255 replies to this topic

[BadPenny]

I agree with Rye on this, and please don't jump to the "it'll benefit your guild or playstyle excuse" right away. The last time we had a GvG day we hit around 12 guilds and only 1 tried hitting back. The others didn't make a single effort to defend. If I really wanted the extra benefit, then I wouldn't even agree with the idea in the first place. 

 

Giving defenders a reason to actually try to hit back might increase actually GvG participation.

I try to rise to the challenge, when I show up, anyway.

Edited by BadPenny, 29 April 2017 - 06:43.

[Spider0007]

No offence intended.....BUT....I do not think "RA" is the best GvG Guild in the Game......OFF TOPIC..the best GvG Guilds in the Game are the top 2 and 3 Guilds....as they have numerous targets available to all of FS to hit....

RA has 5 active members ??  Seriously??  try holding number 2 and 3 spot with a bigger Guild like Lap and I do....LOL  w0w...Best GvG Guilds in the Game are LWS and NoD...??

Poor Wazzi, you have become quite confused or delusional. As I have told many before you, if you want the top spot, come and claim it. Until then, you just be happy sitting in our shadow.

Edited by Spider0007, 30 April 2017 - 13:08.

[BadPenny]

Poor Wazzi, you have become quite confused or delusional. As I have told many before you, if you want the top spot, come and claim it. Until then, you just be happy sitting in our shadow.

^ I did say he was a superhero....

[catsmasher]

I've been hoping for something like this for years now. I think it would help breathe healthy compitition into the GvG system and breathe new life into it, drawing new players into it, while also creating competition between guilds who wish to climb the ranks. Its just not competitive right now. Very few players/ guilds do gvg now because of this and i could really see such a system bringing it raging back into poularity. Ive always been a fan of GvGs and i would really like to see some changes implemented to bring it back.thanks x~catz~x

[Ryebred]

Grim. Have hoof and you had a chance to look over this yet? Any thoughts or concerns?

[BigGrim]

Not had a chance yet, but we will, have no fear.

 

~ Grim

[Ryebred]

No worries, I've mastered patience. I'm just so very passionate about this subject.

[DragonDave]

I like Rye's ideas. Sounds like fun to me. I like to play all aspects of the game. I try to defend all GVG's I can & I hate to see the guild who started it get almost as much RP as we get if it's a draw. I hope this idea goes somewhere

 

[KitiaraLi]

I wonder how many pages this "exchange of thoughts to improve" would be, if all the "my nose is bigger than your nose" comments weren't in it

If it at all helps anyone to get back on the trail, big guilds have a disadvantage in GvG because; A. Too many ppl to coordinate and B. Presenting a vast amount of targets makes it take more time to find the ones being hit and buff 'em, and also makes it easier for the opponent to find targets withing the guild.

 

This is not something there should ever be considered any specific rules of fairplay (or whatever the frack you wanna call it) for.

This is something these guilds have chosen, and they get plenty of benefits from it in so many other aspects of the game.

 

The smaller, more GvG dedicated guilds, can be more dominant in this aspect of the game. They do however not (usually, not all) reap the benefits from having multiple EOC players among 'em - and that is again, their choice and not something that should be made any sorta rules/exceptions/whateverthefrack about.

 

Stop trying to complicate things to make it an even playground. There is no such thing as an even playground.

[Emperor Sidd]

I wonder how many pages this "exchange of thoughts to improve" would be, if all the "my nose is bigger than your nose" comments weren't in it

If it at all helps anyone to get back on the trail, big guilds have a disadvantage in GvG because; A. Too many ppl to coordinate and B. Presenting a vast amount of targets makes it take more time to find the ones being hit and buff 'em, and also makes it easier for the opponent to find targets withing the guild.

 

This is not something there should ever be considered any specific rules of fairplay (or whatever the frack you wanna call it) for.

This is something these guilds have chosen, and they get plenty of benefits from it in so many other aspects of the game.

 

The smaller, more GvG dedicated guilds, can be more dominant in this aspect of the game. They do however not (usually, not all) reap the benefits from having multiple EOC players among 'em - and that is again, their choice and not something that should be made any sorta rules/exceptions/whateverthefrack about.

 

Stop trying to complicate things to make it an even playground. There is no such thing as an even playground.

 

I agree there won't and shouldn't be an even playing ground, but trying to uncomplicated things is the wrong way to go.

 

We can agree dedicated guilds have an advantage of having less liabilities so they should/are/will be higher ranked in competition with other guilds. 

 

My argument was to create a system where guilds compete with other guilds with equal resources so that they have an equal chance at rewards. If it was simply a reset with added rewards, it would look similar to as it is today and the hype will die down for most guilds to bother with ranking if only the top few could get a reward since, if we can stop debating it, it will be the dedicated GVG guilds since that is their full intention. In a system where you have to compete with someone your equal size or resources, you simply cannot complain about being bad and will have to improve.

[Ryebred]

I wonder how many pages this "exchange of thoughts to improve" would be, if all the "my nose is bigger than your nose" comments weren't in it
If it at all helps anyone to get back on the trail, big guilds have a disadvantage in GvG because; A. Too many ppl to coordinate and B. Presenting a vast amount of targets makes it take more time to find the ones being hit and buff 'em, and also makes it easier for the opponent to find targets withing the guild.
 
This is not something there should ever be considered any specific rules of fairplay (or whatever the frack you wanna call it) for.
This is something these guilds have chosen, and they get plenty of benefits from it in so many other aspects of the game.
 
The smaller, more GvG dedicated guilds, can be more dominant in this aspect of the game. They do however not (usually, not all) reap the benefits from having multiple EOC players among 'em - and that is again, their choice and not something that should be made any sorta rules/exceptions/whateverthefrack about.
 
Stop trying to complicate things to make it an even playground. There is no such thing as an even playground.

I would guess 4 pages. I really thought the changes proposed were subtle, and likely easy to make happen for Grim... honestly have no idea how much work it would take for them to code. The main reason for the suggestions was to make my idea appeal to as many people as possible. Without community support even the best ideas disappear into the would of been nice abyss.

I do agree with you in large part though. Any guild large or small who's members commit to the program can see great success in GvG. You are 100% correct that it's about choices. Large guilds can adjust, and it does require more work than for small venue specific guilds, but if organized right big guilds can make their own advantages.

I may be biting my nose off to spite my face with some of them, seemingly willing to make things as difficult for the top guilds and small guilds. I'm really just confident we would adjust, and still do well. Thanks for your feedback sweetie. I'm fine with less or more. This is baseline idea, and if it starts getting serious consideration by HCS I'm sure the discussion will get even deeper and at best hopefully most of my idea gets put into game

[Ryebred]

I agree there won't and shouldn't be an even playing ground, but trying to uncomplicated things is the wrong way to go.
 
We can agree dedicated guilds have an advantage of having less liabilities so they should/are/will be higher ranked in competition with other guilds. 
 
My argument was to create a system where guilds compete with other guilds with equal resources so that they have an equal chance at rewards. If it was simply a reset with added rewards, it would look similar to as it is today and the hype will die down for most guilds to bother with ranking if only the top few could get a reward since, if we can stop debating it, it will be the dedicated GVG guilds since that is their full intention. In a system where you have to compete with someone your equal size or resources, you simply cannot complain about being bad and will have to improve.

It's not about appealing more to the dedicated GvG guilds. We enjoy all aspects of FS here at my home. Kittles is amongst the very best Titan hunters in game. I'm a serious leveler, but also enjoy bh and GvG. Spider is one of the top PvP players in bh, ladder, and GvG. Red1.....well idk what red does, but he's a cool cat that seems to play all aspects. Chazz is a gifted diplomat, and known for starting wars, but also plays everything.

Your idea for a resource specific pairing imo would cripple GvG. What counts as resources? People, potions, money spent, I really don't get it. I've made multiple compromising ideas that would make us who represents​ venue specific guilds because we actually coordinate and prepare need to adjust, perhaps expand our ranks, give more for being defeated. Yet I'm accused multiple times of personal agenda serving by those who in turn are really doing just that in worrying about the ideas effect on RP farming! I think those who do benefit from the RP can also make adjustments and flourish as well.

[Chooma123]

Although I agree that it doesn't need to be a "level" playing feel; the current suggestions would just instantly result in the small dedicated gvg guilds reaping all the rewards,  ultimately changing GvG to a point where it would be less beneficial to guilds like mine, that are not gvg focused, and irrespective of what guild or thoughts you have, you can't deny this - It would create a "the rich get richer scenario". 

 

So my question to you is, how does this system appeal to gvgers like me, who enjoy the gvg aspect of the game and would love for changes and to take part in this, however I ultimately know my gvg team would stand no chance?

 

Consider this without thinking about RP, yes we for example farm RP but putting that aside, this system still has so many flaws. What is wrong with a simple "ladder-esque" system, which remains pretty much the same as the system you have  suggested, but divides guilds based on their size? In fact even a ladder system in GvG based on size would slash gvg activity through slashing the number of targets any given guild has

 

As I and others have said before, Cutting RP rewards by 50% for attacks against guilds under 1000 rating, as well as no RP for defenses, will not "strengthen" the price of RP, it will kill it.

Firstly, It's pretty safe to say every current guild that has a gvg system will TRY to defend hits, with this system the number of guilds that would bother to try to defend hits would obviously increase. At the moment, if a guild consistently defends against us for draws, well we will just not hit that guild as its not really worth it. Getting NO REWARD for attacking a guild that then  gvgs the gvg WILL create a system where the only viable targets for the majority of the game are those who simply do not gvg i.e they will have less than 1000 rating, which in your system means 50% less RP.

 

You say your system aims to increase gvg activity, but lets be honest it will just kill it further after the initiate "hype" of the first "season. You are right, RP prices will go up, however the rate at which it can be farmed will be slashed to pieces for all except the dedicated guilds that can attack any target and defend any target, due to their small guild size and gvg focus it is viable for them to buff every member of their guild, for every member to wear defence sets.

 

Don't get me wrong Im not opposed to GvG change, I remember when I gvged a few years ago it was much more competitive and fun place (and I was doing it free then). Although I GvG now I don't gvg for pride or for fun, I do it because its easy money. I would love for some changes to GvG but I don't think this is the right direction to go with the current changes you propose

 

Sorry if there are parts of this that don't make sense, if there are please ask, I typed this quickly.

Edited by Chooma123, 06 May 2017 - 18:42.

[BadPenny]

Chooma, I fail to understand how this would be bad for your guild, or mine.  If it sparks new life into what many think is dying (not me, I actually enjoy it and hate that I have no targets in your guild, for example), how can it be anything but good?  When I read Rye's proposal, I see an outline of things that may be, some things that will be debated till doomsday, and some things that most if not all can agree on,  and I automatically assume that modifications will be made to fit the dynamics of the game and make it a more enjoyable playing field.  

[Chooma123]

why do you think my thoughts are wrong, and why do you think they would be good for guilds like ours? =)

Edited by Chooma123, 06 May 2017 - 21:04.

[Chooma123]

and you could hit xninex1 ill be waiting

[BadPenny]

why do you think my thoughts are wrong, and why do you think they would be good for guilds like ours? =)

I never said they were wrong, I said I fail to understand why you feel this way?  Explain to me how incentives to compete can do anything bad for our respective guilds?  Won't it open things up more?  Give us more healthy competition?  

 

Tell me what the downside would be.... help me to understand where you're coming from.  

 

I don't mean to call you out or make you look bad in any way.  You are certainly entitled to your opinion....  I just want to understand it so I can be more informed.

[Chooma123]

As I mentioned in my post, to start with, the new system would provide an incentive for guilds to gvgs - thats pretty clear

New content, new rewards, ect, everyone would want to take part

 

the problem is, with the proposed changes, everyone would be trying to climb the ladder, defending every hit. With the proposed change of no rewards for the attacker of a draw, attacking a guild that defends is worthless. This means I have no incentive what so ever to hit any guild taking part in GvG, as I know they will defend.

"But just defend there hits"

What I am saying is in guilds like ours, it is not possible to defend hits effectively. 

 

So we are left with a situation where the only option for us is to hit those guilds that don't fight back, our only chances at consistent wins

With the proposed changes, RP rewards would be 50% against those that don't gvg (guilds with under 1000 gvg rating)

 

So therefore we are left with a rich get richer situation, in which only the top gvg guilds (small/medium sized guild) can viably attack other guilds that gvg, as they can defend the hits in order to win.

 

Does that make sense?

[BadPenny]

Partly.  But look at it this way.  Maybe it will inspire you and your guildmates to be more aware of the need to dress defensively while offline.  To put away the shiny epics and dress in something more PvP worthy.  

 

In the case of a draw, what would you suggest happen?  There aren't many choices here.  I can only think of a few, mainly:

A. Defender gets RP points, agressor gets nothing.

B. Both get equal points

C. Defender gets double the amount of points as the agressor.

D. Things stay as they are for the GvG itself, and there is a separate dynamic for the "seasons" portion, let's call them victory ticks.  In case of a draw, both sides get a tick, when there's an obvious victor, they get 2 ticks.... something along those lines. At the beginning of each season period everybody gets set back to 0 and it all starts over.  Season standings should also be separate from overall standings as not all guilds will qualify for season play....

 

Now these things are just one old lady's opinion.... in the grand scheme of things, I don't know anything, I'm just here to have fun and socialize with my friends.  GvG and PvP have always  been a big factor in how I meet people and I want these things to be encouraged...

 

But I don't believe the whole idea should be scrapped because of one or 2 things people disagree about.  Learning the thoughts of the community is the primary reason he was asked to post in the first place, was it not?  So that we can all ring in and express our concerns so a consensus can be reached.  I realize that not everybody will be happy, and in truth, we may all hate it in the end and it all end up scrapped.... But the only way to know is for us to all say what we feel and offer alternatives to the parts we disagree with, so that we can have a meeting of the minds at the very least.

[Emperor Sidd]

It's not about appealing more to the dedicated GvG guilds. We enjoy all aspects of FS here at my home. Kittles is amongst the very best Titan hunters in game. I'm a serious leveler, but also enjoy bh and GvG. Spider is one of the top PvP players in bh, ladder, and GvG. Red1.....well idk what red does, but he's a cool cat that seems to play all aspects. Chazz is a gifted diplomat, and known for starting wars, but also plays everything.

Your idea for a resource specific pairing imo would cripple GvG. What counts as resources? People, potions, money spent, I really don't get it. I've made multiple compromising ideas that would make us who represents​ venue specific guilds because we actually coordinate and prepare need to adjust, perhaps expand our ranks, give more for being defeated. Yet I'm accused multiple times of personal agenda serving by those who in turn are really doing just that in worrying about the ideas effect on RP farming! I think those who do benefit from the RP can also make adjustments and flourish as well.

 

I admit, it is hard for me to decide what the most appropriate measure of resources would be but, active members should do it for now. Also the kicker was that you still GVG every other guild possible but are only competing your rating against the rating of similar size guilds.

 

For eg: since it is free for all, lets just say my guild beats ND and and gets 30-40 rating but at the same time ascension is not able to so they will have lower rating. This way even though even if mine and ascension only reach 1200-1400 rating at most, our ratings can be compared for the rewards and more dedicated guilds can still reach 1600-1700 rating and get rewards in their own tier. 

 

This way, mine and Ascension guild have similar potential at beating ND in terms of no of targets, people who can buff, people online in different timezone etc etc. In the end one of us is better, and a simple win doesn't mean guaranteed rewards, Ascension could make up the rating they didnt win by winning against lots of low rating guilds, 1-5 rating adds up. They just gotta initiate more and obviously if they put more effort into GVG and have a higher rating some how than mine. They will and should get the rank 1 rewards. 

 

I'm sorry about the whole self serving comments, its just you were holding on the rewards being for top 1-3 so tightly, its just knowing in a 1 v 1 tourney, my guild vs yours, mine would never come first. So I didn't see it as a real incentive.