Guild War Improvement for all (?)


#1

For me, GWs is the above all best game mode and the other modes just serve the purpose of feeding resources and troops to the end goal of making us stronger for GWs. I understand that not everyone feels this way, and GWs is not considered as fun by a fair amount of the population. How can we change that? Also, how can we design an improvement so that it falls inside the devs vision for GoW?

#1 move the active GW lovers much faster to the top where the competition lives

EDIT: Version #1 using point system

EDIT: Version #2 using a participation based system.

The devs did a great job modifying the old bracket promotion formula to help move guilds faster, but since GWs is monthly it can still take years to get to the top as a newly formed guild. I would like to suggest splitting GWs into 2 main parts. First part being exactly how GWs is now with the same formulas and ranking/reward system. Then a second part where all the less than mostly inactive GW Guilds live in one giant bracket, let’s call it the Starting Pool.

------Version1 – Point System ------

Staring Pool Threshold: let’s say for example that 1Mil total guild points (38K/player) is the threshold. Once a guild can hit 1Mil points total in the Starting Pool then for the following guild wars they are put into what is now Normal GWs. And then any guild no matter the bracket from Normal GWs scores <1Mil falls back to the Beginner’s Pool.

Operation inside the Starting Pool: GWs operates as normal but the lineup of vs Guilds is set at random. This method comes with some RNG for sure, some guild may be put against 1 person dead guilds or vs a guild that cares (same as now). However, it is my belief that any active GW guild should hit >1Mil points (or otherwise set threshold).

According to https://www.taransworld.com/GuildRankings/gw.pl 142 guilds broke the 1Mil barrier last week. Using this new GW bracket system we would need to also add in the next 8 top guilds in order to include the 2 scored guilds that broke 1Mil. So that there is 15 Brackets of 10 guilds each for the following GWs.

Using the Bracket system detailed above i believe that it would allow a newly formed GW focused guild to move into B1 in 15 months if only moving 1B at a time, only 10 weeks if you can move +2 brackets from B15-5, even faster if guilds above jump out, even faster with the GW bracket formula used now allowing more than 2 brackets jumped per round.

------Version2 – Participation System ------

Staring Pool Threshold: let’s say for example that 450 total GW battles (15 player’s at 30 battles each) is the threshold. Once a guild can hit this level of participation in the Starting Pool then for the following guild wars they are put into what is now Normal GWs. And then any guild no matter the bracket from falls below 450 total battles in Normal GWs goes back to the Beginner’s Pool.

Operation inside the Starting Pool: GWs operates as normal but the lineup of vs Guilds is set at random. In the Starter pool total points are not as a big concern but getting your players to participate in GWs. This will in 1 GWs round separate inactive from active GW guilds.

I have no statistics on how many guilds do all their battles or even half their battles. So I can’t say how many GW brackets we would have or how long it would take to get to the top. For sure this would help move guilds into their direct competition zone faster.

#2 make GWs engaging and/or rewarding for players of all levels.

This is the part where the devs need to make more detailed choices on their own as it effects the game economy. I would like to suggest that GWs has an additional reward system per player or per guild for participation. Where you get 100% of the reward if win all your attacks. I can’t really comment on how big these rewards should be, but they should be enough to keep a new/casual player engaged enough to play GWs and set hard defenses.

EDIT: removed the bit about participation rewards based on Def performance.

EDIT: i want to clarify that a 1Mil target may not be the right number its only an example. this could be done by participation or another factor as well.


#2

I like these suggestions! I agree that while the changes made to the bracket promotion system were a good step in the right direction, it can still take ages to get anywhere near the top brackets.

For guilds with members that are still levelling up, this is perhaps good, since you don’t want the difficulty to ramp up tooooo quickly. For newly-formed high-level guilds, though, this would definitely be a problem.

One thing I’ve been thinking about suggesting for a little bit, now, is a new mode called ‘Expeditions’ that can help you to level up your guild statues more quickly. This would help newer, more active guilds score better in GW more quickly, helping them to get past that ‘1 mil.’ stage.

It’s a real tough nut, I think - I think I’ve mentioned elsewhere that I think GW suffers from its infrequency in a way that the other modes don’t - but given the current balance of events and the difference in opinion of players around GW, I think changing it again would be tough.

Greater bracket mobility and a faster way to level up guild statues, as well as better rewards/incentives for lower brackets definitely all gets +1s from me. Perhaps winning Blue Day in GW could help to level up your Blue Statue/a Statue of your choice - and instead the daily experience bonus could be scrapped, since it’s inconsistent with any other event.


#3

the difference of opinion towards GWs among players is indeed tough. my goal is to formulate a GW improvement that would turn the tide on this. if we can make it more engaging or rewarding for the masses we could end up with an even more competitive and fun game. one main problem being that for most guilds the rewards are nearly zero and it would take years of hard work to get to the point where rewards are acceptable, so why even bother…

please help refine my idea to something that helps engage lower level guilds and at the same time keeps the spirit of the game alive for the upper ones.


#4

from popular demand from a group of GLs i have been talking to, i have added a participation based example method rather than a point based method. Using all the same concepts as before.