• We are looking for you!
    Always wanted to join our Supporting Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
    Take a look at our recruitement page for more information and how you can apply:
    Apply

Guild Expedition Championship Feedback

  • Thread starter DeletedUser4770
  • Start date

DeletedUser19807

I'd say it this way: a guild full of active players is more likely to level faster than a guild full of inactive players. And a guild full of active players is more likely to win GE. So there's a correlation. But that's because they both stem from the same cause. Do you think that a guild full of inactive players deserves to have some kind of advantage in GE?

The championship prizes are based only on participation, not points won.

No , I think that all guilds should have a chance to win. As expected the level 47 guild is running away with it, my level 23 is behind, and the level 5 guild has no chance at all. Does anyone think that maybe a level 5 guild , who's players most likely have no military to speak of, should have to compete against a level 47, whose players have been playing for years and have fully upgraded military? Active or not, level 5 can not compete.
 

DeletedUser3679

No , I think that all guilds should have a chance to win. As expected the level 47 guild is running away with it, my level 23 is behind, and the level 5 guild has no chance at all. Does anyone think that maybe a level 5 guild , who's players most likely have no military to speak of, should have to compete against a level 47, whose players have been playing for years and have fully upgraded military? Active or not, level 5 can not compete.

Not necessarily true. I have seen many low level guilds with upper age active members. This happens when these players leave their existing guilds for various reasons, and form new guilds. I would think that such a guild would be not only competitive, but probably dominate in it's size group, no matter what levels the other guilds are.

This is the first time that INNO has crafted a points-earning contest that is strictly based on participation, yet somehow it's unfair because the less active guilds don't have a chance to win? Isn't that the whole idea?
 

Algona

Well-Known Member
No , I think that all guilds should have a chance to win. As expected the level 47 guild is running away with it, my level 23 is behind, and the level 5 guild has no chance at all. Does anyone think that maybe a level 5 guild , who's players most likely have no military to speak of, should have to compete against a level 47, whose players have been playing for years and have fully upgraded military? Active or not, level 5 can not compete.

My first GEc lvl 14 won, lvl7 took third against four lvl 20+ guilds. This week the lvl 20+ guilds are running away with it.

All Guilds have a chance to win. Just some more than others. I'd say organization and participation are at least as important as any other factors.

Heh. And not letting in a dozen new players the previous week. We're getting crushed because t3h scrubbish n00bs have no Zen.
 

DeletedUser14197

I think there is a good chance that some of the guilds on the list of 7 guilds aren't actually competing. In a number of my guilds, they have very low percentages, not even coming close to the top 3. Sometimes just 1 to 3 percentages. I got 4.8 percentage in my 7 member guild by only doing level 1 with no one else fighting even one battle. So really many times there really aren't that many guilds that are losing that are trying to win. And than sometimes, like in my 7 member guild, we actually get to win even though we aren't trying, since we came in 2nd last week and I only did level 1 and someone else fought 4 battles. So far the leading guild has 6 %. lol. I think they are actually competing against me, but I don't open up level 2 since no one else is fighting. So they could quit now and win. Maybe they will even. Do you really think people who aren't competing should win? I don't think my guild should get a trophy or any perks for me fighting level 1 and someone else fighting 4 battles, even if we only do have 7 members, and especially when there are other guilds who are actually trying and don't end up with a spot. The competition is a good idea. I just don't think it was implemented in a way that makes the trophies meaningful. There is a good chance my 7 member guild will end up with a 3rd place trophy this week, unless roadkill gets on the ball and catches up. It wouldn't take much to take my spot. They already have 2.8. Just one more person doing half a level should pass me. Come on Roadkill, you can do it! Let the competition begin!!!! (This competition really is a joke)
 

DeletedUser19807

Ok, we're not talking about level 5 guilds with 7 players, let's say 60+ members, not some ghost guild where 7 top players go to beat up on others. A real level 5 guild, with players still trying to level up. how can they compete? Of course you can argue all you want, and there are exceptions to every rule, but there isn't even a way most players under 100k can even finish level 2, and that's who would be in a real level 5 guild.
The point is this is a case of the rich getting richer, while the newer players get left out. I'm don't want to see anyone rewarded who doesn't deserve it, but level 47 against level 5 with 60+ members, will never be a contest, unless level 47 doesn't try, which I guess is the argument here. Why don't they filter the guild levels , as well as the player count, is the point here.
 

DeletedUser8152

but there isn't even a way most players under 100k can even finish level 2, and that's who would be in a real level 5 guild.
OK, in my tiny town guild, where no one has any expansions, we are ages iron through colonial. Several of us finish through level 2 every time, and if we opened level 3 I'm confident we could get pretty far. And this is with no expansions, that is a pretty heavy handicap by the time you're up in LMA/CA. So I can't agree that finishing GE is out of reach for a typical low-level player.

What is true is that good players will gravitate to good guilds, so yeah, the top guilds are typically going to have the best (most active, most skillful) players. And that is why they are likely to win GE, but its not due to any structural advantage.
 

DeletedUser23206

Is there a GE Championship this week? I have almost 30 fights done and when I click the trophy it says the Championship will start in a min to come back it has been giving this msg for almost an hour. When and if it does light up is it going to count my fights and my guildies?
 

DeletedUser8152

Is there a GE Championship this week? I have almost 30 fights done and when I click the trophy it says the Championship will start in a min to come back. When and if it does light up is it going to count my fights and my guildies?
I'm sure it will count your fights once it starts. No idea what the delay is from though.
 

DeletedUser7851

The first two weeks I was disappointed to find my young 18th - 24th ranked guild match up against a top 2 team from much older worlds each week, where their teams were much better prepared to fight or negotiate with more rogue hideouts and attack GBs, and much larger supplies of goods compared to my team which was just started in April. The level of the guild does play into the ability of the fighters to field troops in a timely manner as well. I tried to play it down w my team, but this week, facing 3 top 5 ranked guilds.. we are not happy w the championships and feel they are incredibly unfair to the teams from the newer worlds.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser11427

My understanding was that similar guilds would be grouped together to compete. In one of the worlds I play in, my level 28 guild is up against a level 50 guild. We have little chance. How is this similar or even?
 

DeletedUser11427

The first two weeks I was disappointed to find my young 18th - 24th ranked guild match up against a top 2 team from much older worlds each week, where their teams were much better prepared to fight or negotiate with more rogue hideouts and attack GBs, and much larger supplies of goods compared to my team which was just started in April. The level of the guild does play into the ability of the fighters to field troops in a timely manner as well. I tried to play it down w my team, but this week, facing 3 top 5 ranked guilds.. we are not happy w the championships and feel they are incredibly unfair to the teams from the newer worlds.
Yes, it's very discouraging and unfair.
 

DeletedUser14197

The competitions are meaningless in that in some competitions the winning guild may only have 25% participation and in another competition someone with 25% doesn't even take a place. So, it is just one more aspect of the game that is based more on luck than anything else. If you are up against the right guilds, you may win with next to nothing, where as if you are up against the wrong, ones, you may lose even if you have high participation.
 

DeletedUser8152

My understanding was that similar guilds would be grouped together to compete. In one of the worlds I play in, my level 28 guild is up against a level 50 guild. We have little chance. How is this similar or even?
You are placed against guilds with a similar number of member, is all.
 

DeletedUser11427

You are placed against guilds with a similar number of member, is all.
Oh, now I "understand"! Similar means that a guild with 70 Arctic Era members is "similar" to a guild with 70 Iron Age members. Strange "competition".
 

DeletedUser8152

Is there anything preventing the iron age guild from having 100% participation?
 

DeletedUser11427

Is there anything preventing the iron age guild from having 100% participation?
Possibly the same thing that prevents the Iron Age guild from reaching LvL 50. My "guess" is that many players from an Arctic Era LvL 50 guild might have many more attack boosts as well as many other advantages that make a competition between an Artic era guild and an Iron Age guild grossly unfair.
 

DeletedUser14197

Possibly the same thing that prevents the Iron Age guild from reaching LvL 50. My "guess" is that many players from an Arctic Era LvL 50 guild might have many more attack boosts as well as many other advantages that make a competition between an Artic era guild and an Iron Age guild grossly unfair.

I am not sure, but I don't think the enemy has as high bonuses if you are fighting EMA GE than if you are fighting Artic GE. At least on level one the bonuses are lower. I only do level one in most of my cities, but the bonuses are lower depending on the age. Therefore, you really wouldn't need to have as high of bonuses for fighting lower age GE. It still may be an even competition. It may be that it is even easier for the lower age if they can get all 3 of the gbs to level 10 than it is for artic. I had to build strike teams in my future age city to be able to complete level 3. Perhaps I should see if I can complete level 3 in my lower age cities. Some day if I get ambitious, I will try just to see. The problem is I have forgotten how to fight with the lower age troops, so I just do level one on auto with the same units every time.
 

Ylisaveta

Well-Known Member
Possibly the same thing that prevents the Iron Age guild from reaching LvL 50. My "guess" is that many players from an Arctic Era LvL 50 guild might have many more attack boosts as well as many other advantages that make a competition between an Artic era guild and an Iron Age guild grossly unfair.


I was in Iron Age in beta when GE first came out and when the 3 levels were introduced later. Had no Zeus at first, a level 3 Zeus when the 3 GE levels were introduced. Had no trouble finishing level 3. I had an advantage in that I am more advanced on the live servers and therefore a more experienced fighter than most Iron Agers, but it can be done. It is much easier in the early ages, actually. And that is a very exteme case, your example, as I'm sure you know. Most guilds are far more mixed. I also doubt any guild of that size gets 100% participation, no matter what age.
 

Ylisaveta

Well-Known Member
I am not sure, but I don't think the enemy has as high bonuses if you are fighting EMA GE than if you are fighting Artic GE. At least on level one the bonuses are lower. I only do level one in most of my cities, but the bonuses are lower depending on the age. Therefore, you really wouldn't need to have as high of bonuses for fighting lower age GE. It still may be an even competition. It may be that it is even easier for the lower age if they can get all 3 of the gbs to level 10 than it is for artic. I had to build strike teams in my future age city to be able to complete level 3. Perhaps I should see if I can complete level 3 in my lower age cities. Some day if I get ambitious, I will try just to see. The problem is I have forgotten how to fight with the lower age troops, so I just do level one on auto with the same units every time.


You are correct, the bonuses are much lower. Between beta and my 5 worlds on the live servers, I've played all 3 levels in every age from Iron to Indy. I think the last 5 fights on Iron had a 1% boost or something like that. As you go up, boosted opponents show up earlier and the boosts are higher. I've read some of the tactic discussions for Future and AF and it sounds brutal, lol.
 
Top