When can we stop pretending GBG is balanced?

[Ebeondi Asi]

-

 

[Savvy187]

GBG is so bad I can't even care about it anymore..

 

[Tony 85 the Generous]

Do any go into specific weighting of factors while acknowledging that past performance has to be given some weight?

Can you roll out a couple of models we can look at?

I'm happy to discuss this and see if we can come up with some formula that works with the five factors.

Working on it. I need to build enough players and guilds to simulate seasons in GBG. That's a lot of players.

 

[Tony 85 the Generous]

I can tell you it sucks to be the only strong Guild with six other really weak onesina GbG Season. In one World we are in. This Season we can do almost nothing, since even giving other Guilds SC they still cannot take one sector in less than a day. (other times we have had a weak partner, waiting on them some, but this Season is the worst, with none capable of communicating, nor acting on any advantage given.) Times six makes for a very very boring GbG. We stopped adding any SC since it is a waste of time. We, even with very low exchange, have more points than all the rest together. If that is what weak Guilds wanted ? LOL like Kintergarten for Foe. And they are supposed to be 'Platinum"? Not whining heaven forbid!! just stating the fact. Then in other worlds my Guild is up against the other top two who shut us out hard last Season. Again just a fact. and actally preferrable to the six weak ones.

You have described the situation I have been putting forth, in reverse.

And they are supposed to be 'Platinum"?

I cannot say it better than that. Now contemplate how they got there and you will close the loop on one of the largest (IMO) problem in GBG.

 

[Taipanium]

Here is an idea to consider for helping to fix the utterly broken GBG mechanic. All guilds in a battleground get a special new button. Make it so that only Founders of the guild can press the button, and if there is more than 1 founder, a majority of them has to click it. What does it do?
Abandon GBG. As in, you remove your guild entirely from that GBG instance including its last tile. And it can be more than just a symbolic 'storming out with hands in the air' - the feature gets more bite when a GBG is automatically closed down entirely when there are less than 3 guilds remaining in that GBG instance.

Concretely - if 2 guilds want to farm the hell out of GBG and lock down all other 6 guilds to their starting tiles, then the others can leave, and if all 6 leave, no more free goodies for the bullies. And if the counterargument to that is 'well then those 6 guilds are so weak, they should not be there in the first place' - we would be back at discussing the broken matchmaking algorhytm Inno uses.

Unless, Inno likes it this way because it is their way of diamondfarming their users ?

 

[Manicato]

If you can't hang with the big dogs, bark, bark, bark...

From how I see it , it is not about hanging with the big dogs because I have been on both sides, in one land am in a strong guild always places 1st or 2nd, and in another world in a guild that struggles near the bottom.

The map is limited, if you have two top guilds always exchanging then no one has a chance to even compete in a race.

This is why even though my ideas were unformatted, I believe the sectors in front of each of the guilds home base should be off limits to opposing guilds who continually lock them out when their home base is on the opposite side of the map.

The concentration usually is center for the top guilds with outer rings usually secondary or third and so on. The sectors in front and next to the guilds home base should be exclusive for the home guild for auto battles for rewards and also a platform to launch to be able to battle a strategy towards the center rings. Now if a smaller guild is unable to do this, then so be it.

From the lower levels such as Platinum, a weaker guild may place 1st because of the grouping of other guilds they may not be as active, then it thrusts that guild automatically into Diamond. There are guilds who try their hardest not to make Diamond because of this.

Also I believe the Diamond map can sometimes be too easy for a stronger guild who generally easily does over 1,000 battles/negotiations in a season. With that the Diamond League needs to be upgraded to challenge top guilds.

 

[Manicato]

What I’m saying is the guilds are already arranged top to bottom in order of score. So there’d be very little change if the score continued beyond 1,000 to allow only 7 guilds because those at 1,000 are all on the same island(s) and everyone below 1,000 is arranged in order of score.

I believe the change should come in which opposing guilds should not be allowed to attack the sector in front of a home guild or the sides, these should be the launching platforms for the home guild to enter the map; and if the map sectors are locked down, the sectors in front of the home base and sides the home guild is able to do auto battles to earn rewards as well. A bottom scoring guild may not win in the season, but it does give them a fair chance to earn rewards and fulfill quests.

 

[Manicato]

Here is an idea to consider for helping to fix the utterly broken GBG mechanic. All guilds in a battleground get a special new button. Make it so that only Founders of the guild can press the button, and if there is more than 1 founder, a majority of them has to click it. What does it do?
Abandon GBG. As in, you remove your guild entirely from that GBG instance including its last tile. And it can be more than just a symbolic 'storming out with hands in the air' - the feature gets more bite when a GBG is automatically closed down entirely when there are less than 3 guilds remaining in that GBG instance.

Concretely - if 2 guilds want to farm the hell out of GBG and lock down all other 6 guilds to their starting tiles, then the others can leave, and if all 6 leave, no more free goodies for the bullies. And if the counterargument to that is 'well then those 6 guilds are so weak, they should not be there in the first place' - we would be back at discussing the broken matchmaking algorhytm Inno uses.

Unless, Inno likes it this way because it is their way of diamondfarming their users ?

agree and my suggestion is to make off limits to each opposing guild the sectors surrounding the guild's home base and only allow the home guild to use this as their launching pad and also option to auto battle on these sectors to earn rewards.

 

[Taipanium]

From how I see it , it is not about hanging with the big dogs because I have been on both sides, in one land am in a strong guild always places 1st or 2nd, and in another world in a guild that struggles near the bottom.

The map is limited, if you have two top guilds always exchanging then no one has a chance to even compete in a race.

This is why even though my ideas were unformatted, I believe the sectors in front of each of the guilds home base should be off limits to opposing guilds who continually lock them out when their home base is on the opposite side of the map.

The concentration usually is center for the top guilds with outer rings usually secondary or third and so on. The sectors in front and next to the guilds home base should be exclusive for the home guild for auto battles for rewards and also a platform to launch to be able to battle a strategy towards the center rings. Now if a smaller guild is unable to do this, then so be it.

From the lower levels such as Platinum, a weaker guild may place 1st because of the grouping of other guilds they may not be as active, then it thrusts that guild automatically into Diamond. There are guilds who try their hardest not to make Diamond because of this.

Also I believe the Diamond map can sometimes be too easy for a stronger guild who generally easily does over 1,000 battles/negotiations in a season. With that the Diamond League needs to be upgraded to challenge top guilds.

Tanama, I appreciate the input, but I don't know what world you live in.
1000 battles per season? On Brisgard we have 2 guilds sectorfarming and holding down 48 of all 52 capturable tiles on the entire map, flipping every 4 hours. They easily do 40.000 to 50.000 battles per season, if not more. I know of single players doing 5k to 8k hits per season all by themselves.
Here is a pic of our current battleground. We got three guilds fighting eachother (verbally) to get to 0 vp/hour as fast as possible to be demoted out of this hell rather than spend another season in it.
Getting 1 tile as foothold would make zero difference in the overall experience.

 

[RazorbackPirate]

my suggestion is to make off limits to each opposing guild the sectors surrounding the guild's home base and only allow the home guild to use this as their launching pad and also option to auto battle on these sectors to earn rewards.

No matter how many times you say it, nothing will make your proposal anything other than taking away from dominant guilds, simply because they're dominant guilds. I guess it's a sign of the times. You're proposal is based on the assumption that dominant guilds have done something wrong by locking you into your home territory. Sorry, 'bout your feels, but tough. There's only so many places to go one the map to farm for rewards and if those spots are the place to go for more rewards, too bad, so sad. NOT!

I've also regularly been on both sides of the equation, and I can say one thing, not matter what's happening on the overall map, I've always been able to max out my attrition fighting, then continue further with negotiations. Sure, in some weeks I can't get as much as... blah, blah, whatever. So what? Stop worrying about what others do or have, focus on you.

Either be willing to do the things others do to have the things others have, or deal with the fact you'll always have less. No one should be penalized for your deficit. Dominant guilds have broken no rules, they've done nothing wrong. Stop trying to take from others. It's not yours to have.

 

[Tony 85 the Generous]

my suggestion is to make off limits to each opposing guild the sectors surrounding the guild's home base and only allow the home guild to use this as their launching pad and also option to auto battle on these sectors to earn rewards.

What is the difference if one guild is so outmatched they cannot get out of their base versus can't get out of the sector in front of their base?

Getting 1 tile as foothold would make zero difference in the overall experience.

Either way the guild is pinned. This suggestion only masks a symptom and does not address the problem. Why is the guild pinned? Lazy members? Doubtful or they would be in copper and have little to complain about. Outmatched? Probably. Why? Because they happened to win last season and advanced leagues. Now we have the root cause. How about ideas and suggestions to address it.

 

[Taipanium]

What is the difference if one guild is so outmatched they cannot get out of their base versus can't get out of the sector in front of their base?

Either way the guild is pinned. This suggestion only masks a symptom and does not address the problem. Why is the guild pinned? Lazy members? Doubtful or they would be in copper and have little to complain about. Outmatched? Probably. Why? Because they happened to win last season and advanced leagues. Now we have the root cause. How about ideas and suggestions to address it.

You too are making assumptions. I challenge the statement that failure to break out from HQ tile is due to weakness of the guild in question. That is but ONE possible explanation. I have personally witnessed a determined coordinated lockdown of an enemy guild to their home tile, where that guild was very strong and doing its utmost to break out. We're talking about a guild where the top 5 players combined are stronger than 98% of all other guilds with all their members. A guild that was #1 on its server for years. Sky high attack ratings, infinite treasury, 80 determined fighters. etc etc. It all means nothing if you are locked into your starting position without the ability to break out, regardless of your resources, determination level, or tactical insights.

 

[Emberguard]

We're talking about a guild where the top 5 players combined are stronger than 98% of all other guilds with all their members

What’s the strength of the rest of the guild? Or are they relying on 5 players? Yes there is absolutely strength in the top players. That can swing the balance quite a bit. But you can’t always rely only on the top players. If they’ve been pinned they need to co-ordinate everyone they can to get out as attrition goes a lot further across 80 players then it does 5

If a guild can’t break out from HQ it’s because they‘re slower then the opponents attack once the locked province is available to attack.

Why are they slower? Are we talking about a fresh province or a province with advances already on it? Whose advances are on it? If you’re springing off from HQ there’s no way for the opponent to prevent you from attacking. So any progress is still progress even if the opponent is faster. What’s preventing the guild from chipping out of there across a couple exchanges of that province?

When things are going well how many of those players are actually participating in that guild each day compared to the opponents?

A guild that was #1 on its server for years

To be fair they only had to compete with 5% of the player base for years. Now they’re competing with the other 95% that haven’t got access to GvG

 

[Tony 85 the Generous]

You too are making assumptions. I challenge the statement that failure to break out from HQ tile is due to weakness of the guild in question. That is but ONE possible explanation. I have personally witnessed a determined coordinated lockdown of an enemy guild to their home tile, where that guild was very strong and doing its utmost to break out. We're talking about a guild where the top 5 players combined are stronger than 98% of all other guilds with all their members. A guild that was #1 on its server for years. Sky high attack ratings, infinite treasury, 80 determined fighters. etc etc. It all means nothing if you are locked into your starting position without the ability to break out, regardless of your resources, determination level, or tactical insights.

I am not making assumptions. I am asking questions and posing possible answers and/or reasons.

I challenge the statement that failure to break out from HQ tile is due to weakness of the guild in question.

Not sure what you are challanging, as I did not make such a statement.

I have personally witnessed a determined coordinated lockdown of an enemy guild to their home tile, where that guild was very strong and doing its utmost to break out. We're talking about a guild where the top 5 players combined are stronger than 98% of all other guilds with all their members. A guild that was #1 on its server for years. Sky high attack ratings, infinite treasury, 80 determined fighters. etc etc. It all means nothing if you are locked into your starting position without the ability to break out, regardless of your resources, determination level, or tactical insights.

This would not be a counterpoint to my statement but agreeing with the final statement from the other side. They are outmatched. Now

Why? Because they happened to win last season and advanced leagues. Now we have the root cause. How about ideas and suggestions to address it.

Why are they slower? Are we talking about a fresh province or a province with advances already on it? Whose advances are on it? If you’re springing off from HQ there’s no way for the opponent to prevent you from attacking. So any progress is still progress even if the opponent is faster. What’s preventing the guild from chipping out of there across a couple exchanges of that province?

Another possibility is there are two guilds allied and coordinating softlocks which can very effectively pin a guild into the base sector; baased on the picture in post #389 is very much possible. Which brings us back to determining a root cause (alliances) and methods that can be implemented to prevent them (or so burdensome to create players just don't_.

 

[Emberguard]

Another possibility is there are two guilds allied and coordinating softlocks which can very effectively pin a guild into the base sector; baased on the picture in post #389 is very much possible. Which brings us back to determining a root cause (alliances) and methods that can be implemented to prevent them (or so burdensome to create players just don't_.

That still means they're slower than the attacking guild. If the guild trying to break out was faster the ally wouldn't be able to lock them out indefinitely. The guild trying to escape will keep increasing their advances on that province. The allied guilds would have to keep swapping between them giving a disadvantage of starting again from scratch from that change over

 

[Emberguard]

Of course if they do escape they've then still got to deal with the alliance on all the other provinces

 

[Tony 85 the Generous]

That still means they're slower than the attacking guild. If the guild trying to break out was faster the ally wouldn't be able to lock them out indefinitely. The guild trying to escape will keep increasing their advances on that province. The allied guilds would have to keep swapping between them giving a disadvantage of starting again from scratch from that change over.
Of course if they do escape they've then still got to deal with the alliance on all the other provinces

If the allied guilds setup the map correctly, they can and it is very easy.

For discussion, I'm going to make all three guilds equal strength. It should also be noted the home or pinned guild will have no SCs while the allied guilds are supported by one or more SCs.

Start: Allied guilds both takes sector #1 up 90%. Guild 1 takes sector #1, leaves guild 2 at 45%.
Unlock #1: the home guild works sector #1 from at 0, guild 2 starts at 45%
Unlock #2: home guild gets to 55%, guild 2 takes it.
Unlock #3: home guild starts at 28%, guild 1 starts at 0. Home takes sector #1, guild 1 now at 72% but reduced to 36%.
If the home guild cannot also take the adjacent sector, in 4 hours sector #1 goes back to start, But alas, the next sector also has a soft lock. Guild 1 waits as long as possible, then takes sector #2. Now the home guild cannot take sector #2 for 4 hours and sector #1 will unlock before sector #2. When sector #1 unlocks, the home guild cannot prevent it from being attacked and is lost along with all of the attacks on sector #2.

If the guilds can take a sector in equal time and the allied guilds run the strategy correctly, they can keep the guild pinned in to the base, or at worst case, the four adjacent sectors. Furthermore, the pinned guild would accrue 100% attrition per attack while the allied guilds accrue no more than 76%.

This is three equal guilds, in a 1 v 2 fight and the lone guild will lose. This is a single, but detailed, example of why alliances should be prevented by Inno. The only possible hope for the pinned guild is to hope one of the allied guild screws up their execution.

 

[Taipanium]

To be fair they only had to compete with 5% of the player base for years. Now they’re competing with the other 95% that haven’t got access to GvG

Just regarding this one statement: you are assuming that GBG success actually factors in, in some significant way, into server rankings / prestige. it does not. You get a one day bump on the day GBG closes, and the rest of the days are as always, prestige is largely driven by the amount of GVG lands held.

 

[Taipanium]

Another possibility is there are two guilds allied and coordinating softlocks which can very effectively pin a guild into the base sector; based on the picture in post #389 is very much possible. Which brings us back to determining a root cause (alliances) and methods that can be implemented to prevent them (or so burdensome to create players just don't_.

This. ! Perhaps I was not clear before - but THAT is the problem - When 2 guilds ally to dominate the map and lock down the rest (with overlapping softlocks), THEN it does not matter how skilled or resourceful you are. Whoever gets the lock in place first in the first hour of a 14 day candygrab ride / hellride (depending on where you sit) 'wins'. This is not as it should be.

 

[Taipanium]

Of course if they do escape they've then still got to deal with the alliance on all the other provinces

Yep. Take 3 equally matched guilds and the allied team will always win. Because you cannot 'rebubble your own tiles' in GVG terms. You can break out, take 4-5-6 tiles depending on how much firepower you have / siege camps you have, and then 4 hours later are powerless to prevent being pushed back to HQ tile only.
That's not a complaint, just an observation. The guild suffering from this is free to make its own alliance and try to apply the same counterstrategy, 2 vs 2. (Which I have never seen work, but okay). The problem is the way SC attrition works, its a snowball effect, once you got out of the starting gate you can take the next 10 sectors or so for virtually no attrition cost. If two guilds do that and get overlapping softlocks in place on day 1, its game over for next ten days.