Its not about punishing guilds that are at the top. As a matter of fact, I am in a very strong guild in one of the lands and going, sometimes, against another strong guild, when racing sometimes our opponent just has that edge and sometimes we do. One thing I will say for the top guild that I am in I appreciate, is that the leaders are sensitive to the list. So, for example, it doesn't take conquering sectors in front of other guilds home base to be in the top 2 in order to remain in the diamond league. The advisors will tell us as a team to not take sectors from time to time in front of other guilds home base giving those guilds an opportunity to farm and lock sectors so they can earn rewards. Now if there is a competitive guild that does not do this, then our guild will counteract the opponent(s). But if we are on a list that is going to be a reasonable season, then why lock guilds down when it is not always necessary to win? It is all about strategy.Mu apologies. My mistake for using undefined terminology. I'm not talking about the number of Diamond Guilds.
By 'tier 1' I meant what you refer to as " these 5-6 guilds " and Thanksfortheloot as top 4 Guilds.
----------
A computer needs objective criteria.
What do you propose as those criteria?
Almost every poster complaining in this and every other thread about GBG is upset because they aren't getting enough personal Rewards.
How does forming another Division give those Guilds moved into that division more Rewards?
Looks like your idea is a way to punish those Guilds while getting more Rewards for Guilds that can't get them now.
Not "else its just a temporary displacement of the same problem" it is "a temporary displacement of the same problem".The server distribution gets very top heavy, which is why I suggested the 8 guilds-only titanium league. The size limit is key there, else its just a temporary displacement of the same problem.
Growing and competitive are two different things. Growing your guild and gaining members is straightforward. Growing will help in being competitive. But the members also need to "gain strength". Gaining strength in and of itself is not difficult. Plant and level the right great and event buildings. But gaining strength to catch up to the top guilds is problematic. They are not sitting still. They are also gaining strength. Gaining strength to be competitive with the top guilds is a significant issue.I agree with what others have said ... grow your guild and be more competitive instead of the constant bitching about how others are better or bigger or stronger than you.
Your leaders won't do what is needed to grow? Find a better guild, there are plenty of them out there.
Instead of trying to neuter others, get better yourself.
But gaining strength to catch up to the top guilds is problematic. They are not sitting still. They are also gaining strength. Gaining strength to be competitive with the top guilds is a significant issue.
I see what you are saying in general terms. But the point is still there and when applied to the guild instead of a player makes catching the top guilds a significant issue (as compared to adding members).Good post, but I think you need to look a little closer at this.
As I mentioned above, this is a case of looking at the second derivative.
In plain words while the more established player has a lot more resources and can add more to their city, the player catching up gains more proportional strength by doing less then the established player.
Crude example.
Player lvls Traz from 80 to 81 goes from 78 to 79 troops. Player lvls Traz from 10 to 11 goes from 8 to 9 troops.
First player is ahead still by 70 Troops but the proportion of the difference is less.
This second derivative phenomenon is exacerbated by the nature of increasing GB lvl cost.
Pre GBG this process was not significant because the lesser player was always behind in production by the ratio of the production between the players.
GBG changes that ratio because the Rewards from GBG add more proportionally to lesser players then greater players.
Add 1000 FP to top player per day and they will do a lot with it.
Add 200 FP per day to good player and they will do a lot more proportionately.
Dig it?
the top end of Diamond. There we see a different phenomenon: medium sized guilds (say 50-60 members) loosing their best fighters to the 5-6 top guilds because they rather join the farmfest in stead of being excluded and locked down for a few seasons in a row. The server distribution gets very top heavy
IMO, the top guilds are NOT fun to do GBG. The timing to take sectors and the speed at which they flip requires far more intense playing than I (and I suspect many others) want from this game. Every once in a while we'll end up in a season where things work out nicely and I can pop on and grab a sector for cheap/free and I'll end up with 1500-2k hits. Most of the time I end up in the 700-1200 range just because I don't have time/opportunity to be on right when a sector opens and fight with abandon until it flips. From what I can tell that 700-1200 probably places me in the top 5% of GBG attackers, and I could certainly do more, but I'm miles behind the biggest players in the top guilds and I have zero desire to join them.Solution: join a top guild. I did and now it's a blast in GBG,
But the point is still there and when applied to the guild instead of a player makes catching the top guilds a significant issue (as compared to adding members).
We must be seeing very different server stats. The Brisgard server IS already very top heavy. With that I mean: there about 40 guilds at 1000 LP, lets call that 'Diamond-1'. Those get put together in GBG instances. There are a few dozen more guilds in the 901-999 LP range, those I will call Diamond-2. Those get matched with each other based on their amount of League points. In Diamond -1 there are about 6 guilds who are *far* stronger than the rest, because all the fighters migrated to there so they could farm. Those six will team up with each other no matter what when they find each other, and show zero mercy to the rest of the map. Worse, they will lock some guilds down harder than others, so that they determine exactly what the top ranking from 1st to 8th will look like. It is this migration of fighters that I referred to with the term 'top heavy'. Or as others here have advised: Go join a winning team.Not "else its just a temporary displacement of the same problem" it is "a temporary displacement of the same problem".
Work with the current LP method and run some numbers and simulations. "The server distribution gets very top heavy" will be a very, very, very slow process. On a 8 guilds map, your top 4 will stay in diamond 1, and guilds 5 &6 will bounce from diamond 1 to 2, and guild 7-8 (not mentioned) will drop to platinum. Because of the combination of the 1000 point max and these "titanium" level guilds always taking the top diamond spots, The numbers must work out just right to grow the number of diamond league guilds.
In other words, the diminishing returns concept that is built into the game.In plain words while the more established player has a lot more resources and can add more to their city, the player catching up gains more proportional strength by doing less then the established player.
Crude example.
Player lvls Traz from 80 to 81 goes from 78 to 79 troops. Player lvls Traz from 10 to 11 goes from 8 to 9 troops.
First player is ahead still by 70 Troops but the proportion of the difference is less.
This second derivative phenomenon is exacerbated by the nature of increasing GB lvl cost.
Pre GBG this process was not significant because the lesser player was always behind in production by the ratio of the production between the players.
GBG changes that ratio because the Rewards from GBG add more proportionally to lesser players then greater players.
You are speaking of 'guilds' whereas the original post was (literally) about 'a player'. I think you have missed the point Algona was trying to make. On the other hand, your statement has allowed me to complete my thought."GBG changes that ratio because the Rewards from GBG add more proportionally to lesser players then greater players. "
Wrong in this sense: the 'greater players' conglomerate into farm vehicles, taking all the FP's from GBG for themselves, leaving the 'lesser players' with nothing, or with the occasional trip down to Platinum league where nothing happens.
The total impact of this is a wash. Yes, player 1's gbs cost more. Yes player 1 is stronger thus accumulates more fp. If player 1's cost for the mext traz level (as an example) is 5 times that of player 2, then there is no gain.GBG changes that ratio because the Rewards from GBG add more proportionally to lesser players then greater players.
Add 1000 FP to top player per day and they will do a lot with it.
Add 200 FP per day to good player and they will do a lot more proportionately.
This here is exactly why I never stayed long the few times I was in a top GvG guild over the years. To my mind, to play like that should be a paying position. With benefits. If I worked, I would not want a second job that pays nothing. And being retired, I certainly don't want to go back to someone else (besides my wife, of course) making demands of my time or schedule.IMO, the top guilds are NOT fun to do GBG. The timing to take sectors and the speed at which they flip requires far more intense playing than I (and I suspect many others) want from this game.
I'd be interested in the RP of the players and gb levels.I think GBG strategy is important, #8 guild in my world has only 3 members- a very small guild which kept in diamond for a long time. I didn't feel GBG is "unbalance", but depends how you want to play GBG.
Excuse my ignorance. What does RP stand for here?I'd be interested in the RP of the players and gb levels.
ranking pointsExcuse my ignorance. What does RP stand for here?