DM and Devour are so big because they are high risk, high reward tactics Because the defense wins so rarely, any fixed chance at killing a troop is a big deal. If you had a Greater Maw with a single use spell that devoured the entire other team 20% of the time it would be the best defense for most people.
1 Like
A different sort of suggestion:
Move the GW reset back 12 hours, decoupling it from the weekly reset. That would give people time both after GW completes, and before it starts up to collect rewards, shift guilds and recruit.
No, the extra battle can only be used during that day, just if you don’t use it you can get rewards from them
This was a concern I had way back when we were still discussing Guild Wars prior to its release. The devs claimed they had the sentinels use gems so that they could recoup the money they put into such an addition. My argument was that lower brackets wouldn’t feel compelled to spend gems when they would receive the same reward regardless of outcome. It was why I had recommended a bracketed system in the first place, but with more emphasis on who won their bracket, and less on where they are overall. Obviously, now here we are, telling people in lower brackets not to bother spending gems, which is the opposite of the dev’s intentions.
Unrelated to my response above, I think people need to ease off the point system ideas. While a 27 man lineup is a great idea for vacations, etc., any other change is just going to be a lateral move. Whatever change happens to your guild happens to the top guilds. And they will continue to perform better than you.
My recommendation would be to turn your direction instead on how to make Guild Wars more fun for everyone, without sacrificing the difficulty it entails.
My initial assumption when Guild Wars was being announced, is that the singular color per day thing was just an example. That there would be say the next week where you had to compose your team a different way (wargare, or all troops from x kingdom). Things like that would reduce some of the monotony some people face. We would still need to find a way to make defense teams more varied, but that will also come in time.
And for those that claim that asking for a varied defense team is asking for an easier time in Guild Wars, it’s not. At least for me. I’m in a mobile/PC guild (Hoguns) that has far outperformed what a hardcore/casual group should do, and we’ve been hanging around bracket 1 for a few weeks now. It’s mainly because we’ve designed our teams to face the meta. I nearly had a perfect week last week in bracket one until I got hit by the empty board bug in the last couple hours before reset. It’s totally doable to beat these meta teams with mono-color teams. And with consistency. It’s just boring. And I had higher expectations for the kind of fun Guild Wars would bring.
6 Likes
To stir up the defense meta a bit, how about something like this.
Ban using each day’s color in defense teams. Or at least strongly incentivize not using that day’s color.
Before you reach for your pitchforks, hear me out 
If there is a single color that can’t be used for defense each day, it dismantles SOME of the most irritating aspects of the current “grief meta”, at least on some days.
Let’s look at Psion/Famine as an example. The only day you would be able to see these two troops together is Red day. You could still run into Psion on Red/Yellow/Green/Brown days and you could still run into Famine on Red/Blue/Purple days, so they’d still need to be accounted for, but you might have more flexibility in how you build your teams since you aren’t countering them both at the same time every single day.
How about EK/Justice/Mab? Blue day is the obvious one, but Mab would be absent on Purple day and EK would be absent on Brown day.
Kerb/GS/FG/Kerb would only work at maximum strength on Red day.
I’m not saying this is a perfect solution, but I think it would shake up the metas enough where it would at least provide more variety over the course of the week. It could open the door to more creative attacking teams as well since there’d be more variance in defenders. Two of the three meta formats I mentioned would still be at full strength on Red day (which ironically was my least favorite day already) so I’m sure there’s a better idea, but I’d love to see more diversity.
What it boils down to is that I would really like there to be a relationship between daily color and defense, not just offense. I’m all for “reward = good” but unless there’s a really strong reward, I don’t foresee people voluntarily moving away from these teams simply because they’re very effective. This is why I listed banning on-color defense as an option.
6 Likes
Agree with a lot of the suggestions here.
-Rewards based on Bracket Position not just overall leader board position
-Make all battles available from Day 1 so you can just get them done if you want
-Change Reward from just 100% EXP bonus
-Remove the outside of GW buffs from guild bonuses/events so that it is truly even
-Remove gem cost from sentinels and just use Gold/Souls/Glory
-Trickle down sentinels for offense/up for defense
What about having a player choose which enemy they fight? Instead of working up to the highest value let them tackle it first. If they lose they still lose points but not the one worth the most. This would be like attack a foot soldier for minimal effect in the war or attack the general for larger impact. This way the ranks don’t lose their meaning and if a person wants to keep trying they may lose more in reaching for the higher points than if they battled the foot soldiers first.
This is an awesome idea and would probably make me want to play again
1 Like
I think that every troop should be assigned a point value depending on how strong it is. for instance a TDS is not compairable to a Skeleton. the TDS would have more of a point value in comparison. Each player would be given an amount of points to spend and depending on the day certain colors are weighted more or less so that it would be impossible to make the same defense and or attacking troop’s twice in the same week depending on how the algorithm would work. I used to do this when I was planning troop deployments with Mechwarrior the Dark age.
Scoring could still be on the same slid rule system of how many troops you use for a certain color, but a multiplyer bonus could be applied for every solid color vs dual, tri, or all color troops. the increased percentage of straight color would be worth more than the multi-colored varity.
4 Likes
Everyone seems so ban hammer, limit happy, lock stuff down, use once etc. ? But what is the goal of all this is it really trying to obtain more fun more variety? Too much stick, no carrot. One alternative I posted before was to offer rewards based on troop usage for Defense (this could also apply to PvP)
All tropes are assigned a 5 Star rating based on the previous weeks (or other time frame)usage/popularity in 20% brackets. This is displayed when choosing your Defense team. Setting your teams using very uncommon (bottom bracket) troops earns BIG bonuses. Using a top 20% troop earns 0 Bonus. Middle brackets vary accordingly.
Reward will need to be refined and structured to encourage some players to experiment, and allow others to run their usual grief for lower points. Variety is the goal.
6 Likes
Right now, Guild Wars is so controversial because some like it while others don’t. The rewards are shared among all in the guild. Those who don’t like it have no way of opting out. If they do not play, those who like and play GW see them as leeches … taking the rewards while doing nothing.
Suggest we change the reward structure so that the GW rewards are shared BASED ON THE NUMBER OF BATTLES PLAYED.
A player that plays 30 battles would therefore get 30/30=100% GW REWARD
A player that plays 15 battles would get 15/30=50% GW REWARD
A player that plays 0 battles would get 0/30=0% GW REWARD
Also instead of a fixed reward for each player, the GW reward could perhaps be based on a basket that is shared among the guild players who play. This would help resolve some of the ill feeling among guild members who do 30 battles against those who do not do the 30 battles.
Ultimately the cardinal principle must be that the rewards for GW must go to those in the Guild who play GW. Any reward structure that does not follow principle will simply lead to more of the unhappiness that we are seeing.
3 Likes
I’m sure it’s already bee mentioned, but just in case it hasn’t…
You should not have to fight the same person more than once (unless, of course, their guild is that small). The last Guild War I fought in I fought the same person for the first three battles.
Aside from that, Guild Wars (quite obviously) favors the guilds that have been around for forever.
You know exactly how much points you did when you invade but it’s not that conveninent to know how many points an opponent looses becuase of your defense team. Really this race of the ones who will put the most horrible/annoying team to win more points is the reason why we are stuck with META teams…
Honestly, I don’t care about defense teams. Having to put the most annoying team just to possibly win more points is not something I like to do… So if I can be free of this choice, I will be fine ;-).
The only problem for you is: “oh no I’m going to have a not-OP team (ie META) in my defense”. But is it not what some players are asking for?
The idea was more: you don’t care about the defense team which will be chosen automatically and you choose whatever invade teams that you want. If you take this team to win your GW, I assume that it’s not a crappy one. Maybe the AI will not be able to play well some troops (transformers maybe?) but it should be a good defense.
But if you really care about your defense team, we can imagine that during the week 2, for each day, you can choose your defense from your invade teams of the same day of week 1 (and not a random one like I firstly proposed). So you will have to do one battle from the 5 battles with a good invade/defense team…
The issue with the defense team is that they are chosen by players.
Someone proposed that the devs can choose them: it’s just impossible. It will ask too much time for them and the fun will depend of this choice and so on, players will complain that devs choose crap and GW is not fun anymore, etc.
Another solution is to put some carrots (what you call “lock the defense”, I think) to push players but either the carrots is the same so you will go for a carrot-META or not the same for each player which will totally unfair.
Last idea is that the defense teams are chosen automatically. Devs can collect all the data, keep only the good teams for the next week, etc. It could take some time to converge to obtain a good amount of different defense teams, but it’s possible. Not sure if devs have time for that…
I would love it if you always got to battle the Paragon, even if you lose a battle.
And I would love the chance to “get revenge” (rematch) when I lose.
No more “tokens” for battles, but still only 5 opponents per day.
One way to do this could be:
If you lose a battle, you could get the option to:
a) receive no points from failed attempt, then fight the same team again, but for a smaller % of points you would normally get (say 75% or 50%). Either just one rematch, or diminishing returns on points for each attempt.
b) skip the battle and go to the next, receiving some points for each troop defeated in the battle lost (including some bonus from your “colour-of-the-day” troops used).
I would also like to see the scoring system tweaked a little.
Most points come from the win. (So that remains the focus)
Some points from each enemy troop killed (in case you lose, you still get something)
Only a few points from each troop left on your team.
Keep the troop colour bonus points.
My previous ◄
Click on the 
to expand
i like the idea to be able to choose enemy from the rank i am suppose to fight, not sure if this way but its some idea!
[quote=“Kharybdys, post:237, topic:27538, full:true”]
Unsure if this has been said before, but one of the big reasons Deathmark and Devour are so big in Defense is that surviving troops are counted. Perhaps a different statistic needs to be taken into account, like total damage dealt. Ofcourse that might warp the meta as well.
[/quote]intgeresting but might put high stat players into disadvantage offering higher “damage dealt” points to the enemy?
then we are back to the issue of “cant de-ascend/delevel a troop”
thats completely not necessary imo, the only thing it would change is sometimes allow a “almost best” guild to fight among the “best guilds” which i think nothing worth fighting for? let the top have their hardest chellenge as they want it 
(ps. im not at the top)
lower brackets guilds dont have anything to worry about as every guild around them performs more or less the same
as long as we arent actually rewarded for each win in particular i dont see a point,
unless we do get one of this:
- each win nets some exp points to the corresponding statue level
- each win grants you a bonus loot of 1 weekly gw unit
but in that case if we got 6energy points for 5 battles, i would suggest that winning all 5 battles having the last idle attack should grant extra gw points - that way it will preserve the chellenge for the top guilds while allowing “better chance” for lower brackets to net those extra win rewards
i would go for ban but with one or two exceptions:
-
allow each player to actually assing which color they want to ban which day, they can change it only during the rest day and must arrange all the colors, no duplicate colors no skipping any
-
perhaps even ban 2 colors? so each color has to be banned 2 times (and cant be “double-banned” same one color in one day)
-
the color ban will just stick to a day or to a defense team, it will reset/shuffle/follow its corresponding defense teams (which it was assigned to) depending how the defense teams are reset/shuffle/moved each week - (since we want improvement towards the defense teams and not the current “into-pvp-defense” weekly gw defense reset)
@Mekkalyn look,
that wouldnt be guild wars at all, thats some sort of PvE raid, not PvP,
its cool idea just not for guild wars
i like it. it requires a must have improvement to our gw defense “reset” handling - something that wouldnt require ppl to re-do their defense teams each week if they didnt want to, but the improvements are needed there anyway
the reward would have to influence: guild wars rewarding system or guild wars scoring system, or directly reward gw-related stuff like the gw troops or any tokens that could net the gw troops. otherwise ppl wont be willing to weaken their defense and their gw-reward chances in order for those extra rewards
but in general its interesting idea and could be done right
ok i get it, everyone gets “gw played” points and the loot is shared according to participation. but there is a problem:
- if its distributed according to “fights played” ppl could just waste their points on a quick loose just to get some points, and the ill feeling in the guild would stay
- if its distributed by wins then it will frustrate the ppl even more
and i dont think mix of the two would make it any better,
besides i actually like the idea that all members get the rewards (same like with guild tasks) it makes me happy that me as the stronger/older member can help our newcommers, it makes a healthy guild more fulfilled. you should probably work on making your guild healthier to remove that ill feeling instead of asking the system to minimise the consewuences of it
thats only for non-competitive guilds
im only bracket 5 lately but i do care about the result already, and it would suck the fun out of me. do you really think it wouldnt suck the fun out of ppl more then the current sustem? the ppl who are already frustrated are the ppl who care about the resutl! they wont suddenly stop caring just coz you introduce the system - it will only frustrate them more. the solution you offer only pleases very small amount of ppl who just want a different gameplay and already wasnt caring as much about the rewards/results. i dont think that describes majority of gow community, even if you describe majority as “the low bracket casual players”
edit: especially that curre4ntly in this thread we are also asking for rewards improvement, so i dont think with the new guild wars ppl would care even less about the rewards, quite opposite
the moment guild war defenses arent chosen by players it stops being a “pvp guild wars” and starts being a “pve guild raid” which is completely different feature and i sure want to see it coming into the game, but we are right now talking about guild wars, not pve
i would go for carrots, there is already lots of carrot suggestions around
also some “light” restrictions in the defense build doesnt sound too bad
But do you really know how many times your defense team won? Moreover, I already answered that one good invade team could be also a good defense team and if the META defense is out it will mean less effective defense teams. You’re not going to invade with 4xPeasant… So you will have a quite powerful defense team: it will not be a META one but it will be a nice one.
I was always in the Bracket 1&2 and I’m not sure how you can know if your defense teams are good or not. I care/frustrate only about the results that it’s in my hands: invade ones. Not defense ones which can be easily crushed. I never thought that if we lose one War it was because we didn’t put good defense teams but because we didn’t do well in invade.
Let’s take Psion/Famine team: do you really think it’s a good team in the higher brackets? I don’t think so because after 4 weeks of GW most of the players will have their counter ready to crush this team. But not all the players: newcomers in the guild or low level players will still loose and so push down the guild which create more frustration.
So if I resume it’s the frustration of an hypothetical gain of GW points for the opponent because your defense is not-that-good VS. your real frustration to fight/loose against a META team. I never heard that players were frustrated because their defense teams were bad…
Devs give enough free stuff. More rewards, no thanks. But a better distribution of the rewards will be nice .
You don’t fight versus a player but versus a team chosen by a player and it’s an AI that control the team (like in other PVE modes of the game)… So no, there is no PVP in this game.
So you’re in contradiction with what you said before: players will get the carrots (ie personal rewards) to the cost of a less powerful defense team and so on, “bad results”… 
1 Like
Which still amounts to the same, handing out extra rewards on top for not participating. I’d rather see an incentive to actually play the GW battles.
1 Like
sure lets say no person was frustrated coz their defense team was bad so far,
but everyone had full controll of their defense team.
you bind this control with the attack team => frustration will come from the fact that player must choose to weaken one or both of the two
maybe not you but many players (including me) will try to still construct an attack team that would perform better at defense, but the enjoyment of playing such attack team will be smaller then usual
- its the same with having daily win rewards - ppl dont have to do the fights during the day, but cause its possible to maximise gain doing them that specific day they will be tempted to do it, even if it means they suffer on other aspects
- its the same with playing gw in the first place - ppl can skip it and skip rewards but they play to maximise the gain even if it means lessening their enjoyment of gow
- and again its the same psychological mechanic with reaching tier1 and 1500 seals
i know not all ppl are like that but i think rather majority is - and your suggestion would suck some enjoyment out of them
for two or three week i was actually tracking my defense entries from pvp (i mostly pvp at weekends so its easier for me to track it during week)
and i had more or less some idea how good my defense team performed and i could see the difference while different event bonuses were applied
i also saw difference in the amount of attacks towards me depending on my gw rank
better distribution is also an improvement, i didnt word it wrong i think just re-distributing it will give poor results but sure id accept even that, after all that would indeed be improvement 
it is a kind of semi-pvp, i call it pvp for a shortcut
it is definitely completely different then playing vs developers chosen team. while devs choose team we get to the issue weather a player has those cards or not, and what stats the card should have if not? then my voice in it would be its better to not even bother. leave it for a pve raid where the enemy is completely generated by devs and not from a players collection.
this, gw, should be at least semi-pvp where you fight against player-chosen deck with players collection and stats
where is the contradiction?
i like a lot of different suggestions posted out there, mostly favoring carrots but some restrictions too. but restrictions that still leave a lot of control to the defending player
Again, I honestly had no problem with the previous setup, but I think one extra attack would offset the “AI cheating” argument
As GWs is looked at, I still believe there should be some type of parallel leveling of Guild Statues, other than just gold contributions. I think taking top positions in the brackets, should also add some experience to the Guild Statues.
You could even go so far as to allow Guild Wins on specific color days to add some experience to the statue of that day.
The catch up time for new guilds to get to the level 100 statues is just too long for new guilds to feel they will ever have a chance to compete. Giving out Guild Statue exp in guild wars will give another feeling of helping the guild progress.
2 Likes