs when battling together, strategizing and making friends and enemies with other guilds and players. I play FoE for the social aspect in the game from trading goods with others, fighting alongside with others, and advice on play. If the game becomes more of a single user game much like it is in GE, I might as well just go play SIM City.

I think some wonderful suggestions have been made. GvG ... get rid of reset or rotate the times or add more of them. Reset hinders participation. GE ... don't see any real changes needed there. Very easy as is and I like the diamonds. As to this new concept merging the two, I see positive and negative. Positive ... battle format that mobile can play is a big plus. Negative ... unfair penalties to those who are fighters, having random guilds to fight against that may fight against you or not, heavy emphasis on individual play rather than group attacks. And one final complaint I get from my fellow guildies is that there is just too much to keep up with and if you choose not to try, it is viewed negatively ... by yourself or from other guildmates.

Totally agree. GE and GvG are very different for those exact reasons, and definitely understand the sentiment on wanting focus for group attacks. The best part about this game (and sometimes the most frustrating) are the players. I love working with my guild to do stuff, in real time. If somehow GBG had the flexibility for both real-time strategy and solo work (like GvG does), that would be fantastic. I think that's a major part of the sparkle of GvG for those who truly adore it, aside from the rush of having to think on your feet and strategize in real time and such. Anything that can bring aspects that are loved of GvG into GBG would be a huge win in my eyes, because it will help attract those who hold GvG dear, while also introducing something that mobile players have an easy time accessing.

 

[Agent327]

Will the guilds be grouped based on then number of members like in GE. If so, i assume that guild members that join the guild after the event starts will not be eligible to participate in the event like in GE.

Read the announcement. It tells it all.

 

[DeletedUser22236]

That only 10% play ought to tell anyone there is a problem here. The GvG idea is great, the requirement to require goods to take land whereever it came from was great, BUT the AA idea you use only medals is a first class ---- up. They should have been added at that level to the goods. Now guild have many millions of useless good in the treasury (last time I counted we were around 15 million on Q), that Sir is idiotic.
It's complex but thats makes it more interesting the fact that it has so many bugs has turned off a lot of players the number of different crashes has gotten better but ..
The fixed reset time for all worlds shuts out a lot either you make it at reset or you'll always be a want a be.
Rather than add another major piece of code to maintain fix what you have.
You might consider that flooding the game with % boost items has an impact on the way people play the game. Someone that REALLY plays the game needs to have some serious input into what your doing. I spent a lifetime as a programmer and it can be a real shock to work with the users and see all those great ideas the developers thought would be great ideas

 

[RazorbackPirate]

That only 10% play ought to tell anyone there is a problem here. The GvG idea is great, the requirement to require goods to take land wherever it came from was great, BUT the AA idea you use only medals is a first class ---- up. They should have been added at that level to the goods. Now guild have many millions of useless good in the treasury (last time I counted we were around 15 million on Q), that Sir is idiotic.

Inno said it's only 5%, but either way, it's a problem that's finally being addressed with Battlegrounds. When GvG was designed, FoE hadn't planned to take FoE beyond FE. When AF was released, the GvG code prevented them from adding an AF map, so they created the AA map as a compromise, knowing no future age specific maps would be coming.

I suspect the same issue that kept them from introducing an AF map using AF goods also prevented them from utilizing goods from any age on the kludged together AA map. Hence the "first class ---- up."

It's complex but that's makes it more interesting the fact that it has so many bugs has turned off a lot of players the number of different crashes has gotten better but ... the fixed reset time for all worlds shuts out a lot either you make it at reset or you'll always be a wanna be.

Reset time is the fundamental problem with GvG and why it can't simply be ported to, or opened up to mobile. The lag/bugs everyone complains about all occur around reset, because everyone playing GvG plays GvG during the short span around reset. More players in GvG during that same short time span will just make the lag exponentially worse.

Having one map per age, per world also locks out the vast majority of guilds and players from ever gaining a toe hold to start fighting GvG. The maps have long been locked up by the bigger GvG guilds and allies, leaving the rest of the guilds on the server completely locked out of GvG even if they wanted to play. Works great for the big guilds, but for the rest of the server? Not so much.

Rather than add another major piece of code to maintain fix what you have.

Therein lies the rub. They can't fix the code they have. GvG was broken the day it was released, because of it's fundamental design. Recalc, one map per world, no ability to add maps for AF and beyond. The only solution to fix unfixable code?

Start over with a new concept that fixes the underlying problems of GvG by not repeating them. No defense means no recalc. Eliminate recalc and you eliminate recalc lag. No recalc also means anyone, anywhere can participate in Battlegrounds anytime their playtime allows.

GBG will also have unlimited maps that guarantee a foothold to each and every guild that wants to play. The maps won't be tied to age, meaning for the first time the entire guild, regardless of the age of the individual players, can now work together and contribute equally to a common goal on a common map. No more sitting on the sidelines, or rushing unprepared through the ages to join the rest of your guildmates on the guild's preferred GvG map.

Leagues also eliminates the problem of big guilds, filled with big players, with big boosts, built over many years of play, who can simply overwhelm anyone who attempts to come up against them. That alone leaves too many guilds and too many players locked out. Again, works great for the big guilds, but for the rest of the guilds on the server, not so much.

With Leagues based on performance and match-ups based on Leagues, now every guild, new or old, big or small, will fight guilds from their own League. Winning guilds climb Leagues to fight tougher guilds, under performing guilds can drop a League to have an easier time. Higher Leagues offer higher rewards to the most successful guilds in the Battleground wars, month after month, war after war.

You might consider that flooding the game with % boost items has an impact on the way people play the game. Someone that REALLY plays the game needs to have some serious input into what your doing. I spent a lifetime as a programmer and it can be a real shock to work with the users and see all those great ideas the developers thought would be great ideas.

Having also worked with software users over a long period of time, the biggest issue surrounding new feature acceptance is users inherently resistant to change, not wanting have to have learn a whole new thing that's only going to upset their routine.

Even features specifically built around user requests are often met with complaints simply because the feature is new and different. A simple UI overhaul sends many users into a rant fest lasting several release cycles, and too often, the first thing most users want to know about a new feature is where to go to turn it off. I expect most GvG users will end up disliking GBG simply because it's new and it's not the same GvG they already know, love, and dominate in.

Most of the complaints already have been along those lines. They don't want GBG because it's not GvG, they think it's the wrong direction because it's not an expansion or port of the same GvG. GvG players are already asking if they can opt-out of GBG, or will they be forced to deal with it, like it or not. GvG staying is to satisfy those resistant to change, because it's change.

For the rest it's something new and just like anything new, you'll have early adopters, early majority, late majority, and the laggards. Like any other change of this magnitude, expect those most heavily invested in GvG to be the most resistant to GBG, and likely the laggards in the adoption curve. No one should expect anything different, especially with GvG staying to accommodate their resistance, which is good.

C'mon, there's people who will never switch to HTML5 until Flash literally ceases to exist. When it does, they'll come here to make all the same complaints, "been here since the beginning," "spent a fortune," "greedy dirt bags," "never another dime," you know the drill and all the complaints. You also know the complaints are really about the change, it doesn't matter what the change.

With change come complaints from those simply resistant to change. So, let the laggards lag and the adopters adopt. It'll work itself out in the end, it always does.

 

[DeletedUser39339]

I've always thought it's silly for so many battles to take place around reset. If that specific time is difficult for you and others in your guild, plan battles at a different time. your enemy guild may not be there to defend.

The reason so many battles take effect around reset is that is when the protective shield is removed from a sector. Can't attack a neighboring sector earlier in the day that's shielded. And if you wait some time after reset, there is a strong possibility the sectors are protected again.

 

[Agent327]

And if you wait some time after reset, there is a strong possibility the sectors are protected again.

How?