Well said. Yeah all this talk may not mean anything if the point system is solid.
BUT the gem cost is still a problem and I think there’s a better way.
1 Like
There’s more than 10 min/max-ing guilds out there, so there seems absolutely no point in signing up even as the currently rank 18 guild.
Looks like this is going to further increase stratification between the top .01% of guilds and the rest, further exacerbating the endlessly annoying issue of member retention.
Why? Why do you insist on further complicating things for guild leaders? Every minute I spend on administrative work is a minute I’m not playing the game.
Sorry, I know this is wandering off topic, but I want to get it out while it’s on my mind. Please consider incentivizing guild leadership at least a little. I don’t mean like “give me resources.” Give me tools to lead. The ability to personally mitigate some of the disadvantages of a lower activity guild without dropping $20 a week. A higher personal seal cap based on empty slots perhaps. They don’t even have to be spendable. Something. Anything to let me lead with positive reinforcement instead of negative. It’s so depressing to know my only defining characteristic is access to the kick button.
<3
11 Likes
I sincerely hope team scores don’t factor in to this. These are a fairly poor way to judge power to begin with, not to mention the five star kingdom issue - thats a disparity of over 1000 team score points unaccounted for. I doubt it will, since it would make sentinels hurt your overall max guild wars points potential (assuming they also correctly added to team scores, which would also be a pretty big assumption) and they want people to buy these levels.
2 Likes
Exactly this.
As the GM of a top 10 guild, I’m a bit disappointed by this sentinel setup. I do not look forward to setting resource requirements for something like gems. It really puts the leaders of competitive guilds in a bad spot.
As @ogunther mentioned earlier, this is an issue centered around human nature. We all know that a couple of stats usually won’t make a huge difference in a win or loss. However, I already know that some high level players won’t be satisfied staying in a top tier guild if they are maxing their sentinels while others are not. I can already hear the words “leech” forming on some people’s lips because the people that don’t use gems will still benefit when gems are rewarded.
TLDR: More negative drama for guild leadership.
Anywho, the main point of this post is to reiterate Tard’s point that it would be great to get some positive reinforcement options for GMs in the game. Heck, I’d love the ability to even just buy a gift for a particularly hardworking member from time to time.
10 Likes
Also anything that will be stressful or hard to achieve for the top guilds will be close or near impossible to achieve for the other Guilds. It’s most of the time not a good idea to invent in something that only a few will get use of, because soon medicore/lowbee guilds will not have any good players left, all gone to the top guilds.
6 Likes
Hmmmm… This seems like something that could work. But it reminds me of what Sirrian stated before:
Let me explain what i understood and you disagree you can get a Crazy Ticket with @HKdirewolf and an Idiot Ticket with @htismaqe so you can get in line to me call me that. 
I’ll show a sketch of three bracket with five ranks each in your model and compare the rewards with the total amount of the rewards from Sirrian’s table using only the gems as an example:
First of all, i didn’t tried more than once to fit the same amount of gems corresponding to Sirrian’s table because i wanted to do it quickly (And the numbers may be tweaked anyway), but i did matched the first rank of each bracket to the same amount of rewards for the last rank of the next superior bracket.
Why you did that?
Well, it wouldn’t make much sense if your guild arise into a new bracket, even to the lowest rank of it, and still get LESS rewards than being at the top rank of the previous/inferior bracket. This is also sensible to guilds that would move out from a superior bracket into the highest rank of the next inferior bracket giving some chance to recover the position.
Even if the team tried to give some epic rewards to a few guilds i believe the players in general are more inclined towards evening the distribution. And personally i don’t mind about the rewards, i liked this concept, as i understood and how i worked on some small details in this sketch, because it gives mobility, as guilds could recover from a given week where they underperformed as well as it gives visibility as some guilds overperforming start to climb the ranks week by week. Sounds good enough to not become an stale/boring feature.
This is how i’m assuming things should work on your model and tossing some numbers to make it more visible. And hopefully it can be implemented.
You don’t need my approval or anything, but i was pointing out a flaw in your suggestion and that’s all. For the highlighted part i believe that we must try to do better and never settle for the same mistakes in the past.
2 Likes
Why am I the crazy ticket? And yeah that seems to cover the idea, and looks great.
runs around like my hair is on fire
1 Like
I wasn’t even thinking about reward levels. I know it’s complicated and I don’t think there is any point in us even speculating about how to allocate rewards in a hypothetical environment. A lot of people compete in real-life leagues with no hope of a reward at all. Just the thrill of competition, being able to win the D squash ladder and move up to challenge in the C ladder the next week is enough to motivate people. Check out this guy:
5 Likes
6 Likes
3 Likes
As you watch closely my crazyness level i think you are qualified to manage the tickets. At least the ones you didn’t ate anyway…
The numbers are here just to add visibility so people could figure out some details that i judged important to this idea. I could as well use candy next time as my Number’s Specialist has suggested to me over and over…
2 Likes
I think it’s too late for this but I really wish GW rewarded something other than the current reqs and a new troop. I like the troop but the rewards just don’t feel exciting to me at any level. 1,000 gems! Ok, I get 1/2 that a week already. Sure it’s help and I appreciate that Sirrian is so generous with their premium currency but it doesn’t excite me.
I’m tired so I don’t have any good alternative ideas (plus, like I said, it’s probably too late to change this anyway as it’s a big ask) but I thought I should at least mention it.
Edit: I should add I’m speaking as a late gamer in a high-end guild; I know that others who are newer to the game or in more casual guilds may very well be excited by the reqs reward but since they most likely won’t be winning very much of them (in the current GW system) it’s a moot point.
1 Like
If you’re consistently winning each week it could really add up over time, but who is going to do that? Amirite?
1 Like
As previously stated for the record, my client (me), is very sleepy so my client may be missing your point. Are you saying over time, winning resources will get more exciting?
It could be added later maybe. Mithran suggested some tokens to help obtaining the cards exclusive to GW but if we want something entirely new it requires probably another feature to have some relation or not with the guilds.
No absolutely not, but over time their perceived worth becomes more valuable. I.E players save up gems now to try to pull Mythics out of chests. At even 1500 gems that’s probably still a pipe dream, but it does help. So if you were consistently winning each week, it at least helps to try and get something valuable back from your time and effort.
But yeah I agree, that’s why I don’t think gems are a premium currency anymore. They’ve become too “watered-down” over time. So no they’re not exciting to me either. Even if you win 1 week, it almost does nothing for you other than the troops. You have to keep winning to get something of value back.
Basically common sense. 5 keys stink, but 1,000 keys are great.
We need a new currency that is actually premium. VIP keys are the closest thing to that, that we have right now. Something you can win that gives you a higher chance to get something you want/need. Something that can’t be abused.
And when they find out a way to monetize that on a mass player-scale, we should be golden.
I mean it’s all a matter of opinion anyways. You and I can think gems stink, but others obviously may not. shrugs
Just a matter of how you perceive them.
2 Likes
I come back to this forum every 12 hours or so, and between attempting to read the verbose speculation novels and “changes” posted here (sorry I don’t have time to fully read them all). Someone always reposts my question/comment from the top. (I don’t think we have an answer though)
I sure Sirrian and the development team are attempting to look over this thread and will reply when they are ready to share more details.
1 Like
I agree about gems being (mis)used like this. Mithran’s post way up there somewhere had some more details about getting them out of this new system…
1 Like
Hey it could be worse. All the costs could be in souls! That would cause a gigantic rift between those will full collections and those without!
So I have one question and forgive me if it’s been answered. Do you receive more points when you win if you pay for each of the four bonuses? I don’t really have much issue beating teams with more hp/armor/etc