Flavius Belisarius
Active Member
Easy to fix if INNO would allow you to free your last sector with the provision that your Guild can't re-enter that ERA/AGE for 96 Hours.
-
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:
Reduce the shield protection from 24hrs to 1 hour.
- Thread starter *Arturis*
- Start date
DeletedUser28077
So I walk across a map, fighting...no problem. There better be a number of guilds willing to spend 24/7 and have the firepower necessary to keep me locked up.
DeletedUser26965
Nope, you can only move your HQ once a day and you can only attack sectors connected to HQ until reset which of course any guild worth their salt will either stop you beforehand or simply wipe ya when reset comes.
DeletedUser28077
No loss. They have to contain me and others on 12 maps. Anybody wanting to be Number 1 is not going to spend a lot of time on flies like us.
DeletedUser26120
Gvg grievances should be addressed in its own thread/proposal. We've gotten way off topic here.
DeletedUser26965
Yet another reprimand of "off topic". What is exactly off topic here? What "grievance" are you talking about?
The OP said;
You even added;
How is a developers passing relative to improving GvG?
DeletedUser28670
Hmm he did say any person could make a suggestion to improve GvG in this thread....
qaccy
Well-Known Member
I think the little 'back and forth' between @amaranth the mighty and @sloppyjoeslayer is what @Dursland was referring to as being 'off-topic', although that's been a lot of this topic without a lot of talk of how to 'change' or 'improve' GvG.
For what it's worth, amaranth's idea of 'fun' is one-sided, and sloppy's still correct in that Inno's got it hard-coded that you can't abandon your last sector, meaning they must envision to some degree that taking and holding sectors is the intent of GvG. Of course, some players who that intent doesn't appeal to have different ideas, but based on the track record of what Inno's done regarding GvG changes, I don't think they see amaranth's 'catch and release concept' as an encouraged way to play GvG (a lot of updates/changes to the system have been to discourage this practice).
For what it's worth, amaranth's idea of 'fun' is one-sided, and sloppy's still correct in that Inno's got it hard-coded that you can't abandon your last sector, meaning they must envision to some degree that taking and holding sectors is the intent of GvG. Of course, some players who that intent doesn't appeal to have different ideas, but based on the track record of what Inno's done regarding GvG changes, I don't think they see amaranth's 'catch and release concept' as an encouraged way to play GvG (a lot of updates/changes to the system have been to discourage this practice).
DeletedUser28077
Who is the customer? I know Innogames doesn't particularly care.
DeletedUser11463
As I mentioned above, you can get a small guild (of highly advanced players) who have arcs & Alcatraz and you can chew through territories held by big boys. The current system slows you down to a few sectors. If they got rid of it, you could mow through a huge amount of sectors in a few days and take/release big numbers of sectors very easily.
But even with the current system, if you can get into the middle of a guild's territory you can eat up 10-12 sectors by the second night. So I think the small guild would have more advantage than a big guild. Sure the big boys could take alot quickly but their goods would soon run low once the got nibbled on by other guilds. Much harder to keep territory than to take it.
But even with the current system, if you can get into the middle of a guild's territory you can eat up 10-12 sectors by the second night. So I think the small guild would have more advantage than a big guild. Sure the big boys could take alot quickly but their goods would soon run low once the got nibbled on by other guilds. Much harder to keep territory than to take it.
wolfhoundtoo
Well-Known Member
I agree with that.......plus players forget just how much replacing a single lost sector cost in goods if you hold a significant amount of territory. This change would certainly require a lot of rebalancing if you were going to change the protection to 1 hour.
Flavius Belisarius
Active Member
Please let me bring this up.
Large vs Small Guilds in GvG.
That's life, but once a Guild conquers a vast amount of territory, they do not have to do anything to keep it other than fight off Guilds.
There is not COST for maintaining your Empire.
Another thought would be to have a maintenance tax on your sectors.
Cost based on distance from your HQ. If not paid by next RECAL all your units in your DAs lose one step. This continues each RECAL until you make a payment. No partial payments for a sector. You can't pay back taxes to regain steps. Tax for each sector should include Coins, Supplies and goods.
Example for a simple 7 sector holding:
XXX AGE HQ 1 Coin & 1 Supply per DA and 1 of each era good (total five). Adding one to tax for each hex distance from HQ would generate a total tax for 7 sectors of 65 goods, 130 Coins & 130 Supplies.
Big Guilds should have to pay to keep what they conquered.
Large vs Small Guilds in GvG.
That's life, but once a Guild conquers a vast amount of territory, they do not have to do anything to keep it other than fight off Guilds.
There is not COST for maintaining your Empire.
Another thought would be to have a maintenance tax on your sectors.
Cost based on distance from your HQ. If not paid by next RECAL all your units in your DAs lose one step. This continues each RECAL until you make a payment. No partial payments for a sector. You can't pay back taxes to regain steps. Tax for each sector should include Coins, Supplies and goods.
Example for a simple 7 sector holding:
XXX AGE HQ 1 Coin & 1 Supply per DA and 1 of each era good (total five). Adding one to tax for each hex distance from HQ would generate a total tax for 7 sectors of 65 goods, 130 Coins & 130 Supplies.
Big Guilds should have to pay to keep what they conquered.
lemonwedgie
Well-Known Member
I have long said that 24hrs is ridiculous and GvG hinges on reset although I think an hour would be too much as we would go back to the similaf problems we had when we could bounce our HQ limitlessly. I would love to see two shields drops 12hrs apart - it would allow many more people to enjoy GvG (example, my guild has many daytime players who hate that they can't make reset) and I also think this would help combat some of the reset lag issues .... currently the more cross-swords on a map the worse the lag ... so reset becomes unbearable for some.
DeletedUser
Lots of good ideas here. I don't do GvG except on rare occasions, but I hope the developers can figure out something to make it more fun/fair for those that utilize it.