# Guild Wars - Sneak Peek VI **URL:** \ **Category:** Official News\ **Created:** [March 20, 2017, 5:10am UTC](https://community.gemsofwar.com/t/guild-wars-sneak-peek-vi/21506 "2017-03-20T05:10:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 21
**Author:** ![HKdirewolf](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/community.gemsofwar.com/hkdirewolf/32/21614_2.png) [@HKdirewolf](https://community.gemsofwar.com/u/HKdirewolf)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2017, 4:15pm UTC](https://community.gemsofwar.com/t/guild-wars-sneak-peek-vi/21506/407 "2017-03-23T16:15:47Z")
Oh you mean see how fun it is like a preview video? Yeah we’re waiting on that. ---
**Author:** ![Ashasekayi](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/community.gemsofwar.com/ashasekayi/32/61090_2.png) [@Ashasekayi](https://community.gemsofwar.com/u/Ashasekayi)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2017, 4:26pm UTC](https://community.gemsofwar.com/t/guild-wars-sneak-peek-vi/21506/408 "2017-03-23T16:26:10Z")
> [@UKresistance](#): > > Console players are happy When did you become the spokesman for all console players? 😕 ---
**Author:** ![HKdirewolf](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/community.gemsofwar.com/hkdirewolf/32/21614_2.png) [@HKdirewolf](https://community.gemsofwar.com/u/HKdirewolf)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2017, 4:29pm UTC](https://community.gemsofwar.com/t/guild-wars-sneak-peek-vi/21506/409 "2017-03-23T16:29:08Z")
> [@efh313](#): > > You can find above where, I think @HKdirewolf played over 28 hours and barely made top 100. I’m trying to figure out which time you’re talking about. 😀 I play about that much every week without going for the leaderboard, and the time that I did I made it to 8th. -#humblebrag Which of course this is insignificant to anything, just wanted to know. > [@efh313](#): > > I think its safe to say that most of the people “complaining” stand to do fairly well within the given structure, assuming we understand it correctly, our concern truly is for the good of the game. My concern with the current structure is the fact that every guild that cares about this will require players to play it, including ours and it’s a hot mess right now. The cherry on top is it doesn’t even seem fun in current design. They’ve created enough of a “carrot on the stick,” that GW is now a big enough part of the game. I’d rather stick to playing pvp, where I have a better time. This is of course if nothing changes. Which is fine, I don’t have to play it. As long as the majority enjoys it. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![efh313](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/community.gemsofwar.com/efh313/32/34349_2.png) [@efh313](https://community.gemsofwar.com/u/efh313)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2017, 4:30pm UTC](https://community.gemsofwar.com/t/guild-wars-sneak-peek-vi/21506/410 "2017-03-23T16:30:46Z")
> [@UKresistance](#): > > @Nimhain Let’s prioritize consoles getting the guild war patch as beta. Console players are happy with the current plan, and mobile/PC players will have to see how fun it is before their complaints/suggestions stop. While I appreciate your humor, if memory serves, aren’t you in one of the TOP Console Guilds? The people, that have been the quickest to say, LEAVE IT AS IT IS, have been players in TOP (meaning 1-5) guilds, regardless of platform. And I don’t blame you, the carrot is AWESOME for YOU. For the other 30k players behind you it’s another mode that creates a feeling of “Never gonna happen…” And the more experiences of “Never gonna happen” a player feels, the more likely they decide to invest time and money in another app/game/etc. That is why we keep addressing this so vocally. > [@Delinquent](#): > > So what does that look like in practice? Can you take the payouts @Sirrian proposed and modify them so they feel EPIC for everyone without giving away the farm? Is that literally minor adjustments to a couple of tiers per @Annaerith’s payouts? > [@efh313](#): > > Shouldn’t rewards be tied to the places within a guilds ACTUAL opponents? Otherwise, why bother having specific guild opponents. They serve NO purpose. > > Here is another option, to tie rewards to the place within the actual Guild War in which you compete. > > 1st Place Guild- 400 gems2nd Place- 350 gems3rd Place- 300gems4th place- 200gems5th Place- 150 gems6th Place- 100 gems7th Place- 50 gems I direct you to my earlier suggestion[quote=“Delinquent, post:402, topic:21506”] This is a discussion about Guild Wars where this is a hard limit on how many battles you can do. It’s irrelevant. [/quote] You are correct. Which is my one lingering hope for GW, but the PVP ladder is so… “corrupt” (harsher word than I want) that we are hoping that we can prevent the GW ladder from being seen in the same light. And as it currently is dsigned, IF a guild is capable of performing consistently well into the Top position, the distribution of rewards is designed to create an ever widening gap between that top performer and other guilds, meaning it will be EASIER for them to secure top spot and harder for others to compete with them. I for one think the rewards for GW need to be a pat on the back. Base it off of the 7 guilds competing. Rank 1-7, there will be a lot of Rank 1 winners, one for every Weekly War put together by the devs. And, hell, reduce the reward of Rank 1 to 300 gems. Thats right its a loss of 40 gems if you max out Sentinels and take top honors! Why? Because those 40 gems were worth donating for the bragging rights! That’s what this is really about, isn’t it? The ability for people to say, within their guild, Hey we Kicked A$$ this week! Great Job, Guildies! That is a feeling that EVERYBODY should have and would have if ranks were based on the ACTUAL weekly war opponents, but if the only RANKING assigned is out of ALL Guilds, the devs are missing out on the best human nature motivator they have, and its free! 😉 You do that… and then you can STILL have an overall Leaderboard, that most people wont care about, like PVP, but you will generate a feeling of accomplishment in 1000s of players who based on current design, wont give a flying F about GW… imho… ---
**Author:** ![Shimrra](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/community.gemsofwar.com/shimrra/32/87_2.png) [@Shimrra](https://community.gemsofwar.com/u/Shimrra)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2017, 4:36pm UTC](https://community.gemsofwar.com/t/guild-wars-sneak-peek-vi/21506/411 "2017-03-23T16:36:02Z")
I agree about scaling up the accessibility of rewards. Right now I typically rank something with five digits, and that’s still playing something like 8-12 hours per week. It really feels quite out of reach. (That goes for both current _and_ future systems - PVP and Guild Wars and so on…) ---
**Author:** ![Delinquent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7c8e57/32.png) [@Delinquent](https://community.gemsofwar.com/u/Delinquent)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2017, 5:01pm UTC](https://community.gemsofwar.com/t/guild-wars-sneak-peek-vi/21506/412 "2017-03-23T17:01:02Z")
> [@efh313](#): > > Shouldn’t rewards be tied to the places within a guilds ACTUAL opponents? Otherwise, why bother having specific guild opponents. They serve NO purpose. > > Here is another option, to tie rewards to the place within the actual Guild War in which you compete. > > 1st Place Guild- 400 gems2nd Place- 350 gems3rd Place- 300gems4th place- 200gems5th Place- 150 gems6th Place- 100 gems7th Place- 50 gems Again, this doesn’t work. You’re telling me it’s okay if guild #1000 gets first place and gets the same rewards as guild #1? I _really_ want to see someone build out a better system than what’s proposed and actually works across all groups. ---
**Author:** ![HKdirewolf](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/community.gemsofwar.com/hkdirewolf/32/21614_2.png) [@HKdirewolf](https://community.gemsofwar.com/u/HKdirewolf)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2017, 5:04pm UTC](https://community.gemsofwar.com/t/guild-wars-sneak-peek-vi/21506/413 "2017-03-23T17:04:35Z")
All these systems are better than the current design. Are you saying #1000 gets first on the leaderboard? If so, then yes. The leaderboard is insignificant. @efh313 was speaking to the rewards inside your own actual bracket. The guilds you actually fight each week. ---
**Author:** ![SirCookie](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/community.gemsofwar.com/sircookie/32/13060_2.png) [@SirCookie](https://community.gemsofwar.com/u/SirCookie)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2017, 5:04pm UTC](https://community.gemsofwar.com/t/guild-wars-sneak-peek-vi/21506/414 "2017-03-23T17:04:57Z")
> [@Sirrian](#): > > Rank 7-10 = 300 Gems, 32 Guild Wars Troop Cards, 20,000 Gold > Rank 11-20 = 200 Gems, 24 Guild Wars Troop Cards, 15,000 Gold > Rank 21-50 = 100 Gems, 20Guild Wars Troop Cards, 10,000 Gold > Rank 51-100 = 80 Gems, 16 Guild Wars Troop Cards, 8,000 Gold > Rank 101-200 = 60 Gems, 12 Guild Wars Troop Cards, 5,000 Gold > Rank 201-400 = 40 Gems, 9 Guild Wars Troop Cards, 4,000 Gold I haven’t had time this week to read all of this thread, but as a Guild Master of a top 80 guild, I feel the need to chime in. If that’s really the reward payout, I’m going to have a hard time justifying adding a requirement that our members put resources into Sentinels. The difference in rewards for 21st place vs. 200th place just doesn’t feel like much. My gut says that you are not going to see this monetize well. For all but the top 20 or so guilds, I see little incentive to spend resources (especially gems) to boost Sentinels. And those top guilds will likely get their gem investment back anyway between the rewards and guild tasks, so it’s not like they will actually be buying gems. The only way I see this making money is if you directly sell a pack of the Guild Wars troops. Maybe like the Guild Seals purchases, you can only buy it once a week (so that nobody gets the troops Mythic right away). $10 for 20 of the previous week’s troop or something like that. ---
**Author:** ![Delinquent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7c8e57/32.png) [@Delinquent](https://community.gemsofwar.com/u/Delinquent)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2017, 5:07pm UTC](https://community.gemsofwar.com/t/guild-wars-sneak-peek-vi/21506/415 "2017-03-23T17:07:16Z")
My bracket is the top 6 guilds in the game. Your bracket is guilds ranked 1000-1006. You absolutely should not get the same rewards for being first in bracket 1000 as first in bracket 1. That creates a horrible system where people are encouraged to do poorly and not upgrade so they can get into easy brackets for the best payouts. ---
**Author:** ![efh313](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/community.gemsofwar.com/efh313/32/34349_2.png) [@efh313](https://community.gemsofwar.com/u/efh313)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2017, 5:07pm UTC](https://community.gemsofwar.com/t/guild-wars-sneak-peek-vi/21506/416 "2017-03-23T17:07:24Z")
As I said, they can keep the overall leaderboard, and if they feel like giving a reward according to that IN ADDITION, fine. But if the GW points are structured in such a way that guilds that compete and win all 30 battles. (Remember if I beat you @Delinquent, it does NOT count as a loss for you.) So EVERY guild could potnentially win EVERY GW Battle, then you are talking about Guild 1 and Guild 1000 could very well have only a nominal amount of difference in points… If I’m only 100 points behind Rank 1, but am listed as Rank 101 and am getting close to 1/10 of the rewards… I see that as a distribution problem. (Rank 1 gets 1500 gems, Rank 100 gets 100 gems, iirc) ---
**Author:** ![HKdirewolf](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/community.gemsofwar.com/hkdirewolf/32/21614_2.png) [@HKdirewolf](https://community.gemsofwar.com/u/HKdirewolf)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2017, 5:09pm UTC](https://community.gemsofwar.com/t/guild-wars-sneak-peek-vi/21506/417 "2017-03-23T17:09:05Z")
Ohh yeah I agree, sorry misunderstood you. Lots of us have already covered that though, they could do a tier system bracket. Those toward the top tiers get the chance at more rewards than the bottom tiers. That’s the only way to keep it fair. Edit- Well after reading @efh313’s post, he’s correct too. 😅 We don’t know how points are added up, so we can’t say who is better than who. ---
**Author:** ![Delinquent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7c8e57/32.png) [@Delinquent](https://community.gemsofwar.com/u/Delinquent)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2017, 5:09pm UTC](https://community.gemsofwar.com/t/guild-wars-sneak-peek-vi/21506/418 "2017-03-23T17:09:50Z")
Why would a weak guild beating up other weak guilds get as many points as a strong guild beating up other strong guilds? Again, that creates a horrible system where you’re encouraged not to progress so you can get easy match-ups. ---
**Author:** ![efh313](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/community.gemsofwar.com/efh313/32/34349_2.png) [@efh313](https://community.gemsofwar.com/u/efh313)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2017, 5:11pm UTC](https://community.gemsofwar.com/t/guild-wars-sneak-peek-vi/21506/419 "2017-03-23T17:11:05Z")
> [@HKdirewolf](#): > > Ohh yeah I agree, sorry misunderstood you. Lots of us have already covered that though, they could do a tier system bracket. Those toward the top tiers get the chance at more rewards than the bottom tiers. That’s the only way to keep it fair. I am perfectly fine with tiering rewards based on guild levels, or brackets, if those brackets are appropriate in size. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Delinquent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7c8e57/32.png) [@Delinquent](https://community.gemsofwar.com/u/Delinquent)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2017, 5:11pm UTC](https://community.gemsofwar.com/t/guild-wars-sneak-peek-vi/21506/420 "2017-03-23T17:11:13Z")
I still don’t see how a tiered brackets system works. Someone _please_ break it down for me with an actual example from guilds ranked 1 to 1000 that doesn’t encourage guilds to deliberately do poorly so they get easy match ups. ---
**Author:** ![UKresistance](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/community.gemsofwar.com/ukresistance/32/7558_2.png) [@UKresistance](https://community.gemsofwar.com/u/UKresistance)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2017, 5:11pm UTC](https://community.gemsofwar.com/t/guild-wars-sneak-peek-vi/21506/421 "2017-03-23T17:11:42Z")
I can’t be bothered too read your soliloquy. However, I’m so rich I can’t become richer. Loot means nothing to me, I just want new content. But the whiners and cryers seem to be putting there best effort to delay it. So I invite a delay for guild wars to pc/mobile and instead prioritize console. If console players disagree, then state your platform and why. Otherwise I will work towards us getting guild wars asap. Mobile / steam can wait. ---
**Author:** ![HKdirewolf](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/community.gemsofwar.com/hkdirewolf/32/21614_2.png) [@HKdirewolf](https://community.gemsofwar.com/u/HKdirewolf)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2017, 5:12pm UTC](https://community.gemsofwar.com/t/guild-wars-sneak-peek-vi/21506/422 "2017-03-23T17:12:27Z")
If you win in your tier one week, you automatically move up to the next one the next week. If you lose, you move down 1 tier the following week. Is a way it could work, but that’s if the Devs could actually implement that system. If you make it to Tier 1 or whatever the highest is, then you belong there and you have a chance at the highest rewards. ---
**Author:** ![efh313](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/community.gemsofwar.com/efh313/32/34349_2.png) [@efh313](https://community.gemsofwar.com/u/efh313)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2017, 5:12pm UTC](https://community.gemsofwar.com/t/guild-wars-sneak-peek-vi/21506/423 "2017-03-23T17:12:27Z")
Consider Boxing: A welter weight champion is just as much a champion as a heavy weight champion. They just fight people of the same size. Ergo: GW 😉 ---
**Author:** ![efh313](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/community.gemsofwar.com/efh313/32/34349_2.png) [@efh313](https://community.gemsofwar.com/u/efh313)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2017, 5:14pm UTC](https://community.gemsofwar.com/t/guild-wars-sneak-peek-vi/21506/424 "2017-03-23T17:14:22Z")
> [@UKresistance](#): > > However, I’m so rich I can’t become richer. Loot means nothing to me, I just want new content. But the whiners and cryers seem to be putting there best effort to delay it. Thank you for proving my point, you WILL get the new content 200 copies in 2 weeks, the other 95% of the player base will have to wait YEARS for the same content? But I suppose you’re perfectly fine with that? Please correct me if I am misinterpreting here… ---
**Author:** ![Mithran](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/community.gemsofwar.com/mithran/32/18064_2.png) [@Mithran](https://community.gemsofwar.com/u/Mithran)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2017, 5:17pm UTC](https://community.gemsofwar.com/t/guild-wars-sneak-peek-vi/21506/425 "2017-03-23T17:17:45Z")
> [@Sirrian](#): > > If your objection is that other players who work harder and coordinate better than your guild will out-earn you… that’s a legitimate position to have. I don’t think we can ever STOP that in a **competitive game** , but we can look to soften it. I can’t believe I missed this the first time through the thread, so I’m replying now. I’ve never had to “compete” over a limited number of _anything_ in Gems of War up to this point. You have the option to with the PvP leaderboards, and when that was revealed, I wasn’t big on that either - because Gems of War is _not_ a competitive game. Gems of War is a _single player_ long haul collection/progression puzzle game with a large amount of content designed by an online playerbase (eg., their defense teams) and large amount up to the player themselves (their invade team). That is to say, Gems of War is not _currently_ a competitive game. In the end, ranked leaderboards were tolerable (after the early numbers where you lose more points on defense than you could gain on wins were changed) because I could easily pretend they didn’t exist and go about my merry way while still having the same access to content as the next person, and the people competing were doing so for the sake of competition (or just play GoW a whole lot, or were bots) and the rewards gained were by in large stuff that I could get in another way (the fact I could get them _faster_ by exploring was less of a factor here than the fact that I could just go get them any time I wanted). Guild Wars will mark the first time you _have_ to compete for something in Gems of War if you want access to it at all, and that, by in large, is the problem. Guild Wars, of course, only marks a _part_ of the game, but this is the second competitive feature so far (after PvP leaderboards) so I really hope this isn’t the direction the game is headed overall. ---
**Author:** ![HKdirewolf](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/community.gemsofwar.com/hkdirewolf/32/21614_2.png) [@HKdirewolf](https://community.gemsofwar.com/u/HKdirewolf)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2017, 5:18pm UTC](https://community.gemsofwar.com/t/guild-wars-sneak-peek-vi/21506/426 "2017-03-23T17:18:37Z")
But that example is a bit off in this case. Lower guilds will not face the toughest opponents, and they also most likely won’t have a full guild. Nor will they most likely be as active. They should definitely be included, but there’s no way they can be compared to the “big dogs.” 200-400 gems would be insignificant to us, but not to them anyways. So rewards would still scale nicely for them I believe. [Previous page](https://community.gemsofwar.com/t/guild-wars-sneak-peek-vi/21506.md?page=20) [Next page](https://community.gemsofwar.com/t/guild-wars-sneak-peek-vi/21506.md?page=22)