View Poll Results: Will these arrangements re-balance Guild Warfare and Championship Warfare?

Voters
212. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    66 31.13%
  • No

    108 50.94%
  • Some sort of

    33 15.57%
  • I don't know.

    6 2.83%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 4 of 26 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 254

Thread: Will these arrangements re-balance Guild Warfare and Championship Warfare?

  1. #31
    Guardian
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Subversion
    Posts
    179
    Quote Originally Posted by Lockecole_5393515 View Post
    Whats to keep the other guild from making alts? Why not just make appropriatly powered players fight each other, so your biggest guy can hit their biggest guys, and unless youre HUGELY outnumbered, you'll win that way, since its a 1:4 ratio in win/loss durability, unless the other team has 50+ heros to your ten, you'll win every time. And honestly if you have to split your small guild up that much then you shouldnt be holding that many cities. Nothing keeping you from inviting more members/making alts, and if you dont want to, accept the fact that you shouldnt own 4 cities.
    Not real sure where you came up with the 1:4 ratio. It's 5 lost if you win and 10 lost if you loose. That's 1:2.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jakoda_6650940 View Post
    It is nice to have the appearance of a fair poll by posting for all to vote. It has been said every sever has one mega guild running all cities, with maybe 20 to 30 actives if lucky. That means the entire rest of the server also has a voice. Lets say 4 guilds also participate in GW on said server with aprx 10 to 15 players in those guilds. Which voice do you suppose will be louder?
    Not too sure who said every server has one mega guild. Our server has 3 guilds that seem to trade cities fairly regularly. That said, I think loosing 5 durability for a win is too much. As has already been said, it allows a few alts to totally change the outcome of a battle. I didn't like the rationale they used when they added it, and now that I've seen it in action, I like it less.

  2. #32
    totally a silly thing to do...why build and build and spend money just to have someone way lower power beat the heck out of ya...like playing a baseball game when nobody keeps score..makes no sense at all........

  3. #33
    Lightbringer ChickenWing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Hangmen
    Posts
    994
    Quote Originally Posted by tready007_8039559 View Post
    totally a silly thing to do...why build and build and spend money just to have someone way lower power beat the heck out of ya...like playing a baseball game when nobody keeps score..makes no sense at all........
    Find a strategy to work it out instead of complaining. This game is not only about being a super power and spending money. If your guild is any good, it will adapt. Most ubber guilds are good at that (otherwise they wouldn't be where they are). And baseball is boring.

  4. #34
    Ironheart WickeD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Tigerland
    Posts
    399
    On our server we hold 8 cities one day and drop down to 6 or 7 the coming day and we know we have competition again the next day which we were missing for ages before the server merges. I Would like to make a small suggestion which most have already mentioned , the Durability loss of 5 is high even after a win. More rewards based on the cities that we hold / is it general rewards raise. Any thing that you do to fix the imbalance shouldn't create more imbalance.

  5. #35
    Ironheart Cuddles_1461020's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    +Scandal+
    Posts
    317
    Quote Originally Posted by ChickenWing View Post
    Find a strategy to work it out instead of complaining. This game is not only about being a super power and spending money. If your guild is any good, it will adapt. Most ubber guilds are good at that (otherwise they wouldn't be where they are). And baseball is boring.
    Agree, but the alt-stuffing can be problematic. The challenge is therefore on how to differentiate between the alt and the new player.
    I don't know about your server, but on our server.....
    The new player is 5 to 25% your power.
    The alt is under 5% your power.


    Cuddles' Law: The volume of a player's whine is directly proportional to his/her VIP level.

  6. #36
    Justice
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    1,037
    Whatever changes have been made to GW, they SUCK!! The first 2 days were not bad. But then apparently there were tweaks or something done that has made defense impossible. Attackers seem to be made of steel and defenders are weak as twigs. Normally strong players, med players are being creamed by small players. This is not right, and there is nothing we can do. It is very glitchy. Many players refresh between Rag and GW and when they get in they can't see their toon, get the msg Not Battletime. Then it takes 2 full rounds at least to straighten this out, refresh and by then its 2 rounds too late.

    Very very frustrating. And I'm NOT a whining, I'm stating that its unbalanced and all the advantage has flipped to attackers. You may think "great" no more monopolies but its farther reaching than that. If two sides are pretty fairly matched, then it should work that way, but it doesn't. 2 small accts.. 3-5 mil types, can take out a 30m player, send to G, takes 3 rounds to recover, by then they have 3 more camp buffs and move forward. Go figure. I don't think you meant to make it that ridiculous did you?? Said recovered acct then can't reach D to gain back any lost point and recover. Well ... it's just the truth.

  7. #37
    Guild wars now sucks why work and spend money to build yourself up only to get slapped in the face by Tynon if you want a city work hard build yourself up

  8. #38
    Dawn and devs

    I think the concept of the change is beautiful. YOu guys really came up with a great idea to make gwf challenging again. But you did too much. Cut it in half
    5% power boost per city
    2 durability lost for a win
    5 for a loss

    DOes teh excat same thing but stops lats from over whelming.
    I get you guys dont wnat one guild to hold all cities. Thats fine but the current numbers you are using put players who spent good money on this game at a MAJOR DRASTIC OVERWHELMING disadvantage
    You can still give the small guild an advantage that will be enough for competitive active guilds to over come uber guilds without making it next to impossible and letting alts control the game. Just cut the bonuses in half like I keep suggesting. I think everyone will be very happy with that change

  9. #39
    Guardian japerdog50_9329163's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    B2A
    Posts
    113
    I think the change for GW is fine the way it is. We still are unable to take any city's from the top guild but we are closer. If it got lowered it would be almost useless to play again. And we are the 2nd best guild.
    Crimson-Server 41 Darkness of Tartarus

  10. #40
    Forum Moderator Andy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Sol
    Posts
    2,885
    I have been doing some thinking on Alts. In most cases the players that have alts do not dedicate the time to 'grow' them, but they do log on. This means that players that do log on frequently but do not increase in power and rank, or increase very slowly, and are below some specified power (maybe 4 mil or so) can be assumed to be Alts. If this is the case then it should be fairly simple for the game to identify them.

    Just to make things clear, I believe that a player that has all of the following characteristics is an alt (see exception below).

    1. Logs on to the game several times a week.
    2. Is below 4 mil power (or some other number).
    3. Power and rank increase very slowly or not at all.


    Using this description infrequent players would not be identifies as alts because they do not log on several times a week. Only the players that log on frequently but do not grow would be identified as alts.

    Using this definition the only players may be labeled as Alts but in fact are not would be the 'social' players. The one that use the game for chatting and not to play. But if 'social' players are considered Alts got game mechanics (like GW battles) it will not hurt them because they are not really playing the game.
    The opinions expressed on this post are my own as a player, not as a Moderator.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •