KEEP ALLIANCE PVP SCORES SECRET UNTIL END.
No steamrolling at the end if you allow catch up because no one knows anyone else’s score. Or allow doing a new pvp set of 5 every four hours.
1 Like
@Sirrian please consider server side code and client data extrapolation methods to allow tweaking guild war requirements without a client patch.
Most importantly don’t assign the same daily reset time variable to what allows you to fight your next 5 battle round. You might want to tweak that value from 24hrs often until we get it right without client patches.
It’ll keep you from pulling all your hair out in frustration . If you decided to grow a beard.
Sorry if you didn’t read my other long post in response, I might have another one for you. 
I’m simply disagreeing with you as I see the game, but I do respect your opinion. One thing that I forgot to mention is that higher player activity can and will happen regardless as the game grows in popularity. With all the systems in place now, the game being fun aside, it promotes high activity. Again nothing wrong with that, if your players are playing a lot then it’s important for them to have somewhere to spend that time.
So I don’t want to be unfair to anyone, especially the Devs. They aren’t promoting player engagement, player engagement is already happening. Not only that but it’s at a higher level than ever.
You adapt or die, such is the way of life.
Its a concept… read the post I quoted…
I’m not a mega grinder but I play this game a decent amount. On a top-100 guild and put up 200-500 trophies per week. I rarely post on here but lurk a lot.
I’ve read this whole discussion and here’s my thoughts on it…
I came to GoW from two straight games that required TONS of your time, and on specific days and times. GoW is like a breathe of fresh air because I can be on a decently competitive guild without having to participate in events or game modes that don’t 1) require me to play 24/7 to be relevant - or - 2) require me to play on specific days.
While I’ve probably played at least 5 matches in GoW every day for the last two months, and yes, it’s a very light requirement, it’s a very slippery slope to go down as it’s tapping into #2 that I listed above. Yeah 5 games isn’t much but there’s something about knowing you HAVE to play the game at some point that day, it’s restricting, that’s troubling. While I think this is a light enough requirement that I think it will be fine for now (I’m mostly thrilled about Guild Wars), I’m more concerned about the future. Hopefully this isn’t the beginning of a trend that builds to either having to grind the game 24/7 or pay exorbitant amounts of money to remain relevant. It may seem like I’m overreacting but I’ve seen many-a-wonderful game destroyed this way. For now I’ll love the wonderful product that GoW provides but I have worries for its future with these kinds of changes.
19 Likes
My god man, you summed up everything I tried to say all nice like. You get my like and I agree completely. (obviously)
Forget lurking, if you can post like this keep coming back!
It’s all about the question, where will this road take us to?
If they do indeed implement this, this go-round, then they honestly couldn’t continue to do this. This should be the first and last time. IMO
2 Likes
in two guilds that i was in (one top 50, at a peak it was top30 for a moment, and one around top 250 now) in both cases the require daily fights would be an issue. some ppl will have to start playing more or get booted or the guild just wont do the maximum fights in guild wars to begin with… (meaning lowering the requirements)
so nope, as much as you are in a maximum activity guild you might miss to see the way average guilds function
(and i cant even speak of even more casual guilds who will just not make it - like with their seals count, but thats fair i guess)
my problem with the daily fights is simple:
i believe guilds who are able to reach 40k seals should on average have a fair chance to get maximum fights in guild war scored without drastically increase their activity character - im just generalising now,
i dont mean that 40k should be equal to having all fights but what im trying to say 40k means that 3 players are allowed to do nothing and the guild will not be pulled down from the 40k of maximum benefits! - unlike in guild wars,
i think the activity balance where a guild is able to maximise the guild fights should be put a little lower then 30 members every day (or even every other day)
i can see many ppl not agreeing with me but so far every game activity allowed more flexibility then that and it just doesnt feel right to restrait that flexibility to the 1 or 2 days extent for entire guild. there should be space for tat 2-3 members to do less and NOT pull whole guild down from its maximum attacks chance (even if it means the rest of members have to do their utmost maximum instead, it should be still possible to balance that)
that kind of activitty flexibility of all game features was so far one of best characteristics of Gems of War allowing dedicated guilds and players for a breath of casualty here and there while still getting the most of it. i dont want it to be spoiled too much into a pressure of power struggle
i like it, makes a lot more sense
Right now we have tons of guilds that dont reach 40k. If that wasnt a must goal for them, doing 5 fights every day wont be a must too.
Guilds that are hardcore now, will remain so, those that are not wont suddenly jump into that mode.
McDiddy gave perfect explenation of whats the real problem here, which i understod throughout all other complaints, but i am 100% sure the game wont go there in the future.
6 Likes
yes but 40k still allows a lot of “casualty” among the guild, the daily fights restrain it twice as hard, thats what i dont like
2 Likes
I don’t understand this concept: we will all be limited to 5 fights against each guild. So how can you do “more fights”?
You don’t want to be surprised by a guild? It’s easy: do all your battles.
And the rush meta claimed by Sirrian can also be applied day by day (i.e. everyone waiting the last 10 minutes of one “australian” day). It is way worst because it’s unfair for the ones that cannot be connected during these 10 minutes (because of night time).
1 Like
Seriously its not hard and I don’t want to be condescending about it.
Ugh. THIS ONE.
My answer was about something in your reply (nothing to do with Studs’s post):
Maybe I’m wrong but it seems to me that it was the same argument that Sirrian gave against removing the day limitation:
If you were not talking about that, I am sorry .
I was just saying that I don’t agree with this conecpt and gave my arguments:
1 Like
actually i think “last minute rush” would be totally fine if there was no difference in ranking gain/loss regarding “when” are the fights done:
- if the points gained/lost are not changing depending on the enemy points gained/lost during the current week
and
- if the enemy matchmaking is not dependant upon the ranking change during the current week
(basically if there was no extra points available for ganging up / timing then ppl wouldnt go for the “rush” to begin with, and when a guild would organise a “rush” it would rather be perceived as a brag not an abuse, turning the rush into something rather positive or neutral)
then i think the last minute rush bad effect would be minimised while the benefits of time flexibility could be saved and we would keep the non-reastrained Gems of War that we know and love so much 
I’m surprised this is the only answer to what I thought was a legitimate question, but thanks for responding @efh313 . I agree that top guilds will make playing guild wars a requirement and I have no problem with that. However, there is a big difference between players “slacking” and choosing not to play, and somebody having an emergency come up (such as getting sick). As an example, if you have a player who finishes at top of guild leader board every week for 6 months get sick for a day, are you going to kick him? Probably not, but the entire guild will NOT receive the top rewards due to this event. Despite claims to the contrary, I don’t believe even the very best, most active, organized, and committed guild of players who normally play daily can avoid missing a day or two a year. Assuming the bunch of “optimal” guilds (who normally play daily and with “proper” teams for bonuses) and a glut at the top as I mentioned, that would mean that the top rank would be decided by which teams had somebody sick for a day and which didn’t. To me that’s not competition, that’s just luck. Unless some teams have somehow found a way to require and enforce health (in which case I’d love to know the secret)…
Another issue I have (which I haven’t mentioned earlier, but some others have) is that players can NOT take vacations with the currently proposed design without adversely affecting the team. If I can’t play for a week, my team won’t get top spot that week. And if my week of vacation doesn’t line up perfectly with the schedule (say I’m away Thursday until Wednesday), then 2 weeks of competitiveness is affected. While the team could remove me and then re-add me, that encourages mercenary free agents roaming from guild to guild, which I don’t believe meets the goal of working as a team. Also, it means the vacationing player loses the possibility of getting that weeks unique award. Personally, I don’t mind working harder this week so a teammate who’s away can get the award even if they don’t play, and then they’ll return the favour later when I go on a break.
Obviously there need to be high standards to encourage everybody to play daily and work together. I’m NOT saying 5/day isn’t reasonable (or even easy) normally, just that it isn’t reasonable in the context of a group or an extended period of time. I also don’t think the scoring should be dumbed down to be a participation ribbon, I want it to be something you have to work for. But to me 100% is just way too high for the target, and I’d suggest that something around 90-95% would be more fair/realistic. For example, if you only count/require 165-170 of the 180 player days, that would allow 2-3 players to be on break and/or a couple sick days (note this is only an example of the concept, there are numerous specific ways to achieve this sort of thing, and this one is likely not the best).
6 Likes
I hope guild wars comes with some sort of balance, as it stands now it takes to many hours per week to do 1900 in pvp, finish the weekly event, then if time permits finish getting 1500 seals. Then if I want to hunt for trait stones in explore mode or try and finish up the challenges it adds to those hours. Just seems like it is huge amount of tasks to complete.
Don’t get me wrong I do enjoy the game, but I am a casual player just trying to grind the weeklies.
Mr Biggs, you participate in Guild War by doing PvP ranked battles. So while you are grinding for your 1900 pvp points, you are activly completing your guild war participation part. And youll get some rewards of it.
So by continuing to do what you do now, youll get more. Doesnt that sound good to you?
2 Likes
You are right about this, but this still isnt something that i fear from. I belive that this applis to all guilds, since they are consistent of alive human beings, that can get sick, that can have a busy day.
Im a guild leader of a top guild and i expect that our avarage participation per battler will be 25+ every day, probably averaging out at 27-28. There will be days where all 30 members participate, there will be days where a few are missing. I certainly wont kick people just because they missed a day or 2.
Or if a player gets 500 trophies on weekend, but doesnt take part i guild wars until weekend, i wont kick that member either.
I expect that the way we earn points is more then just dump 5 battles, and the guild that does more battles will win. I believe that the point system will be made in such a fashion that 28 participants will be able to defeat 30 opposing participants.
1 Like
If you’re just a casual player, you likely won’t be competing for “top” rewards so much as receiving “some” awards for participating. So as @DonBoba mentioned, you’ll effectively be getting additional stuff for the same effort, as long as you’re part of a guild that registers every week. I think that most of the issues and potential problems being discussed in this thread are related more to highly active players/guilds.
For the average player with a routine like you’re describing, everything about GW seems to be roses with very little downside (which I think might be getting forgotten by many, including myself).
4 Likes
Guild wars system will be a problem for weekend players no doubt that.
But since its only 5 battles a day, and ill repeat only 5, some of those weekend players might want to fit in thise 5 fights in their non weekend day.
Id support reduction of battles if it was anything bigger then 5 battles a day (id still be able to do them, but the pool of players that couldnt would be much larger). But with mere 5 battles a day, something that 90% of the player base is already doing, its not a problem.
To add this:
Right now i have completed 65 battles so far this week. Im ranked around 16.5. So there are at least 16k players that did 65 fights and more.
By going the guild war system, i would need to have 10 battles right now. See the difference in the number of battles? See how many players will do those 5 battles a day without any problems?
1 Like