yup look like the only argument to feel better 
I think i saw over 30 people who doesn’t like it. This is enough to create their own guild with no GW requirement
4 Likes
Hi Drathas,
I appreciate the comments to the thread but I would like to see what kind of counter team you have for say… an all green day when you’re looking at a wall of grief in the form of kerberos and DK.
My biggest problem is that other than Carnex, you tend to nerf your damage potential relying on impervious troops. And I am also someone who plays enough to know that you can try to protect against RNG devours and death marks by making an all impervious team - but the irony is that many times my impervious team dies because they either get mana screwed by the RNG or because they can’t put out enough damage before Famine or others drain out their mana.
Comparing my impervious teams to RNG teams with devours and similar, I tend to win more with RNG teams.
I guess the challenge here is that there seems to be only a small handful of people LIKING the GW and they post about how it’s all skill and not RNG - so I’m eager to see them put some money on the table and show off their skillful teams they designed for each day to deal with a wall of grief.
Since I exist in a top 10 team that has taken the #1 spot in GW and I’ve actually been paragon for scoring so highly… I’m certain that you guys are using the same or similar teams or you just aren’t fighting at the same level to see the kind of grief walls we get when we play GW.
4 Likes
When I started playing GW, the guild I joined was really active. Now I and my husband are the only ones in our guild that do anything. No one else in the guild has done anything at all. I keep thinking about leaving the guild but don’t want to run into another non-active guild. We like playing and want to join a guild that has others who like to play. We play GW on the xbone.
1 Like
Funny, I’ve been one of the few vocal supporters but my posts have quietly been getting likes, even days later. Several of my posts have 10+. That said, most of the anti-GW posts have like 1.5x my Likes. Still, it’s felt like there’s several very loud anti-GW people that gladly share their opinion at every opportunity as opposed to an overwhelming consensus. But I see I’m in the minority on the forums.
I think what’s really going on is that the forum is 2/3 elder, regular forum-going players that like the more casual feel of the game where everyone is a winner (anti-GW) and 1/3 newer and less vocal/regular players that like the added challenge/competition.
What’s not clear to me is whether the anti-GW people on the forums (a) are representative of the population more generally and (b) are expressing an opinion that’s best for the game as a whole.
9 Likes
Hi, I wouldn’t be wholly relying on impervious troops to carry the load, because I agree not many of them are great damage dealers (true for green anyways). Place a couple in your team and fill the other spots with stealthy is what I do, so only the impervious troop can be targeted by Kerberos.
Last week against K/GS/FG/K for green day I used:
Desdaemona
Wulfgarok or Spirit Fox (I switched to try them both)
Plague
Manticore
Red/Purple banner to charge the first two troops quickly.
First battle, Board starts and blammo I get a skull match and one Kerberos is already removed from the battle.
Their Forest Guardian died in two casts of Desdaemonas spell. Manticore, I kept charged to drain the other Kerberos.
None of my team were devoured - though Des did die in the second last turn of the battle when the opponent got some skulls dropping in from above. Weakness is the no summons, but points for losing a troop is minimal so I don’t worry about it.
Desdaemona is a neat troop against the daemons and yellows.
I’ve also used teams containing Sylvasi (instead of des when no or little daemons), good for the extra mana gen, triggering Plague’s trait more frequently and keeping your front troop alive by reducing opponent attack. I would try GloomLeaf but I don’t have him traited. 
I haven’t faced a Deathknight team on a Green Day, but would use Manitcore for the stun.
My purple team which I used against Deathknights.
Carnex
DRACOS
Elemaugrim
Plague
Worked really well. No need to worry about stunning at correct time. Has a nice drainer and Carnex is good at the skull bashing. Once again no summon but I don’t really worry too much about that.
I see a lot more of Kerberos type teams than Deathknights. This first guild battle this week enemy paragon fielded 4x Mercy so was happy with the extra event gems there! 
3 Likes
No one left us at Stratagem. Bracket #1 since start.
I like GW, despite some of its warts, so I guess I’m the one guy you’re referring to who likes guild wars? I too have a job, and a family, but I also like a bit of competition in my LEISURE activities (don’t know why we needed to capitalize that?). So I think you are correct when you say your perception is wrong.
Luckily you have lots of options available, including learning how to deal with your stress better, playing the other parts of the game and ignoring this one mode, playing a different game, or learning how to win so you’re not stressed. And I know there are lots of people who feel the same as you, I won’t lie and say “only 1 person dislikes GW” in order to lend false credibility to my statements. But they too have the same options available.
The game has grown far past a single style of play. Personally I don’t play Arena or Treasure Maps very often because I don’t prefer those modes, but I’m glad the devs leave them in for the other people who like them…
4 Likes
Imo the easiest thing to do is to make all 30 battles doable whenever and reward the seals and xp bonus on monday. You can log in monday. Set your defense. Then log in any day from monday through sunday and do your battles. If your guild wins 4 of the 6 matches you have 96 hours of xp bonus. Ect
This isnt rocket science. This would appease everyone and gw works like normal
4 Likes
Just for the record, I’m both an elder, regular forum-going player AND I like Guild Wars. I think there are more like me than anyone realizes, we’re just not as vocal as the ones who don’t like GW it seem.
I do think some things about GW need to be tweaked for the good of the game as a whole and it’s obvious the Devs are listening already, so I’m not too worried about that. I rather enjoy building teams, especially with troops that haven’t been viable in PVP for months.
9 Likes
I also enjoy Guild Wars. Yes, it needs work desperately. Yes there are problems, bugs, and imperfections. Yes, we lost 1 member of our Guild directly because of GW (a Top 3 Guild). Overall I hope this will become a more encompassing and fun experience for all. I’m looking forward to Sirrians future post “Preview of upcoming Guild War Changes”.
There are dozens of us!
6 Likes
We started in Bracket 2 and stayed there for 2 weeks then moved up to Bracket 1, moved back down to Bracket 2, and we’re now in Bracket 1 again. I’ve lost 2 matches total during that time - both were Paragon matches the week we were in Bracket 1.
I’ve seen all the grief defenses - DK / Famine / Death, FG / Kerberos, etc. For obvious reasons, I’m not going to flat out post my team builds here since I don’t think my guild would appreciate that too much but I will say this - outside of Brown day last week where I used Ketras, none of my teams use base mythics at all. I use balanced teams that have a variety of traits and status effects.
There’s somewhat of a formula to it. For example, Impervious is desirable but as you’ve noticed, having too many Impervious troops neuters you somewhere else. It’s all about finding the right mix.
1 Like
love this idea. so hard to deal with death mark and kerb and kraken
1 Like
IMO a simple fix would be for there to be say 25 member GW so if 5 of the guild do not want to fight GW they are not harming the guild. This also allows for stronger guilds to have less strong or newer members in the guild without risking effectiveness for the guild competitiveness. I have seen so many disliking this new feature, I personally love it. Stressful…yes…but that adds something for me to the game that has been missing as a 1000+ player.
1 Like
I’m also a long time player who likes GW.
I think it’s just human nature that we’re seeing here. We always are inclined to complain far louder and more extensive than we are inclined to praise…
2 Likes
long term player,
i like gw simply cause it gives me a different (more chellenging and rewarding) game mode to play with
but i do complain / voice negative opinions a lot here as i care about the changes i feel/think are needed
some of the gw shortcomings are annoying and disappointing, some are bad for my health, overall i dont like the direction it is (so far*) heading to, thats why, while i like that game mode, in same time im concerned about its long-term results
lets assume that the “regular forum-going players” overall do “like the more casual feel of the game where everyone is a winner”
if thats true and they are concerned about gw being likeable to that type of playerbase is it rather good interest for the game as a whole? i have no idea how many % players in gow are ‘long term’ and how many % are ‘new’ but surely for a match-3 collectible game keeping long term players happy couldnt possibly be bad?
i mean while we dont know are the gow-negative voices ‘accurate’ or ‘good idea’ there is quite some chance they might be actually helpful for the game
* its slowely getting better since gw points were changed to 100/200/300/400/500 but its not there yet
1 Like
This is what i don’t get. Why the small font to comment on a dramatic GW change in your direction?
The by far biggest issue the anti-GW faction voiced was the felt pressure due to the point structure, and the Devs just made a huge change to relieve that pressure significantly.
But it seems the anti-GW people mostly don’t even reckognize that change and instead keep shifting their focus on other things they also take an issue with. Even you commented on this change in a tiny font, sure an unconcious act but it shows for some reason this huge change does not really seem that important to you anymore.
So i wonder at what point would this even end? I am all for fixing problems with GW and a middle ground on the whole leisure vs suspense thing(to which this change was a huge step), but if the only way the anti-GW fraction accepts GW is to neuter it completely to fancy named regular pvp then i am out.
2 Likes
For me the pressure didn’t change. I still want to win 5 matches.
1 Like
i am in the anti GW fraction, and this is just my 2 cents.
The points fix is, imho, a very small change.
Just like @Annaerith wrote.
The main issues are the ginormous frustration of using oddball teams vs meta teams (defence has no restriction) and the fact that you are forced to play every single day without a break.
Since the stress factor can only be removed by deleting in toto the GW, at least making possible to play all the GW matches in advance would be good. Is annoying not being able to take a full day break from GoW (blessed mondays!) without harming our guild points.
1 Like
Honestly, we don’t know the impact so it’s pure speculation. But since we’re speculating, it could be really bad for the game to disproportionately listen to the elder, casual players. A couple of reasons that immediately leap to mind:
- Most of the elder players accumulate so many resources that they have little reason to spend. It’s possible that the majority of people complaining are people that don’t really impact the bottom line. In fact, this game’s economy is so messed up that there’s more reasons to spend early on than later in the game, so it wouldn’t surprise me if there are a lot of elder players that used to spend (and thus have a high VIP level) but don’t really spend much any more. And nerfing GW to make it easier and more casual won’t change that – it actually creates even less incentive.
- It could be even worse than that. Given that F2P games operate based on converting a very small percentage of players into payers, it stands to reason that GW as-is does a better job of converting people and the proposed changes people want to see would nerf its performance into oblivion such that it becomes wasted effort. I know people have been upset and said they should scrap it, it was a waste of time, etc. but if it were actually the case that it had a negative impact then don’t you think they’d be taking more drastic actions and more quickly? It could thus be better for the long-term performance of the game to keep it as-is.
2 Likes
This was heavily discusses a month ago. Below is the link to the communities thoughts if you want to read them.
2 Likes