When can we stop pretending GBG is balanced?

[Kranyar the Mysterious]

The point of spending nothing is not to build up the threasury, it is to not waste the treasury.

What for god's sake would your guild ever spend their treasury on then if not GBG? Do you have a Mutual Treasury Admiration Club that sits around talking about how wonderful it is to have a treasury with a million SAAB goods sitting in it?

It's not like one decent Arc can't produce a week's worth of GE goods for an era in one day, and if you are worried about treasury amounts I'm guessing your guild doesn't do much if any GvG either.

 

[Beorn Bear]

What for god's sake would your guild ever spend their treasury on then if not GBG? Do you have a Mutual Treasury Admiration Club that sits around talking about how wonderful it is to have a treasury with a million SAAB goods sitting in it?

It's not like one decent Arc can't produce a week's worth of GE goods for an era in one day, and if you are worried about treasury amounts I'm guessing your guild doesn't do much if any GvG either.

His point is that if you get into a map where you know you can't be competitive, any Treasury goods spent there would be wasted. He's not saying they're short of Treasury goods, he's just saying that there's no point spending what they have for little to no return on investment. You don't have to be "worried about treasury amounts" to be averse to wasting them.

 

[Flavius Belisarius]

There's virtually no rewards for being first place in GBG aside from... inefficient RtVs and AD coins. That is the root of the problem

Why? Because you encourage degenerate sector swaps and locks that way. Guilds won't want to overly dominate and instead look for 1 to 2 guilds to work together in order to get more battles. The more guild that works together, the more resources the guild saves. And because sector locks don't get randomized from 1,2,3,4 hours, any half-decent low effort coord blocks any attempt for breaking softlocks

Providing actually good/infinitely scaling rewards for 1st placers and guilds that refuse to work with others because they're too strong would solve a lot of GBG degeneracies because maintaining that kind of strategy would actually cost them compared to what we have now where the costs is basically non-existent to maintain and alliances is always a no-brainer

So here's a thought from Sharmon the Impaler. Sounds like a strategy for success for a Guild that wants to earn/work its way to competitiveness instead of changing the rules.
The guilds are made up of individual people , you make connections with the people in the other guilds over time (you know , friends list , swap groups , forums , etc). These connections build to alliances between the guilds each player is in and voila. Through your hard work your guild is now allied with another and gets a slice of the pie.

The involvement in GbG starts with recruiting , building up your members so you grow as a unit. Ban greedy practices like 1.8, 1.85 , swaps etc. This creates top flowing wealth only and will suppress you as a guild and make you very noncompetitive in GbG.

Guilds were created to form bonds between individual members not as a cash cow for the founder and leaders , work that and you will have the grass roots worked out. Then you compete as a unit and will get knocked down. Guess what ? You build everyone higher and you get into the ring again. Rinse and repeat until you've earned your playing level AS A UNIT.

A large campaign involves many players in a guild and shift work and planning , this is fully engaged game play , this is good. I have been building myself up in Q for over a year and my current guild is a family that helps one another because the weakest link determines the strength of a chain. A weak guild starts with the players that bellyache about guild requirements and not getting everything handed to them , this progresses to the GbG level. Fix the roots and you will fix GbG. Stop asking Inno to spoon feed you and just play it like it was meant to be played . *mic drop*

 

[GreatThunderclap]

That's precisely what a feedback thread is. Random actual players posting their position, thoughts and opinions. Also every now and then Inno does ingame surveys that allow players to give their feedback.

I would expect a move like that to have the majority of active players quit on the spot, quite possibly even kill the game. Those who are established would be rightfully irate if they lost upto a million Forge Points worth of levels overnight and those who don't have Arcs would have a permanent disadvantage from those who already hyper lvl'd their GBs. You wouldn't be able to distinguish between owner FPs and contributor FPs either as purchase of goods would be included within those FPs made by contributors

Also if it's not competitive now, neutering Arc won't suddenly make it competitive if everyone stayed playing. Because then those who have lvl 30-180+ GBs would still have lvl 30-180+ GBs to work with. There's guilds that have hyper lvl'd the other Treasury GBs in addition to the Arc anyway. So such a change would only be kicking down the little guy. The big guy is already established enough that they'd be able to keep going if they wanted without feeling it beyond no longer having 1.9 for future leveling

Would you really want to remove your ability to lvl the Arc above lvl 30 and still have to go up against those with a bunch of Lvl 80-180 GBs?

So then by your statement and position, the game is permanently unbalanced. However, I disagree. This isnt a war game. Perhaps we DONT NEED war whales. Who said anyone gets to keep their 30-180 gbs. Refunds in in a said rebalancing.

The whole point is INNO Forget that this was supposed to be building empires, not slaughtering opponents. Yes alot of the oldbees are here for war because they are bored. The game is over for them. But i seriously doubt this will ever happen so it remains my disliked opinion.

 

[GreatThunderclap]

So here's a thought from Sharmon the Impaler. Sounds like a strategy for success for a Guild that wants to earn/work its way to competitiveness instead of changing the rules.
The guilds are made up of individual people , you make connections with the people in the other guilds over time (you know , friends list , swap groups , forums , etc). These connections build to alliances between the guilds each player is in and voila. Through your hard work your guild is now allied with another and gets a slice of the pie.

The involvement in GbG starts with recruiting , building up your members so you grow as a unit. Ban greedy practices like 1.8, 1.85 , swaps etc. This creates top flowing wealth only and will suppress you as a guild and make you very noncompetitive in GbG.

Guilds were created to form bonds between individual members not as a cash cow for the founder and leaders , work that and you will have the grass roots worked out. Then you compete as a unit and will get knocked down. Guess what ? You build everyone higher and you get into the ring again. Rinse and repeat until you've earned your playing level AS A UNIT.

A large campaign involves many players in a guild and shift work and planning , this is fully engaged game play , this is good. I have been building myself up in Q for over a year and my current guild is a family that helps one another because the weakest link determines the strength of a chain. A weak guild starts with the players that bellyache about guild requirements and not getting everything handed to them , this progresses to the GbG level. Fix the roots and you will fix GbG. Stop asking Inno to spoon feed you and just play it like it was meant to be played . *mic drop*

And that works to a point. My guild is exactly like that. And as of this post, we set 5th on Diamond among the biggest guilds in L. But it doesnt change my opiniom or posts. Yes, my guild is very balanced and had helped me majorly. But I want what I believe the spirit of the game is: a functioning city across the ages. Most others just want a crapload of event and gbs so they can fight for what? Meaningless tokens

 

[Emberguard]

Who said anyone gets to keep their 30-180 gbs. Refunds in in a said rebalancing.

you did. Right in the following statement:

You want the problem in GbG to go away. Neuter arc so max level is 30. No other change. No grandfathering either. Everyone wakes up to 30. Within 6 months you will have competitive GbG.

and ok let’s hypothetically say players got all their GBs reduced to lvl 30, not just the Arc..... then what? How do you compensate losing millions of FPs worth of work if you then have a lvl 30 cap per GB and nothing to use those FPs on? Can’t collect from city if FPs can’t be placed anywhere

 

[ahsay]

So then by your statement and position, the game is permanently unbalanced. However, I disagree. This isnt a war game. Perhaps we DONT NEED war whales. Who said anyone gets to keep their 30-180 gbs. Refunds in in a said rebalancing.

The whole point is INNO Forget that this was supposed to be building empires, not slaughtering opponents. Yes alot of the oldbees are here for war because they are bored. The game is over for them. But i seriously doubt this will ever happen so it remains my disliked opinion.

Yes it is unbalanced...so what?

 

[GreatThunderclap]

you did. Right in the following statement:

and ok let’s hypothetically say players got all their GBs reduced to lvl 30, not just the Arc..... then what? How do you compensate losing millions of FPs worth of work if you then have a lvl 30 cap per GB and nothing to use those FPs on? Can’t collect from city if FPs can’t be placed anywhere

Thats a bug isnt it? Im of the opinion thats a arbitary cap. And it should be off. And yes there should be means to sink fps for those at the end age

 

[GreatThunderclap]

Yes it is unbalanced...so what?

Depends, i personally have absolutely no problem with 1 shot kill guns in online rpgs or things like halo or total warfare. But other use it to grief because life treats them like shit so they decide relieve their stress through mindless slaughter. Its no fun when you are trying to compete and all you do is spawn and die. Same here. One guild overrunning the map isnt fun. Its tedium.

 

[Emberguard]

Thats a bug isnt it?

No. It was a deliberate design choice to allow GBs to be raised to any level. The cap originally was lvl 10 and then it was changed so you needed a complete set of Blue Prints for each level above 10 with no limit on how high you can unlock. However players who have reached above lvl 180 have discovered Arc appears to have a contribution bonus cap at lvl 180 while the goods keep increasing.

 

[mandatoryIDstinks]

What about randomly pre-populating sectors with camps, towers, traps, decoys and so forth. These would be permanent but inactive. They could be activated by spending goods. Flipping a sector would de-activate them. This would make attrition-free sectors rare and force guilds into using traps/decoys (banners, statues and other things) instead. Fair for all while adding challenges to a map. A high end player would still have an advantage.

The fog-of-war idea is good and would enhance the active/inactive idea.

 

[Emberguard]

That sounds like an interesting idea. If you can get an entire island to agree to what randomly goes in each province at the start you'd be able to get an idea on how it'd play out in practice (probably easier said than done when it comes to making such an agreement)

 

[Tony 85 the Generous]

What about randomly pre-populating sectors with camps, towers, traps, decoys and so forth. These would be permanent but inactive. They could be activated by spending goods. Flipping a sector would de-activate them. This would make attrition-free sectors rare and force guilds into using traps/decoys (banners, statues and other things) instead. Fair for all while adding challenges to a map. A high end player would still have an advantage.

The fog-of-war idea is good and would enhance the active/inactive idea.

An interesting idea but how would that help equalize, balance, or equalize the guilds selected for the map on each season? I'm not concerned with equalizing all guilds of all ages and strengths. The issue at hand are the guilds selected and pitted against each other on one map in one season can be woefully and obviously mismatched and unbalanced.

 

[UnStopaBull]

Spent an hour reading most of this thread and certainly agree GBG needs changes . I am in a guild thst has dominated from day 1 and set up alliances to maximize rewards ..it’s boring. Sure my lower guild members like it but I’m #1 in my world and I’d like it to be more fun As these rewards mean little to me.

here are a few thoughts/ideas

gvg has some things right

1. Maybe rather than have home bases where guilds only can get out by hitting 3 tiles connected to home base inno could eliminate home bases and a guild, if not on map, could hit ANY 4th ring tiles . This could give lesser guilds many more tiles to get fights from every 4hr and may help eliminate them feeling trapped. Being stuck between the top 2 guilds (as is now) can’t be fun

2. if a guild would have the ability to retake their own tile (border only) when it reopens that could decrease the need for alliances and likely cause many more races (those can be fun right?)

3. agree way too many diamond guilds .. imo 2 full maps worth (16 guilds ) means elite stays somewhat elite and enough that it’s not completely stale fighting the same guilds every single time

4. rewards for winning should be much better than 2nd place

5. Not sure if it would change the dynamics in a positive way but adding a 5th ring could maybe help as well. As stated we dominate but to do so our need for goods is tremendous ..a 5th ring Of tiles would mean guilds would have to make choices as I can’t imagine any guild swap being able to completely hold and swap all those tiles giving all the other guilds involved more opportunities

 

[UnStopaBull]

Here is one more idea ..maybe my best ..this would only concern diamond league. Have either 16, 24 diamond guilds and after each day the Map RESETS from within that pool. So the next day you could be up against 7 different guilds. Rather than rewards being given 1-8 they would be 1-16(24) and they disparity could be much greater meaning the top would likely hade more incentive. Sure there could be some quick swap alliances each day but those would be harder to establish and would be short lived as the next day would be a whole different situation.

 

[Tony 85 the Generous]

Spent an hour reading most of this thread and certainly agree GBG needs changes . I am in a guild thst has dominated from day 1 and set up alliances to maximize rewards ..it’s boring. Sure my lower guild members like it but I’m #1 in my world and I’d like it to be more fun As these rewards mean little to me.

here are a few thoughts/ideas

gvg has some things right

1. Maybe rather than have home bases where guilds only can get out by hitting 3 tiles connected to home base inno could eliminate home bases and a guild, if not on map, could hit ANY 4th ring tiles . This could give lesser guilds many more tiles to get fights from every 4hr and may help eliminate them feeling trapped. Being stuck between the top 2 guilds (as is now) can’t be fun

2. if a guild would have the ability to retake their own tile (border only) when it reopens that could decrease the need for alliances and likely cause many more races (those can be fun right?)

3. agree way too many diamond guilds .. imo 2 full maps worth (16 guilds ) means elite stays somewhat elite and enough that it’s not completely stale fighting the same guilds every single time

4. rewards for winning should be much better than 2nd place

5. Not sure if it would change the dynamics in a positive way but adding a 5th ring could maybe help as well. As stated we dominate but to do so our need for goods is tremendous ..a 5th ring Of tiles would mean guilds would have to make choices as I can’t imagine any guild swap being able to completely hold and swap all those tiles giving all the other guilds involved more opportunities

2. How does a guild not have the ability to retake a border tiles when it opens? Change mechanics so prevent soft locks on tiles adjacent to the home base?
3. Too many? I might argue not enough. More diamond guilds could allow a selection algorithm that allows better match ups.
5. 5th ring would spread things out and give more room for guilds to work.

Here is one more idea ..maybe my best ..this would only concern diamond league. Have either 16, 24 diamond guilds and after each day the Map RESETS from within that pool. So the next day you could be up against 7 different guilds. Rather than rewards being given 1-8 they would be 1-16(24) and they disparity could be much greater meaning the top would likely hade more incentive. Sure there could be some quick swap alliances each day but those would be harder to establish and would be short lived as the next day would be a whole different situation.

Interesting, but with 4 hour lock times, a tile would only open 3 times. It would be a day one race every day. That would become tedious and expensive.

I will still think the ability to form alliances is one of the largest issues of 1 new diamond guild fight against a group of established diamond guilds.

 

[UnStopaBull]

Maybe it’s World dependent , but in O world we have guilds in Diamond that have no business being there. Sure they earned if I guess but once there they are not able to compete so that is why I feel there are way too many. In O world , 16 or 24 feels right based on what I’ve seen since inception. Only about 8 have the ability to actually control the map.

I have also reconsidered the 24 reset and think 28 or maybe 32 would be better as it would mean the reset times vary throughout the season adding an added twist.

 

[Tony 85 the Generous]

Maybe it’s World dependent , but in O world we have guilds in Diamond that have no business being there. Sure they earned if I guess but once there they are not able to compete so that is why I feel there are way too many.

I doubt that. We are not in O and are that guild that cannot compete in diamond 1 and slaughters everything in platinum. We just spent two wonderful seasons in diamond 2. Two seasons ago it was a flipping war. The entire board set up with swap sectors, 3 per guild with 2-3 SCs supporting. To place you had to flip the sector back to yourself as fast as possible after it opened and hope the other guilds were slower. It didn't cost the guild much goods and was a ton of fun. In that mode, I would say we need less sectors and less or no buildings. Make it about the guild members not the guild treasury.

Now we are moved to diamond 1. We are not that much stonger. Members have comeplte a few levels on their Zeus, CdM, CoA, and arcs. But nothing compared to what will be needed to be competitive in diamond 1. We moved up because we were "successful" last season, not because we have outgrown (ie., gained strength) diamond 2. This is the wrong way to be promoted. For the next 12 days we will sit around twiddling our thumbs and/or be routed. No buildings will be built, which also means there will be nothing to spend diamonds on (aka Inno gets 70 disgruntled players that will not spend any money for the next 2 weeks).

 

[Kranyar the Mysterious]

2. How does a guild not have the ability to retake a border tiles when it opens? Change mechanics so prevent soft locks on tiles adjacent to the home base?

He means that once a sector that your guild holds unlocks, that you can start fighting/negotiating to be able to relock it in competition against everyone else.

Unfortunately all this would do in reality is lock the whole map to just one power guild who can constantly relock, relock, relock. Nobody else would ever control anything. At least now 2 guilds are required to swap sectors, this change would eliminate that.

 

[UnStopaBull]

He means that once a sector that your guild holds unlocks, that you can start fighting/negotiating to be able to relock it in competition against everyone else.

Unfortunately all this would do in reality is lock the whole map to just one power guild who can constantly relock, relock, relock. Nobody else would ever control anything. At least now 2 guilds are required to swap sectors, this change would eliminate that.

He means that once a sector that your guild holds unlocks, that you can start fighting/negotiating to be able to relock it in competition against everyone else.

Unfortunately all this would do in reality is lock the whole map to just one power guild who can constantly relock, relock, relock. Nobody else would ever control anything. At least now 2 guilds are required to swap sectors, this change would eliminate that.

people complain about alliances and swaps ..this would help eliminate that