GVG was half dead and now need to compete with the new kid on the block(GBG）

[Ebeondi Asi]

-

 

[Johnny B. Goode]

Or am I wrong about the Goods used in GvG. I do remember jokes about some draining A Guild Treasury dry in GvG since they had the freedom to use what they wanted. and use they did LOL

The biggest difference is that you can control what age's goods are needed in GvG by which map(s) you decide to be active on. In GBG, in order to erect buildings, you have no control over what ages' goods are needed unless you restrict your membership to specific ages. Goods required can be from any age of an eligible member of the guild. So, for example, a GBG guild with one Iron Age member that is eligible might have to find some way to supplement their Iron Age goods donations to the Treasury, even if they had all three Treasury goods GBs. A GvG guild, by contrast, could simply avoid fighting on the Iron Age map.

 

[Lord Pest]

GBG goods usage. Oh I think about it a lot. We’ve taken on a number of new players in recent weeks and our treasury is now devoid of iron, Ema, and hma goods. No easy fix. They all now have arcs but it will take time to level them high enough to make a dent. I do notice that GBG seems to know which goods you are short of and really sticks it too you. This season it was gold. We have like 1k in the treasury. B2t had 3 building slots and each slot wanted 2700 gold to build a siege. Gold was also asked for on c2t and c3v.

 

[wolfhoundtoo]

Goods are randomly picked amongst all of the ages of the member of the guild. You notice a 'bad roll' because you are short on those goods. How many goods did you get last week that were something you had piles and piles of?

 

[Lord Pest]

Goods are randomly picked amongst all of the ages of the member of the guild. You notice a 'bad roll' because you are short on those goods. How many goods did you get last week that were something you had piles and piles of?

That‘s very true... I do only notice the goods that hurt.

 

[Lord Pest]

How odd is this... There are 50+ diamond guilds in the world I play in so we are looking at 7 diamond maps per season. We have had the same swap partner the last 4 seasons. Works out well for the both of us but what are the odds? I’d love to know what goes in to the placement of guilds on the maps. If it is random getting on the same map with your swap partner 4 seasons in a row has to be very low odds.

 

[OldeDog]

Basically it's a screw up, guild rankings are overly influenced by GvG yet only about 5% (I'm told) of members play it, also the maps (particularly AA) are made in such a way that one or two guilds can block off a large part and thus attain maximum benefits for fairly little effort, and so making players even less interested in bothering to play it. And then we have the costs...

 

[MJ Artisan of War]

How odd is this... There are 50+ diamond guilds in the world I play in so we are looking at 7 diamond maps per season. We have had the same swap partner the last 4 seasons. Works out well for the both of us but what are the odds? I’d love to know what goes in to the placement of guilds on the maps. If it is random getting on the same map with your swap partner 4 seasons in a row has to be very low odds.

Strange You mention that... I posted a Bug Report this morning:

On both Noarsil and Zorskog the GBG opponents are exactly the same this week...
Are others seeing this as well? Very odd...

It immediately got moved to "Not a Bug" and closed...

 

[wolfhoundtoo]

Given the small size of the guild pool on a one particular world you could expect that you would see this now and again (although not often). While the guild I"m in has the 4 of the guilds the same the other 4 were not in the league we were in last week. If you are talking diamond then the number of guilds at that level that I've seen people claim on a world is about 50 so only 7 leagues with that many guilds.

 

[wolfhoundtoo]

Basically it's a screw up, guild rankings are overly influenced by GvG yet only about 5% (I'm told) of members play it, also the maps (particularly AA) are made in such a way that one or two guilds can block off a large part and thus attain maximum benefits for fairly little effort, and so making players even less interested in bothering to play it. And then we have the costs...

AA has a ton of beach which means unless they are trading sectors daily then a guild that wants to land should be able to do so and take sectors so long as they can manage to kill enemy sectors decently fast.

 

[Aggressor]

Just wanted to chime in here for a sec. We've all heard that less than 10% of FoE players participate in GvG. But you need to think of who makes up that 10%. At least half of the top players on the worlds I play on do GvG. These are the best players who spend the big $ and do the most GbG. These are the people Inno can get their money from. Not the small IA newbies. So sure, less than 10% do GvG, but is that the 10% Inno wants to piss off?

 

[Kranyar the Mysterious]

Given the small size of the guild pool on a one particular world you could expect that you would see this now and again (although not often). While the guild I"m in has the 4 of the guilds the same the other 4 were not in the league we were in last week. If you are talking diamond then the number of guilds at that level that I've seen people claim on a world is about 50 so only 7 leagues with that many guilds.

There are 58 diamond league guilds in Mt. Killmore, yet for 3 seasons in a row now the same top 3 guilds have now faced off together in the same battlefield, and the top 4 the last 2 seasons. Only the bottom 4 teams have changed. Similar issue on other worlds too.

 

[Johnny B. Goode]

We've all heard that less than 10% of FoE players participate in GvG.

Not "less than 10%", the figure is 5%. And that's not what "we've all heard", it's the official word from InnoGames. (And that was years ago, it is undoubtedly less now.)

But you need to think of who makes up that 10%. At least half of the top players on the worlds I play on do GvG.

Gee, do you think that might be because rankings are heavily weighted towards GvG?

These are the best players who spend the big $ and do the most GbG.

Best players? No evidence other than rankings, which I already addressed.
Spend the big $? Only InnoGames knows whether this is true, but if it were true, why would they be ignoring GvG?
Do the most GBG? Another guess with no evidence presented to back it up. Maybe true, maybe not. In either case, irrelevant.

These are the people Inno can get their money from. Not the small IA newbies. So sure, less than 10% do GvG, but is that the 10% Inno wants to piss off?

Again, it's 5%, not 10%. And (also again) you present no evidence of these "facts". Because you don't know if they're true. Only InnoGames knows the facts, and the fact that they basically abandoned GvG years ago speaks volumes...to those of us not turning a blind eye to it.

 

[Flavius Belisarius]

I have been into GvG since 2015.
GvG is an essential factor in creating a social environment that focuses inter & intra player cooperation on the game to achieve a common goal for a group of players.
Twice I managed to get my Guilds to Number 3 & then 4 in Global Ranking through intense activity in GvG.
Then along came the Canyon Ranch/Syndicate cabal and Tuulech became their personal farmland.
Eventually many players have adapted to an asymmetrical style of play that focuses on survival, resistance, and growth in spite of the Cabal.
Now I'm in a small guild and have managed to get from #199 to #102 in just three weeks time.
Also, I now regularly reach 64/48 in GE and our small guild finishes top three in GbG (mostly Gold League). GbG feeds our GvG treasury.
Several Guilds have loosely allied (informally) to conduct partisan warfare against the CR/SYN cabal.
If there was no GvG, Tuulech would not be a fun place to play. Unless you enjoy a game where social interaction is not important.
INNO has a product that does provide both a social and an individual environment. Ending GvG would likely influence many players to reconsider their motivation to continue to devote time to this "more than a game."

 

[Kranyar the Mysterious]

If there was no GvG, Tuulech would not be a fun place to play. Unless you enjoy a game where social interaction is not important.
INNO has a product that does provide both a social and an individual environment. Ending GvG would likely influence many players to reconsider their motivation to continue to devote time to this "more than a game."

And yet 95 some % of players manage to just that without GvG being a part of their gameplay at all. I've never heard anyone say that they thought they weren't having fun playing FoE because they couldn't play GvG. I've never heard of anyone lamenting the lack of social interactions because they can't do GvG.

The game revolves around GBG now, not GvG. GvG is a fun place that majorly affects the rankings, and that is why it has remained relevant. Take away the guild ranking points and most current GvG players would abandon it. In fact, I suspect a majority of players would prefer to see it removed from the guild ranking system, or at least become much less important. I also suspect that a vast majority of players believe that it is unfair that a game mechanic that 95% of players can't access is the sole determination of which guild is ranked #1.

I think that GvG spurs enough longtime whale players to spend enough money on diamonds to justify it's remaining, otherwise I think it would be long gone. If GvG were to disappear tomorrow, I suspect that those players who have built their whole game around GvG and nothing but GvG would be the vast majority of players that leave the game, and maybe not most of them either. For everyone else it would simply go away as a whisper in the night.

If what you say were true, this game would have died a long time ago.

 

[Flavius Belisarius]

And yet 95 some % of players manage to just that without GvG being a part of their gameplay at all. I've never heard anyone say that they thought they weren't having fun playing FoE because they couldn't play GvG. I've never heard of anyone lamenting the lack of social interactions because they can't do GvG.

The game revolves around GBG now, not GvG. GvG is a fun place that majorly affects the rankings, and that is why it has remained relevant. Take away the guild ranking points and most current GvG players would abandon it. In fact, I suspect a majority of players would prefer to see it removed from the guild ranking system, or at least become much less important. I also suspect that a vast majority of players believe that it is unfair that a game mechanic that 95% of players can't access is the sole determination of which guild is ranked #1.

I think that GvG spurs enough longtime whale players to spend enough money on diamonds to justify it's remaining, otherwise I think it would be long gone. If GvG were to disappear tomorrow, I suspect that those players who have built their whole game around GvG and nothing but GvG would be the vast majority of players that leave the game, and maybe not most of them either. For everyone else it would simply go away as a whisper in the night.

If what you say were true, this game would have died a long time ago.

Your argument is valid ONLY if you do not value the social interaction required for competitive GvG.
If people like FOE because they can remain in their bubble without having to actively communicate to succeed, OK. GvG requires you to actually communicate, coordinate, and establish a social (human) relationship.

 

[Kranyar the Mysterious]

Your argument is valid ONLY if you do not value the social interaction required for competitive GvG.
If people like FOE because they can remain in their bubble without having to actively communicate to succeed, OK. GvG requires you to actually communicate, coordinate, and establish a social (human) relationship.

I've played plenty of GvG, and while what you say is true about interaction being required, it is just as true in GBG if you want to succeed there. In fact, several of my guilds are now going to discord in order to be able to communicate better in GBG, whereas they've never felt the need for it all the prior years they've been active in GvG, and I'd count actually talking to someone to be more social than typing in chat, especially with all the other conversations that pop up. I'd also say that the interaction in GvG isn't near as social as many other forms of communication I see used in the game, it has always seemed more coordination than social to me.

I suspect that it is you that hasn't kept up with the times and remain in a bubble.

 

[wolfhoundtoo]

There are 58 diamond league guilds in Mt. Killmore, yet for 3 seasons in a row now the same top 3 guilds have now faced off together in the same battlefield, and the top 4 the last 2 seasons. Only the bottom 4 teams have changed. Similar issue on other worlds too.

And? it's not entirely out of the range of possible variables in that small a pool of guilds. Of course it's also possible that they've changed the criteria in some manner that they haven't shared but without more data you aren't at the point where you can say it's broken for sure based on the results. Show the math if you think it's broken then at least you have something to support the idea that there's a bug in the system once it gets to the point where the number of times it has happened ends up in the high ends.

No data to support a bug report means if they say it's not a bug they get the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Kranyar the Mysterious]

And? it's not entirely out of the range of possible variables in that small a pool of guilds. Of course it's also possible that they've changed the criteria in some manner that they haven't shared but without more data you aren't at the point where you can say it's broken for sure based on the results. Show the math if you think it's broken then at least you have something to support the idea that there's a bug in the system once it gets to the point where the number of times it has happened ends up in the high ends.

No data to support a bug report means if they say it's not a bug they get the benefit of the doubt.

Don't think I said anywhere that I thought it was broken. I suspect changed criteria as well. I just added my observations to the others. Other people in several of my social threads in game have been commenting about the same thing too (in other battlegrounds than me).

 

[Johnny B. Goode]

Your argument is valid ONLY if you do not value the social interaction required for competitive GvG.

There is no "social interaction" required for competitive GvG (or any other area of the game, for that matter.) Communication, yes, but that isn't necessarily social interaction.

If people like FOE because they can remain in their bubble without having to actively communicate to succeed, OK.

Assuming that people who don't do GvG aren't social is not just a stretch, it's plain wrong. I have been in dozens of guilds over the years and the GvG ones have been the least social. They communicate about GvG, but that's not socializing.

GvG requires you to actually communicate, coordinate, and establish a social (human) relationship.

Communicate and coordinate, yes, but those do not require establishing a social (human) relationship. And plenty of GvG guilds (in my experience) have trouble just communicating and coordinating.