Good guild —> less points, gold per PVP match

It has been known for a while that “good guilds” get less gold per PVP match than guilds just starting out. Did we ever figure out why that is? My guild just merged with another. Went from 67 points, 1700 gold per battle two weeks ago to 51 points, 1300 gold for the same opponent. (Hooray for apparently tiny player pools.)

There are only two things I can think of that changed between the pre- and post-merge guild environments. First, we completed all basic tasks last week. Second, we completed two legendary tasks.

I suppose I can make my peace with getting less gold per match (though I would greatly prefer instead if the cost of legendary tasks increased with each one completed in a given week). But giving me fewer PVP points per match is just rude. If I were trying to compete for the top 100 spots on the leaderboard, I would be at a 25% disadvantage compared to those in less active guilds.

I recognize that this may be an attempt to counteract the advantage associated with guild task stat bonuses, but it seems much too harsh compared to the marginal value of the bonuses themselves. 3/8/8/2 attack/life/armor/magic is a small fraction of the total boosts available for kingdom bonuses. Do players without kingdom bonuses earn 3000+ gold and 100+ PVP points for taking on a 10k opponent in a PVP match?


I noted this and complained when it first happened. Obviously I was verbally assaulted here for being elitist. Still stinks as unfair to me.

Little late to the party. Not that I disagree with you, but it’s been doing this for years.


Better guild also probably has higher statue levels. And if you max a statue’s task, stat bonus.
So higher surge chance and in general higher stats. And that translates directly to faster and easier matches.

These kind of comparisons should be made by time, not by match

In this case, it probably isn’t that. The guild we merged into had almost identical statue levels. And I don’t think anything changed until late in the week (as we finished our tasks and did the legendary tasks).

I only realised this recently when I changed guilds and went from making 4000+ per battle to about 2500 :sweat_smile:

Was pointed out to me that it’s normal when you move to a higher good.

Want more gold?
Keep kingdoms at level 9, avoid traiting troops unless you need that trait.

You’re suggesting that kingdom level and kingdom power play a role. Was that confirmed anywhere by a dev?

Earning fewer resources for advancing in the game is a trap move that leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Like spending diamonds on souls — that should never be done if you’re playing “optimally”, but the game allows you to do it and spend the most precious resource on the second-least valuable one.

It’s especially bad when the game doesn’t tell you that the consequence of your action is getting less resources. And that there may not be a way to undo the decision. And that you don’t even know which action you took to earn that consequence. If I wanted to go back to earning more gold per match, how do I do that? Can I go to an established guild outside the top 15 brackets? Do I need to be in one that doesn’t have all its statues at level 100? One that doesn’t complete all its tasks each week? Do I have to start a new guild and rebuild from scratch? I get no information on this, and it’s bumming me out right now.


I second the feeling, doing exclusively 3 trophy matches (and thus getting the maximum score available to you) and seeing someone with similar/fewer victories than you having a way higher score just feels unfair, you basically know that if you’re going against someone that is lower level or comes from a newer/less established guild you don’t stand a chance.

Last time I went for the leaderboard I found myself in such a situation, and I basically gave up on Sunday because it was pointless:


1 Like

this system make sense in the past before guardians and newer stat boosters. now it just stupid. you can face a team with 8k score using a 10k score then after a few rounds, they surpassed you starting stats by a huge margin.

masteries also a big factor since it practically diminished in value the more you have it but you still losing more gold than you probably should.

from my experience, the difficulty to beat a same team when in lower guild is not that much different than when in upper guild. yet the gold reward is typically 3k in lower and 1.6-1.8k in upper. now i think i’m getting only 1.4k at most. probably my fault for traiting troops and upgrading kingdoms.

at some point, this system make sense as a reward to small players beating big players, but after a certain point it just punishing people for progressing in the game.


Kingdom skill bonus lowers your gold. Team score in pvp determines gold in part.

Being able to ‘game the system’ by tweaking numbers to be slightly lower is not a healthy place to be in.

Let alone there being an absurd benefit from doing so.


I always thought it had to do with guilds doing Legendary tasks?

It’s been pretty clear from the beginning that the difference in team score influences the amount of gold that you can receive. Team score seems to depend on your character level and your stats (gained by increasing kingdom level/power and having more stats from completing guilld tasks). On top of that, the strength of the troops on the team influence the team score. (More levels and more traits raise the score.)

When I came back to the game and was guildless, the amount of gold I could make per pvp battle was the heighest. After joining a super casual guild that wasn’t able to max guild statues, I made a decent amount of gold per battle but it was less than when I was guildless. Once I went up to a top 10 guild that finished all guild tasks, my gold per battle plummeted to its all time low. (That happened over the period of a week, give or take a few days, so nothing else changed about my kingdoms or character level in that time.)

So, the stronger you and your team are, the less gold you make. I assume the devs designed the mode to give extra reward to underdog battles.


Pretty much this. You fight a team below your team score (1 & 2 trophies) you get less gold. Fight a team close or higher in score you get more (3 trophy).

So being penalized is not by design specifically targeting end game players or higher guilds, it’s just the indirect effect of making gold dependant upon the difference in strength between your team and your opponent’s. Obviously it’s very debatable whether what goes into calculating a team score truly represents the difficulty level of the team you’re fighting. But they’ve designed a formula to attempt to quantify a very subjective concept.

It’d be nice to get a dev to weigh in, but here’s what I guess is happening based on the stories I see in this thread.

We think/it may be confirmed that your gold is at least partially determined by your team score. So I’m thinking, as a dev, what I might do that would make a “better” player get less gold.

It makes me think of a way XP is distributed in Pokémon games recently. When you fight weaker opponents, your XP reward is reduced. When you fight stronger opponents, your XP reward is increased. This is proportional, so if you fight neutral opponents you get something near the “correct” amount of XP.

Maybe that’s what GoW is doing. If I’ve got a 4k team and I fight a 6k team and win, I get a big fat gold bonus. If my 7k team stomps a 1k team, I get a big fat gold penalty. This would encourage me to take risks and find challenges instead of grinding out “safe” opponents.

But there’s a maximum team power! The teams I see seem to cap at around 9.7k, and anecdotally I can tell 10k is more or less the highest theoretical team power. So if I have a team at or near that cap, the game can’t throw “more powerful” teams at me anymore. So I stop getting the bonus.

This happens in Pokémon and we just sort of deal, because the game designers’ opinion is if it were easy to glide past about level 60, the game would be trivially easy instead of just “accessible to all”. If they tried to balance it for a world where Lv. 100 is easy to reach, then only a few competitive teams would have a chance vs. the Elite Four and the game would be inaccessible to all but the people who use spreadsheets to plan their teams.

I don’t think it’s a good Gems of War mechanic. “Use a maxed-out traited team” is the end goal. It’s the reason you ask us to put money in your wallet, @Saltypatra and @Cyrup. What good is a Growth Pack if I’m going to, long-term, get fewer in-game rewards for having it?

I suppose the counter-argument is if I were in a guild that hits its LTs every week, presumably gold is one of my least important resources and I can take the penalty. That’s great, maybe I’ll be there one day. But right now I’m in a casual guild that only reaches 7-10 of its tasks weekly. It’s kind of weird to think that as we level our statues, we’ll subtly get less gold with which to do so?

I think the gold bonus should be tied to whether you picked a 1, 2, or 3-trophy battle. You should always get less gold for 1 trophy, and always get more gold for 3 trophies, and I don’t think the relative team power level should apply. It’s not my fault that for some reason, the game can decide to put a 7k power team at my 3-trophy slot.

Ugh this, too.

I’ve been fighting 4x “useless monster” teams a lot lately. The 4x traited Fire Bomb team has a power in the 9k range, but you sort of have to go out of your way to build a team that dies to it. Then there’s a handful of Infernus teams at the ~8k range I see at 2-trophy that I’m not sure I ever beaten.

I don’t have a suggestion for a better measure of team power, but not all fully-traited mythic teams are equal.

In theory, a stronger team will win more fights per unit time. So the idea seems to be that a stronger team’s more wins per time vs a weaker team’s more gold per win balance out to similar gold per time. I’d guess, anyway.

The reality, of course, is that a team’s “strength” rating isn’t an accurate indicator of its actual ability to win fights, much less win fights quickly.

That’s my big issue. I can justify why higher levels, team power, and guilds influence gold. Why should people in a higher ranked guild get less points though? I tried for top of the leaderboard too but it’s pointless when people are getting a lot more points for their 3 trophy fights. It would be nice to have dev confirmation on all of the issues brought up here. I’ve talked to people who have seen screenshots of how many points people get, and i can see the leaderboard and do the math, but until a dev says, this is how it is and why, it’s all just speculation as to the exact reasoning.


Here’s the last word from a dev, as far as I’m aware, on this question. There were a few good discussions about similar matters about 10 months ago. At the time, I did some experiments to see how high I could keep my average PVP points per battle after moving to a casual guild. I wasn’t tracking gold at the time, but the difference in leaderboard points was pretty stark.