GW/city Suggestion

[fordteddy_9683472]

I have suggested the number of cities a guild can hold be limited or a time limit on cities.
But looking at it. Looks like the buff is the problem. Maybe a buff for just doing GW might help, win or lose.
Anything that changes GW and keeps any dominant guild from destroying a server.
Maybe just eliminating GW altogether.

[Joker]

I have suggested the number of cities a guild can hold be limited or a time limit on cities.
But looking at it. Looks like the buff is the problem. Maybe a buff for just doing GW might help, win or lose.
Anything that changes GW and keeps any dominant guild from destroying a server.
Maybe just eliminating GW altogether.

LOL there is no need to eliminate GW. most servers have super guilds because tynon were coming out with new server every week or so and the no coiners just kept servere hoping thus leaving very few players in each server and forcing them to be in one guild with all the coiners. Now with CW in place everyone wants to have all the GW buffs like the 1-10 servers caseu they are the ones who dominte CW the most.

So the best way is to first make the same rules for GW across all servers and then change the buffs which can be too over powering if help by one guild for too long (mainly the lvl 4 buff for coin and credit). Also as some have suggested to limit the cities guild can hold will not be very effective as the top guild will just choose the best buff for themselves that will not solve much and the idea for having buff with guild level is also flawed and then then host or vice host can just boot the player they feel are threat to theri own power after the guild reachesa certain level thus putting too much power in them and making the player booted helpless.

[DrthCaedus]

LOL there is no need to eliminate GW. most servers have super guilds because tynon were coming out with new server every week or so and the no coiners just kept servere hoping thus leaving very few players in each server and forcing them to be in one guild with all the coiners. Now with CW in place everyone wants to have all the GW buffs like the 1-10 servers caseu they are the ones who dominte CW the most.

So the best way is to first make the same rules for GW across all servers and then change the buffs which can be too over powering if help by one guild for too long (mainly the lvl 4 buff for coin and credit). Also as some have suggested to limit the cities guild can hold will not be very effective as the top guild will just choose the best buff for themselves that will not solve much and the idea for having buff with guild level is also flawed and then then host or vice host can just boot the player they feel are threat to theri own power after the guild reachesa certain level thus putting too much power in them and making the player booted helpless.

This is why I propose also limiting the amount of cities in a specific level one guild can hold to 66%, this means that even if a guild wanted all 5 of their cities to be the lvl 3's they couldn't do it, or if they wanted to hold all 3 lvl 4's they still couldn't do it. At most they could hold 3 lvl 3's and 2 lvl 4's, but then if they also want 100% pirate rewards for extra gems on saturdays they would need to vacate another city, or if they wanted 100% pirates rewards and an extra lab chance, then perhaps they hold 2 lvl 4's, 1 lvl 3, and those 2, etc... Also if they made it impossible for a guild to intentionally vacate a city it could provide interesting strategy with other guilds refusing to attack the dominant guild forcing them to hold their current cities and not attain different ones. Overall I think it would be the best option. It would force guilds to choose what buffs are most important to them.

Second: The buffs are no over-powered, they are essential (in moderation) to being able to progress at a reasonable rate through the game. Do not change the buffs, they are fine as is. Just ensure that no one guild can gain all of the buffs.

[Joker]

This is why I propose also limiting the amount of cities in a specific level one guild can hold to 66%, this means that even if a guild wanted all 5 of their cities to be the lvl 3's they couldn't do it, or if they wanted to hold all 3 lvl 4's they still couldn't do it. At most they could hold 3 lvl 3's and 2 lvl 4's, but then if they also want 100% pirate rewards for extra gems on saturdays they would need to vacate another city, or if they wanted 100% pirates rewards and an extra lab chance, then perhaps they hold 2 lvl 4's, 1 lvl 3, and those 2, etc... Also if they made it impossible for a guild to intentionally vacate a city it could provide interesting strategy with other guilds refusing to attack the dominant guild forcing them to hold their current cities and not attain different ones. Overall I think it would be the best option. It would force guilds to choose what buffs are most important to them.

Second: The buffs are no over-powered, they are essential (in moderation) to being able to progress at a reasonable rate through the game. Do not change the buffs, they are fine as is. Just ensure that no one guild can gain all of the buffs.

you can;t just say 66% as certain level have only 1 city buff. Anyway I think another good idea would be that the rewards are completely random given away everyday after GW guild level can decide the number of cities each guild can hold.