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 7 of 26 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 254

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

  1. #61
    I'm all for balancing GW, but whoever thought this out doesnt seem to even play tynon at all. In my guilds case we have 2-3 decently powered(70-100m) ppl and about 5-6 average(40-70). Our rival guilds best member has 1 decently powered person followed by about 6 or 7 averagely powered ppl, and a tiny army of alts and whatnot under 20m power. This power boost they have over us turns their 1 decently powered person into a 1 man army now and the other players almost unkillable now.

    So now due to their powerbuff they can pick and chose whichever city they want and we cant do anything about it(barring making an army of alts...). HEres my opinion: There are 9 cities to chose from, first 5 give rep bonus, then next 3 give coin gain bonus. So if they want a rep bonus then they can get a max of 5x5%(25% boost) when attacking. If they want a coin bonus then they can get a 15% max buff. This way active guilds still get a buff , but they still have to work for it.

    Now it seems there being rewarded purely for having more alts.

  2. #62
    You cannot compare power levels to determine durability loss. Power is too easily manipulated.
    I will reiterate my proposal:

    Use how much HP is left after a fight, or how much HP a player lost in a fight, to determine durability loss.

    The less hp lost in a fight, the less durability lose for the winner.
    Therefore, small alts will only do -1 durability loss to "real" players.

    Real players fighting each other will deal up to -10 durability loss to the winner, especially in close fights.
    Losers of any fight should lose -20 durability, regardless of how much hp they chop off the winner.

  3. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by Cuddles_1461020 View Post
    I don't bash anything proactive or constructive. Suggestions, ideas, analysis, "how to fix's", etc are all very welcome.

    As you look through my other comments you'll see that I even agree that the change is not perfect, and can use improvement.

    Nevertheless the first step is to change our attitudes.
    #1-- the attitude that the entire server does not belong to ONE (and only one) guild
    #2-- the attitude that power must *always* trump numbers. Numbers are a critical element in war, and history shows that until the invention of Gunpowder, War was a game of numbers. (although the alt issue is something to be calculated/dealt with)
    #3-- to congratulate our opponents (even if they are weaker) when they succeed. ie: good sportsmanship

    With these in mind, we can work toward being a part of the solution.

    PS-- Call of Gods was a fun game.
    We have maybe a third the members in our little guild, but they all have heart and attend our GW as we leaders ask them to when they can, even though they already know we will likely lose the battle again as usual. We take a city from a guild that owns everything on the server and then some, since November of last year, including two other guilds they insure will never bid against them... and we are cursed at in world chat. We hold the city a second night, we are accused by the losing guild of hacking the server. No congratulations nothing of good sportsmanship. It's like we're fighting on the playground for the swing with the best seat or something. I like the way you play over there on your server. I came to play this game, because I love games, I love meeting people, learning and helping people, and I love strategy. I didn't come to play tynon just to be some of these self-important shut ins' way of vicariously living out their dreams to be somebody they clearly won't ever be. These people are generally 30+ years old with jobs, and families to care for and yet... lol and I thought dealing with the drama-laden children on wiz101 was horrible :P Yeah I like the way you play on your server

  4. #64
    WOW! One of Herbs ideas sounds logical for once LOL.....It would definitely eliminate some the grip people have been talking about with the alt problem...or at least put a band aid on it.

  5. #65
    I love the new changes to GW and CW. Now we have balance. No More 1 player wipe outs and ppl have to use a game plan to win. LOVE IT

  6. #66
    Justice
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    1,037
    Just to be clear. We are not one of the uber guilds that just outpower the opposition. At one point they owned all the buff cities. We worked, we built and we got them back. The current system is NOT BALANCED, it is heavily weighted to one side. How is that fair??? Tynon may not "want" us to own all the cities, but if we have 4-5-up to 6 bids per night, and can hold them, then we "deserve" them!! Why is it that some assume just because you own more you don't deserve them?? The realms that have only 1 guild, usually much smaller, that can even bid on them is no comparison.

    This system needs to be changed. I like Herby's suggestion. A 3mil acct should not have the ability to disable a 50m player. At the very least adjust the % given as punishment to achieving buff cities. Adjust the -5, -10 to be more realistic. Player A has 100m, player B has 110 m. Player A was given 75% bonus, how can player B possibly defend against that? Plus as player A moves thru camps he gains AND gains on every kill!!!! So by the time they meet again, 3 healing rounds plus some to move, let's say... he's even stonger!! and player B has only recovered, no time to gain back anything. No... unless you have played this, and seen it in action you just don't get it.

    Say there is a guild with one uber guy - 280m, with a small guild of 10 others. Say a small guild with 40, highest is 10m ... can wipe him out and can take the city. LOL Tynon might as well just "predetermine" the outcome like the rest of the game, and assign cities to each. OR just limit the number of cities owned by any one guild, because that is exactly what this is doing.
    Last edited by MisChief; 03-19-2014 at 11:45 AM.

  7. #67
    When your sitting at 76m power in B and a 3.6m player (scout) knocks you back to G,something must be wrong

  8. #68
    Ironheart Joker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Avenger
    Posts
    444
    Quote Originally Posted by Herby View Post
    You cannot compare power levels to determine durability loss. Power is too easily manipulated.
    I will reiterate my proposal:

    Use how much HP is left after a fight, or how much HP a player lost in a fight, to determine durability loss.

    The less hp lost in a fight, the less durability lose for the winner.
    Therefore, small alts will only do -1 durability loss to "real" players.

    Real players fighting each other will deal up to -10 durability loss to the winner, especially in close fights.
    Losers of any fight should lose -20 durability, regardless of how much hp they chop off the winner.
    I was gonna suggest the same thing, If someone cannot do more than 4% damage, you should lose only 1 durability. Also even though some people might be using alt i don't think they can run more than 3 or 4 accounts at once so people will lose only 2 or 3 durabilty this way.
    Joker - Europe Servers



    You don't really know GW till you play outside servers 1-10


    Quote Originally Posted by Andy View Post
    Giving a handicam to the players that die in GW will make the smaller guilds more competitive.
    Quote Originally Posted by DrthCaedus View Post
    tokens don't do much anyway.

  9. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by ali.nasiban_1722041 View Post
    When your sitting at 76m power in B and a 3.6m player (scout) knocks you back to G,something must be wrong
    You see this is my issue. Not that they made it more difficult to hold on to your cities. I am glad they made it more interesting. But the power boost combined with the durability is just overwhelming. Just tweak it a bit, 5% power boost per city not 10%
    2 durability for a win 5 for a loss

    And if you really want to make it even more interesting - implement that change and add in 2 level 1 and 3 level 2 cities.

  10. #70
    Two things that most people who complain about alts running over their big accounts:

    1. A single player can hardly login more than 5 accounts (same or diff browsers, doesn't make a difference) before flashplayer begins to slowdown and crash.

    To run GWs with these "alts", you need to log them in all at the same time.


    2. The only way a really smaller player can beat a bigger player is if the bigger player's durability has hit 1, or really low levels.

    Believe it or not, some players until now, do not understand how durability affects them in guild wars, so they rant out whenever they get beaten by someone 1/20th their size, but is at 100 durability vs their 1 durability.

Posting Permissions

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