Guild "agreement" in bracket1 to arrange scores

[Taliesin]

Go ahead and do that we will face them head on.

[Grundulum]

You’re changing your defense based on your opponent. This is oddly similar to the decisions that prompted this thread. (If they do the same thing back at your guild, does that make it collusion?)

[JuaitoR]

If and when the 24 different troops used in GW defences becomes a thing, I think I’ll be tempted to use my"best" defence against our main rival guild. This would impact other guilds score against me. But this is how most sport competitions work. Teams try to do their best against their biggest competitors.

[PGSundling]

How about we just make colluding legal?

The top guilds already got to use this against the rest of us. They got their payday and got to walk away. Is this gems, or Wall Street?

When is it ever a turn for the rest of us? Having an easy guild wars day might make it suck less.

And to think Guild Wars is the thing that will prevent me from ever having a perfect collection makes me ill after this whole situation.

[Darkness]

@Stan

@Darkness

Am I obliged to set a meta defense (Wisp-Wisp-Krystenax-Mab , Wisp-WIsp-Kraken-Mab or Forest Troll-Kraken-Kraken-Mab) every day in GW or do I still have the freedom to (for example!) use the current weeks bonus troops (giants this week) or tailor my defense to the color of the day?

I think you’re being overly sensitive. While 4x peasant might be an obvious indication that you’re taking a dive, and there might be a grey area if you were using a mixture of weaker troops, the idea that only “meta teams” are allowed is just silly. Of course you can use event teams or anti-color teams or any other thoughtful team that is intended to present an obstacle to the invader.

I expect that you are correct in this case. However, due to current circumstances I thought it would be good to have a clear ruling on the issue. So far there has not been a clear definition of what is a “weak” or “easy” defense.

[Grundulum]

@Darkness

So far there has not been a clear definition of what is a “weak” or “easy” defense.

Nor will there ever be. As Stan correctly pointed out, the key ingredient in deciding whether a defense is weak or not is the intent of the person setting it. (Assuming, of course, a modicum of competence on the part of the defending player. 4x Peasant ain’t competent.) The only way to know whether someone is truly trying to use their defense as an obstacle is to examine their head while they are setting the defense. And if Sirrian and company could do that, they would not be worried about the financials of the game – they’d be making money hand over fist from literally every corporation/government in the world.

[Darkness]

@Grundulum

@Darkness

So far there has not been a clear definition of what is a “weak” or “easy” defense.

The only way to know whether someone is truly trying to use their defense as an obstacle is to examine their head while they are setting the defense. And if Sirrian and company could do that, they would not be worried about the financials of the game – they’d be making money hand over fist from literally every corporation/government in the world.

Which means that without a clear definition of what is an “easy” or “weak” defense no collusion or anything like that can ever be conclusively proven. But no reason to drag this out any further: Obviously the prevaling opinion of the community (since there is no developer ruling on this) is that players can set whatever defense they want in GW (provided it’s not 4 peasants (or a similar walkover type defense)).

[Vangor]

@Darkness

Obviously the prevaling opinion of the community (since there is no developer ruling on this) is that players can set whatever defense they want in GW (provided it’s not 4 peasants (or a similar walkover type defense

Heres an idea… How bout you set the same defense for anonymous as you would for Gems of the Ostfront? I am sure you would want very badly to be an obstruction to my guild right?

[Darkness]

What happened to our agreement to ignore eachother? You suggested that yourself, and less than a week later you’re already breaking that deal again…
I accepted that deal in good faith and even ignored any posts you made in a topic I started (about the needless flagging), and now you’re telling me what to do on a different subject. That’s not ignoring eachother, that’s just you breaking another promise…

Wisp counters needed

Ok… After numerous PMs from several different people as well as some posts here in the open it seems everyone thinks i should drop this matter regardless of who i right and who is wrong. It seems to me that this advice i should follow if not for me then for the community. So i will leave it at this… @Darkness we will probably never see eye to eye on much of anything (not passing judgement just stating a fact) so for the benefit of you, me, and the community in general i am willing to drop this…

But on topic: We’re not in the same bracket, so I don’t see how I should be setting a defense for Gems of the Ostfront? But why would I set the same defense for every guild we face in GW? Everyone here says I am free to set my defense the way I want to, including tayloring my defense to the color of the day (or any other choice I might make as long as it is a viable defense and not a walkover defense). And now you’re saying my defense should be the same for everyone, but why should I set the same defense for everyone? PLEASE MAKE UP YOUR MINDS ABOUT THIS!

This is exactly why I asked for clarification about this from the devs! We need some clear ruling here otherwise this discussion will continue forever…

[Rojo1]

You just made my point! If there is only a difference between 3rd and 6th of 100 gems then what’s the point in finishing 3rd! If they want to make 1st way more than anyone then 2nd should not be way more than anyone too! 2nd did not win anything! I’m not saying the rewards should be lowered i’m saying they should be closer together is all! The numbers I put out there was an example! It could be 1500, 1250, 1000, 750, 500, 400 and so on!

[Vangor]

@Darkness

What happened to our agreement to ignore eachother? You suggested that yourself, and less than a week later you’re already breaking that deal again…

I accepted that deal in good faith and even ignored any posts you made in a topic I started (about the needless flagging), and now you’re telling me what to do on a different subject. That’s not ignoring eachother, that’s just you breaking another promise

You missed the part where i said “and interact civilly where unavoidable” my response to you was civil and intended to be helpful. I have broken no promise or agreement. If you choose to be offended by my existance yhats your fault not mine.

There also was nothing bad or inflammatory in my post but by all means if you think there was tell salty to ban me again cuz i am sure 24 hours wasnt enough for you.

As for this…

@Darkness

But on topic: We’re not in the same bracket, so I don’t see how I should be setting a defense for Gems of the Ostfront? But why would I set the same defense for every guild we face in GW?

I know you are not stupid so you must be being deliberately difficult here which i have no patience for normally but in this case i will try to be helpful…

This was an example. I am well aware we arent in the same bracket and i didnt mean for you to set the same exact team for every guild and every color. What i meant was maybe when setting your defense for anonymous approach the task as tho you wanted to win every battle your defense fights. Plain and simple.

Now if you still feel i have broken the rules please feel free to flag my posts and report me to salty

[Rellystra]

Honestly this whole ridiculous “well what COUNTS as easy, anyway?” reminds me of little kids asking how many words you can borrow before something counts as plagiarism.

To them, I say: use quotes and cite your sources. You know when you’re borrowing. Don’t do it.

To GW participants, I would say: don’t collude and use real defenses. You know when you’re deliberately going easy on a guild. Don’t do it.

Amazingly, the rest of us don’t need this spelled out with a troop list. You don’t, either.

[Vangor]

@Rellystra

Amazingly, the rest of us don’t need this spelled out with a troop list. You don’t, either

Hear hear!!

[Emos]

As mentioned, certain troops and Defense builds are more viable against certain colors so many people don’t want to setup the exact Defense for all six days. That said, I’m lazy and set the exact Defense (my Event Troop build) for GW this week. Quirky, not meta but very challenging in its own right based on the current W/L record.

EDIT: Honestly the 24 unique troop GW defense patch can’t come soon enough. I think this would require locking in GW Defenses once the matches start. If colors but not Guilds were shown on Monday it would solve the problem in my opinion.

[Taliesin]

If they are going to create a new rule which they have they are responsible for explaining exactly what they are looking for in black and white or no rule can exist otherwise said rule could be used to hurt one person or guild harder than others. I don’t trust the dev to keep their word unless there is a clear definition of what is and is not allowed in a defense.

[Saltypatra]

@Saltypatra

There is no clear answer as to what a suitable defense team is, and we’d never determine collusion by looking at individual teams as a first step. Gems of War is too complex a game to even attempt to define that, and any attempt to do so would simply drive cheaters further into the weeds, where they’d muddy things up and make it too difficult to prove.

Just in case this was missed earlier. In no way do we expect everyone to set up a meta defense, but if we look at your team and you have unleveled troops who do not work effectively together, it should be pretty clear that you aren’t setting a strong defense team.

We do believe in your judgement when it comes to this, so please exercise it accordingly.

[Taliesin]

Who is to say what works well together something could work well together for one person and not another

[Taliesin]

You have created a rule you can not possibly fairly enforce without drastic changes.

[JuaitoR]

Hence the urgency of the update.

I don’t get why people wine so much, it’s pretty much just common sense. Don’t try to take advantage of sister guilds in Guild Wars.

[Vangor]

Hey bro… For your own sake just calm down and stop. You are being belligerent and difficult and the only thing you are doing is making yourselves look worse. I am surprised at the way MG is handling this. My advice? Take a cue from @Aelthwyn. She gained some respect from me by saying (and i am paraphrasing) it wasnt against the rules before but it is now so they wont do it anymore. And left it at that. This constant justification and shade throwing is only making you look bad