I agree, as we need a balance between these game modes but the OP demanded too much. I do like invasions and want to like raid but that doesn’t mean those tgat like it should lose it.
1 Like
While I understand your points, to guilds who are not full and/or high level, buying the shop tiers can be out of reach. If you lose too many, someone else may have to pony up. I like GW because my moves matter and I have to think instead of running up a hill to die and respawn until I reach the next hill. Invasions to me are interesting as you can plan with towers but raid is just awful. While those who want to play more can in raids/invasion, I do think the grind can be too much for some, even to do your fair share for the last portal, especially to get a growth orb.
28 free sigils a week x30 = 840 sigils before birds.
People ignore the reality that everyone can participate in raid and invasion for free. If a guild isn’t high level, they can still participate and use free sigils.
2 Likes
The point I made was to hit the higher portal rewards. I believe the minimum was tier 3 if lucky overall but most would need 4 or more.
And what awesome rewards do they get for completing guild wars? If they can’t even go far in raid and invasions?
I feel it’s no surprise there’s a lot of controversy. I’ll throw some more thoughts out.
We have these competitive modes, if we define “competitive” as “having a leaderboard”.
- Guild Wars
- Raid
- Invasion
- Bounty
- Class Events
- Faction Events
Ignoring everything else, it’s hard to imagine the game majority deciding on one of them as a “favorite”. You can’t ask people which of 6 things is their favorite and expect more than about 30% in any one category.
Also: “I like a mode” isn’t a binary proposition. Some people “like” Guild Wars, but not an awful lot. Just more than some other mode. So “more frequent Guild Wars” can still be a bad thing even if you like it.
Life is complex!
Then again, we could redefine “competitive” as “a mode where one player creates teams another player has to defeat”. By that definition, GoW has the following competitive mode:
- Guild Wars
Raid, Invasion, Bounty Hunt, Class, and Faction events are fancy Explore variants with sigils and leaderboards. The only way you fight against players in this mode is the mental game of trying to figure out how to get the maximum number of points per sigil.
That kind of sets up why GW feels less pay-to-win: everyone gets the same number of sigils. Everyone gets the same capped sentinel upgrades. So even when you “pay” into GW, you can’t pay more than other people. Eventually, your record comes down to:
- The defense team’s effectiveness.
- Luck.
That last part is the one I don’t like. GW is not entirely a measure of skill. There are teams I’ve played against nearly a dozen times and never lost. But I would absolutely not bet money I can beat them 100 times. Sooner or later I’ll bet a bad board setup and they’ll get the better of me. Some GW this happens 2 or 3 times, and those are the weeks I hate GW.
Then, while I typed all of this, @KYLENATOR001 made good points too. OP didn’t articulate things very well. That caused people (me included) to attack OP’s specific post, rather than the idea we all know it stands for. This isn’t a new opinion. We’ve seen better versions of the argument. I think, deep down, we all agree we’d like more events with the GW structure.
I wish we’d talk about what that means rather than sticking to the easy parts. Here’s my part:
The only reason I’m unhappy with GW is it is still very luck-heavy. GoW has no mode where skill is the only factor involved. There are some teams I’ve beaten dozens of times with no losses in GW. I would never bet money I can go 100 matches without a loss. There’s always some small % chance of a bad board serving them a cascade I cannot recover from.
So what I want from the new mode is the good parts of GW with the luck parts of GoW altered:
- Everyone gets a fixed amount of sigils. You cannot buy more.
- Everyone gets a chance to buy a fixed amount of boosts (like sentinels). Once you’ve bought every upgrade, you’re done.
- No free turns. At all. Sorry Goblins.
- Cascades are capped at 3x. After the third match, the board is cleared and the turn is given to the next player.
- Explosions and gem generation are capped at a relatively low number.
Would it be fun? I don’t know. It’d be different. It’d be based a lot more on skill than the current GW. I’d also like some adjustments to the bracket system, but those are complex and not as easy to stick in a bullet point.
Anyway, yeah. I want “new stuff to do”. Not “please repeat the stuff I already have”. I’m already not happy that once a month I have a hell-week where I’ll feel compelled to play an extra 10-15 Delves out of an available 20-25+.
2 Likes
The usual stuff, people don’t like the stakes, they want to play the game mindlessly, nothing wrong with that, i can understand it and would not mind if from a gameplay perspective the game modes of Raids/Invasions themselves weren’t these boring dragfests due to their strict limitations.
Status effects barred and one trooptype/kingdom limitation results in unsynergizing basic and generic teams, making for wait-for-Skull-drops borefests the vast majority of weeks.
Granted thanks to Delves which did the restrictions right(thanks Devs) i don’t have a real need for GW anymore but i’d also like an alternative for the terrible Raid/Invasions bores, as it is a chore going through my sigils and yes just not using them hurts my guild aswell, that’s why i put myself through it.
I would not mind removing the stakes from GW(though i enjoy that aswell) to be able to play the mode of GW for my Raids/Invasions battles … somehow… figure it out.
4 Likes
In most brackets, pretty bad. I wish the devs would add keys or ingots or something, but they don’t want to do that. As for raids, the obtainable rewards through free could be better for lower level players imho. Now invasions give some gems on the individual level and have more varied teams. I prefer that model to raids but with GW, you can get some gems, new troops and gold which is meager, but at least it is less time consuming.
That’s assuming they aren’t using gems on sentinels, which for guild wars costs 340 gems to max all four. Most people are ending up in a clear deficit in gems if they raise sentinels to 5 each…
Heck, I raised my sents all to 5 last week, and my reward for bracket one guild wars? 400 gems Woohoo, so I earned 60 gems for a week of stress.
And your point about time… That’s really why people like guild wars, so they can play less of the game. Have you considered some of us actually enjoy playing more of the game – not less?
However, being in bracket one, guild wars isn’t quick. If you do it quick, you don’t care about score, and won’t be in bracket one for long.
Indeed, but its more complicated than that. Orbs have very different valuations with growth orbs being pretty bad late game to ascension orbs being worth a mythics worth of diamonds to make a legendary into a mythic. In GW, the limits are determined by bracket. You know the min or max rewards. If in bracket 2, you could do that, but only to try and ensure your guild goes to 1. If you have a deficit, you know what you are getting into at least. I think the bracket system needs a rework and hopefully that day is soon approaching. I will say though that while shop tiers have other goodies, the effects are pretty obvious now and more game modes focus on coffers than planning.
Outside of that, while we may disagree, at least we both hopefully understand the opposing arguments better.
1 Like
What do you base that assumption on? It definitely isn’t true for me or anyone i know or have chatted with about this Topic.
1 Like
That’s what he said, as stated above…
I assume less time consuming means it takes less time to do guild wars than raid and invasion. Unless I misunderstood.
And now that is true for all people that like GW?
Personally i could play a lot more than 5 GW games a day, make it happen Devs!
I agree with you, I shouldn’t have assumed people like guild wars because it’s only five matches, and less time consuming.
I want GW more often just to get the troops lol I almost have them all to mythic
I definitely enjoy GW more than Invasion/Raids and would like it to happen more often.
Guild Wars is by far my favorite event in Gems, but the current frequency seems fine to me.
Raid is significantly worse than Invasion but I enjoy both as a change of pace.
GW every week is mostly the same teams every week fighting against the same teams every week. It gets stale in a hurry. At least with Invasion/Raid it forces creativity. I’ve found use for well more troops than I ever would have if I was just doing GW every day.
Uhm what? Raid/Invasion is Hero+Godkiller/Siegebreaker+doesn’treallymatterx2 literally 80% of the time. And the enemy troops repeat themselves infinitely for the week.
Not saying you are wrong about enemy teams in GW, but the variety in teams players play against them is huge compared to what players use or even can use in Raid/Invasion.
2 Likes
It’s the “Doesn’t really matter x2” part where we disagree. I find the strategy of finding the best support troops each week pretty interesting. This week, Hyndla is pretty obvious, other weeks there’s pretty good debate among my clan as to which is best.
As far as defense, Raid I’ll agree with you, that is probably one of the reasons I like it significantly less. Invasion, while it’s a limited subset of troops, they vary greatly and there is strategy to fighting them depending what order they’re in. That keeps it fresh enough where it’s not mindless.
2 Likes