Guild War!!! Wooo!

[Elita]

Hello, hello, hello!

A new guild war...War of the Conjuror starts tomorrow!


http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a538/giiforums/9222ad16-7313-47e5-8787-7fbcc173129b_zpsd80bead4.png?t=1389911421

Guild war starts January 17, 2014 @ 11am PST for Android
@ 2pm PST for iOS

Ends January 20, 2014.

[Eunuchorn]

Same broken system expected?

<3 Elita either way

[shukai84]

yawnz...guild war and same outcome..so boring...

[Reversal]

yawnz...guild war and same outcome..so boring...

Join a better guild.

[Elita]

Same broken system expected?

<3 Elita either way

It would be far more useful to provide a critical but useful summary of what you find "broken" and what you would like to fix aside from any obvious bugs (bc we know we have to fix those). Thank you! :)

[Eunuchorn]

It would be far more useful to provide a critical but useful summary of what you find "broken" and what you would like to fix aside from any obvious bugs (bc we know we have to fix those). Thank you! :)

You're adorable, when are we going to have dinner followed by horse & buggy ride through the Tenderloin?

I'm pretty sure I can let the herd take it from here on how to fix guild wars.

Changed my mind:


Someone had the idea to force you to win against each player in a guild by blacking out the name after defeat. Taking out a full roster would be a huge point bonus. At 4 attacks per refill, 40 members, Gree will be raking in gems. No more +50% win bonuses. & make Champ/Sent Rank bonus halfway between GM & HC. Right now GM is only difference.


Is it just me or is this thread quite relevant? Looks like I had solved the 1-knight GM farming before it was even discovered.

3 knights need to be required in war & arena set up. What reason is there to use less? So my enemy gets less bonus knight points?

Add a war section to profile (maybe replace summoning stone, as I cannot even access/change this armor set without paying gems to summon a boss first)
Arena & war setup should not be tied together.

-Lock armors (1 per knight)
-3 knight minimum during war
-more intricate point system


I also said they need to *REQUIRE 3 KNIGHTS FOR WAR* 10 point knight bonus? Who cares.
In the first war GMs were logging off in 1 armor & were worth crap points. So Gree fixed that & 1-knight GM spam was born.

Why would you have less than 3 knights in your war party?

SA Kill Bonus, Level Difference bonus, Armor Quality bonus, Opponent Armor Quality Bonus, Damage Taken Bonus, total damage done bonus, dodge bonus.
I could go on.
Farming 1knight strip wouldn't go away, but the max potential points from farming fully geared knights would be far higher.

They need to make a true stats screen pop up after each fight with true factors translating directly from gameplay to reward.

K&D needs to be treated like a street fighter/mortal combat game.

The biggest suggestion I can make is every war change one small aspect in how points are gained & see what happens.

Flat win bonus should be immediately implemented imo.

[SomethingStrange]

It would be far more useful to provide a critical but useful summary of what you find "broken" and what you would like to fix aside from any obvious bugs (bc we know we have to fix those). Thank you! :)

He is one of the few that has been doing so in many threads.

[hakihaki]

With all due respect but everybody, including you, knows what is wrong with the guild wars and I believe you are not even interested in changing it because it pays the bills.

[sxespanky]

i actually like what guy said up there ,black out who your attacking(or declare youd like to fight a gm,sent, champ,HC or C and it randomly picks one?). that will cure the spam one man button. lock in your arena when you start is good, unless you mess it up first go. but im kinda on that idea with some alteration. the summoning stone is slightly useless for me, i've never used it, and will prolly never pay 30 gems to ever summon an old boss. just my opinion on it. and at 11 points to summon a monster for 2 armor shards, or summon them with 10 energy for 10 gems, or continue a failed fight for 12 gems, ill most likely pick the 10 gems for 10 energy every time. its not my game tho, you guys are doing ok. ill just sit here and farm more snakeskins.

[Elita]

i actually like what guy said up there ,black out who your attacking(or declare youd like to fight a gm,sent, champ,HC or C and it randomly picks one?). that will cure the spam one man button. lock in your arena when you start is good, unless you mess it up first go. but im kinda on that idea with some alteration. the summoning stone is slightly useless for me, i've never used it, and will prolly never pay 30 gems to ever summon an old boss. just my opinion on it. and at 11 points to summon a monster for 2 armor shards, or summon them with 10 energy for 10 gems, or continue a failed fight for 12 gems, ill most likely pick the 10 gems for 10 energy every time. its not my game tho, you guys are doing ok. ill just sit here and farm more snakeskins.

Thanks...if we can get a few more people on here, I'd like to conduct a poll and hopefully get some actionable results or at provide some feedback in regards to these issues.

[tshell]

not such a dramatic dropoff in reward armor quality from 10-11 would be a welcome change in my book. I didn't want armor of the wolf+ the first time around so I threw it away. Digging it out of the dumpster and presenting it as a prize is revolting! Would you want your local restaurant to dig through your trash to make your next meal?

Change the android point system. When I can attack the same person 3 times in a row and get 230+30, 315+30, then 165+30 points there is too much variability. Attacking officers should reward more points than commanders (I think iOS has this already)

Beyond that, just anything you can think of to spice it up from time to time. Maybe have a war where every armor used has to contain either fire or water. Or using a kaleidoscopic armor increases your point yields by 10-20%. Anything that would give it a feeling of being "new"

[busteroaf]

Thanks...if we can get a few more people on here, I'd like to conduct a poll and hopefully get some actionable results or at provide some feedback in regards to these issues.

We need more people for a poll? We've had 560 odd responses to the feedback thread and just now got a poll where we can pick one item. I'm curious to see what kind of poll, and how long it will take before we get some action on guild wars.

Issues to fix: Stripping, stripping to less than 3 knights, random points with no rhyme or reason, all the other options Eun mentioned earlier. We want a war where armors actually count more, not just who can gem the most and fastest. Figure out ways to fix stripping issues or to rectify the leeches in wars that randomly declare and screw others over. We want fun wars, not just "who can matchup with who, get a strip, and fight 200 battles against a 1 knight gm".

Clearly these have been mentioned enough that they're on someone's radar other than the members here on the forums. Please start acting like you know whats going on, and we would appreciate it a bit more.

[SomethingStrange]

Thanks...if we can get a few more people on here, I'd like to conduct a poll and hopefully get some actionable results or at provide some feedback in regards to these issues.

Fix the impact of leeches -- 3 options -- one unique identifying name per account, viewable old scores, minimum points/some calculation to be eligible rewards.

Fix the terrible itemization of rewards -- armors for everything below top 10 are pretty awful. Gems, gold, and fusion stones appear to just be thrown in as an afterthought.

Fix the impact of stripping -- Eun has some good ideas for this.

Fix the random point system -- Eun also has some good ideas for this.

Add milestones like arena.


Stop releasing GW epics for fusions.

[justin32098]

In all honesty, the rewards for the guild wars have been getting... meh. Old boss armors are not needed. Especially for the guilds around 11-50.

I say, either give guilds ranked 11-50 new legendaries.. Or old epics.. Or at least something GOOD!.

Im trying to say this nicely, hopefully you guys understand. I dont think that everyone can be top10. Especially with the amount of money people spend into this game a week alone..

Thanks for consideration.

[Revolutionist]

Why would you need a poll? Just take what everyone on this thread has read and multiply by the number of players in the game. Everyone agrees. Just make the changes. To sum it up and make it simple for you? 3 words. Stripping and Rewards.

[Dianish]

Im fine with the way it is atm. I dont think a "blackout" for making attacks random is the way to go. If so im out.

Would prefer the issues got fixed differently. I'll get back to you on that one.

[Street Shark]

RR number 1

[Dianish]

RR number 1

And i got money in my pocket.

[Eunuchorn]

Im fine with the way it is atm. I dont think a "blackout" for making attacks random is the way to go. If so im out.

Would prefer the issues got fixed differently. I'll get back to you on that one.

Roster clear would work like this:
You can only win against each member of enemy guild one time, afterwards blacking out their name; clearing the full roster would grant a huge bonus & reset the roster to do it again.

[Dark Prince]

Change the system, and add some content already
Incase you havent noticed we are all maxed on this forum with 5+ epics amd nothing to keep us playing

Make a voting poll for suggestions and Eunuchorrn is 100% right about Gw

[bosskiller]

Roster clear would work like this:
You can only win against each member of enemy guild one time, afterwards blacking out their name; clearing the full roster would grant a huge bonus & reset the roster to do it again.

I dont like this idea about only fighting eafh person once. But everythig else I agree with, better rewards, no stripping, etc. And emphasis on BETTER REWARDS!!!

[The Pale Rider]

Roster clear would work like this:
You can only win against each member of enemy guild one time, afterwards blacking out their name; clearing the full roster would grant a huge bonus & reset the roster to do it again.

One time is awfully low. Losses will skyrocket and scores will plummet. Intelligence sharing will become extremely important. I'm willing to try it, but it's a much more labor intensive approach.
__________________________________
Worthless rewards for 11-100 is the subject of 3 new threads in the last three days with dozens of posts each making the same complaint. Top 100 guilds spend money and want to compete for a prize worth winning.

Elita - Surely you've noticed that there are no more 4 star armors that are a part of the game that are better than the current boss+ armor: combustion+, guardian+, clayplate+, aegis of the dragon+, tempered+, boilerplate+blackfrost+, sky+. All of these have been given out to the top 50 already. The only ones you haven't given out are Red Kaleidoscope and Spartan+.

Stat creep has made the weekly boss+ armor better than moon already (galacious and Demons Carapace). There is no one in the top 100 guilds not able to kill the boss on 43. That's 3000+ of your core player (those in guilds 12-110), who are fighting for armor of the wolf? Half of them don't want to spend any gems because the rewards are worthless and the other half want to compete purely for the sake of it despite worthless rewards. This is causing problems within the guilds and causing people to leave.

Solution is to find rewards that are better than the current boss+ for top 50 like you did for the first 6 guild wars. Top 100 should get the non-plus of the same armor, like they always have. I don't care if you use new armor, old epics or change the color of an old armor and its stats - make it "Red Wolf" with stats that are 1% better than the current EB+. Just don't make the rewards worthless.

Top 100 spend money and gems. It's a lot to ask that they do it for nothing.
________________________
Only HC and up can declare. This is a distant second to the importance of getting the rewards right.

[Adisty]

The ability to kick leeches and inactive players DURING a war would be nice, as well as changing roles too.

[The Pale Rider]

The ability to kick leeches and inactive players DURING a war would be nice, as well as changing roles too.

A better way to implemenet this would be the ability for a GM to set minimum points to stay in guild and receive the reward at any time other than during a GW. That's what we do anyway, but players lie and then freeride and then get the rewards. If a minimum could be set for the guild, then allof that goes away immediately.

[Dave3d]

And then what happens to those lower level people that can only attack the gate, for instance? Or, lower level people that JUST take down guardian health or sentinel, so the good people in the guild can get more points and not use their energy?
They wont be able to meet the points and get kicked?
There is more than 1 way to contribute to a guild than wars and points in wars.

[Doc Sharp]

Really? What about the people who attack the gate not hitting points? Seriously?

[Dave3d]

I guess the setting could be toggle-able.
GM can turn it on or off.
Wouldnt be bad.
Top guilds can set it, and newer guilds can turn it off.

[The Pale Rider]

And then what happens to those lower level people that can only attack the gate, for instance? Or, lower level people that JUST take down guardian health or sentinel, so the good people in the guild can get more points and not use their energy?
They wont be able to meet the points and get kicked?
There is more than 1 way to contribute to a guild than wars and points in wars.

Share those responsibilitis or no one can progress (if you don't want to sacrifice and get less points by hitting gate/sent /guard - then don't). Set the minimum at a level that takes that into account. You're not making an argument against the feature, you're complaining about a non-existent problem.

[The Pale Rider]

Don't hit the gates then. Seriously what's wrong with you people? If you can only score points by hitting gates and the minimum in your guild is greater than what you can score hitting gates then find another guild CAUSE THAT'S NOT THE GUILD FOR YOU!

The minimum in my guild is a fraction of the average. The top 10 score more than the bottom 30. The top 10 don't complain, they choose to score more. The bottom 30 appreciate and cheer their efforts But the top 10 don't like the idea of people blowing off the minimum. Then they feel taken advantage of. That's why there's a MINIMUM.

if you think you'll rely on hitting gates and think you won't be able to hit the minimum - you have three options, (1) be happy being in the guild without getting rewards, (2) earn more points or (3) find a guild with a lower minimum.

Trying hard is not the same as succeeding. They produce different results.

[The Pale Rider]

I guess the setting could be toggle-able.
GM can turn it on or off.
Wouldnt be bad.
Top guilds can set it, and newer guilds can turn it off.

Exactly. Or set it very low. It would only have an impact if the Guild chose to have it make an impact.

[Elita]

Change the system, and add some content already
Incase you havent noticed we are all maxed on this forum with 5+ epics amd nothing to keep us playing

Make a voting poll for suggestions and Eunuchorrn is 100% right about Gw

Lol...see you say that but there are about 5 times more people who write in to support to say they have never gotten and will never get an epic :)

[The Pale Rider]

Lol...see you say that but there are about 5 times more people who write in to support to say they have never gotten and will never get an epic :)

Ha Ha. It's hysterical that there are more people who don't have epics than people who do. Wow what a revelation. We're all idiots who don't actually play this game, so its enlightening to learn such illuminating factual information. Next you'll tell me more people are below level 100 than over level 100 - LOL - No seriously, LMFAO - So there can't be a problem with lack of content for players over level 100.

Clearly there are no content issues. You've taught us all a valuable lesson. I feel my concerns have been dutifully addressed and am fully satisfied. Thank you so so much.

[EljayK]

Let's adjust the scoring system before we work on rewards.

Base scoring on armor that opponent is wearing. If they have less than three people, you only get the points for the individual armors. If they're decked in epics they're worth more, if they're only wearing basic, it should be less than attacking gate.

[The Pale Rider]

Let's adjust the scoring system before we work on rewards.

Base scoring on armor that opponent is wearing. If they have less than three people, you only get the points for the individual armors. If they're decked in epics they're worth more, if they're only wearing basic, it should be less than attacking gate.

You'd have to go by armor level as well or people would just wear level 1 4* and 5* armor to effectively strip. I like your idea. Armor type, level of armor, guild rank (Comm, HC, GS/GC or GM).

[EljayK]

Or instead of armor type just level.

Give 1 point for each level of each armor beaten.

Add in rank bonus.

Flat scoring. Way easier. Less reliant on spending.

Give points to defenders too. (after sentinel is down.)

Black out beaten opponents.

[Elita]

Ha Ha. It's hysterical that there are more people who don't have epics than people who do. Wow what a revelation. We're all idiots who don't actually play this game, so its enlightening to learn such illuminating factual information. Next you'll tell me more people are below level 100 than over level 100 - LOL - No seriously, LMFAO - So there can't be a problem with lack of content for players over level 100.

Clearly there are no content issues. You've taught us all a valuable lesson. I feel my concerns have been dutifully addressed and am fully satisfied. Thank you so so much.

Calm down. No one was saying changes weren't needed. Was simply making a joke that some players claim there are too many epics and the other half claim there aren't enough and the difficulty of addressing both concerns :)

[gardibolt]

Or epic+ to top ten, epic normal to 11-25 and #1 gets some other perk along the lines Eun suggests. Having RR win every time isn't much fun for the rest of us and probably not too much fun for them either (at least for those who want good competition rather than just loot) since the epic+ pretty much sets them in stone as the top. Spreading the epic+ around would help level the playing field.

[Eunuchorn]

Lol...see you say that but there are about 5 times more people who write in to support to say they have never gotten and will never get an epic :)

More reason to adjust war rewards for increased spending.

#1: Epic+, +10 max inventory, +1% EE/AE/HP regen
#2: Epic+, +10 max inventory
#3: Epic+, +5 max inventory
#4-10: Epic, +5 max inventory
11-25: Epic
26-100: ****+
101-who cares


Or epic+ to top ten, epic normal to 11-25 and #1 gets some other perk along the lines Eun suggests. Having RR win every time isn't much fun for the rest of us and probably not too much fun for them either (at least for those who want good competition rather than just loot) since the epic+ pretty much sets them in stone as the top. Spreading the epic+ around would help level the playing field.

This value you are placing on epic+:win ratio doesn't exist. What we need are passive cumulative rewards like the rest of the Gree games like I posted above.
I created Rainbow Coalition for the exact reason of spreading Epic+ to the community. While I agree competition is stimulating, I can assure you winning #1 every time is pretty fun.
I'm assuming you aren't in a top 10 guild? The existence of stripping 100% defeats the purpose of having armors, end of story. Give epic+ to top 100 guilds, at this point it wouldn't matter one bit.

[gardibolt]

I used to be in a top ten guild (DPA), always in the top five players, but it got too spendy with the holidays so I left in December for an extended break. I agree that spreading the epic+ around isn't the whole answer, but I think it is part of it. It wouldn't hurt to make the difference between + and normal less massive but that ship has probably sailed.

Doing something about stripping and win trading and improving the matching system are also parts of the solution.

I still like the game, but I think it could be a lot better and get more people interested in playing (and yes spending) with a more level field.

And yeah I suppose being #1 every time is pretty good.

[Eunuchorn]

Epic+ is supposed to just be a perk. Like you said, spending determines leaderboard not armor. Epic non+ needs to go to more ppl, but not +

[The Pale Rider]

I haven't seen anybody complaining that there is too much armor variation in the game - epic or otherwise. It would be very helpful if you acknowledged the concerns being made by players and identified those where you agree that changes are needed and those where there is little or no chance of a change being made. Even better would be a statement that those necessary changes are in the works. Best of all would be an estimate of when those changes will be implemented.

[Sent]

Even better would be a statement that those necessary changes are in the works. Best of all would be an estimate of when those changes will be implemented.
Would be nice.

[SomethingStrange]

I haven't seen anybody complaining that there is too much armor variation in the game - epic or otherwise. It would be very helpful if you acknowledged the concerns being made by players and identified those where you agree that changes are needed and those where there is little or no chance of a change being made. Even better would be a statement that those necessary changes are in the works. Best of all would be an estimate of when those changes will be implemented.

A glimmer of hope would be amazing.

[Kangaroeland]

You know eunuch most of your points are valid but everything you suggest is a huge favor for the #1 guild and not so much for all others. I personally dislike how easy epics are gained by fusion nowadays and even tho i failed to get an epic 3-4 times in a gw (and again stuck in the chase now) id say give 2-10 a good epic or lesser epic+ and give 11-25 a decent epic or real good ****+. I hardly play any arena but anyone i fight has 3 epics. Used to be real happy with my maelstrom blaze and moon from chests, now everyone has them.

But those reload perks for #1 would make the game ridiculously unbalanced. I do agree increasing armor slots and freinds slots would be cool. This game needs more content more then anything. LTQ's new area's or a total new version of content (guild eb's?)

Sorry if its ill worded or anything, not native english.
xoxo

[SomethingStrange]

You know eunuch most of your points are valid but everything you suggest is a huge favor for the #1 guild and not so much for all others. I personally dislike how easy epics are gained by fusion nowadays and even tho i failed to get an epic 3-4 times in a gw (and again stuck in the chase now) id say give 2-10 a good epic or lesser epic+ and give 11-25 a decent epic or real good ****+. I hardly play any arena but anyone i fight has 3 epics. Used to be real happy with my maelstrom blaze and moon from chests, now everyone has them.

But those reload perks for #1 would make the game ridiculously unbalanced. I do agree increasing armor slots and freinds slots would be cool. This game needs more content more then anything. LTQ's new area's or a total new version of content (guild eb's?)

Sorry if its ill worded or anything, not native english.
xoxo

Perks that were quality of life though might be nice. Extra armor slots for example.

[firefly333]

Perks that were quality of life though might be nice. Extra armor slots for example.

Extra armor slots..yes please, so important.

[Kangaroeland]

I do agree increasing armor slots and freinds slots would be cool.

Eeh yeah haha

[knightsanddraggings]

You know eunuch most of your points are valid but everything you suggest is a huge favor for the #1 guild and not so much for all others. I personally dislike how easy epics are gained by fusion nowadays and even tho i failed to get an epic 3-4 times in a gw (and again stuck in the chase now) id say give 2-10 a good epic or lesser epic+ and give 11-25 a decent epic or real good ****+. I hardly play any arena but anyone i fight has 3 epics. Used to be real happy with my maelstrom blaze and moon from chests, now everyone has them.

But those reload perks for #1 would make the game ridiculously unbalanced. I do agree increasing armor slots and freinds slots would be cool. This game needs more content more then anything. LTQ's new area's or a total new version of content (guild eb's?)

Sorry if its ill worded or anything, not native english.
xoxo
The only one I see as overpowered is arena energy regen time.

[Eunuchorn]

You know eunuch most of your points are valid but everything you suggest is a huge favor for the #1 guild and not so much for all others. I personally dislike how easy epics are gained by fusion nowadays and even tho i failed to get an epic 3-4 times in a gw (and again stuck in the chase now) id say give 2-10 a good epic or lesser epic+ and give 11-25 a decent epic or real good ****+. I hardly play any arena but anyone i fight has 3 epics. Used to be real happy with my maelstrom blaze and moon from chests, now everyone has them.

But those reload perks for #1 would make the game ridiculously unbalanced. I do agree increasing armor slots and freinds slots would be cool. This game needs more content more then anything. LTQ's new area's or a total new version of content (guild eb's?)




The problem we have here are people who have no chance of getting top 25, thinking the reward scheme will affect them. This whole I took a break & couldn't go back because those darn top 10 guilds just keep getting stronger is LUDICROUS. The rewards for top 1250 guilds in KA sucks. Guild #1 might get 300k stats, 25: 100k, 100: 50k, 1250: 5k. Guess what, there's a lot more than 1200 guilds in that game. If you are a free player, accept that Gree doesn't care about you & stop trying to compare yourself w/ those of us that do (whether you approve of spending money on a game or not)

This is the response I'm seeing when talking about 5% faster recharge for PAYING PLAYERS.

"YOU MIGHT GET TO 60 KILLS W/O SPENDING 80 or more gems on EE every week! THAT'S NOT FAIR BECAUSE I CAN'T GET PAST KILL 30 & IM ALMOST LVL.100!"
- everyone in this thread

http://www.funzio.com/forum/showthread.php?48856-Epic-Moral-Struggles-amp-the-Enslavement-of-a-Republic-A-Day-in-the-Life-of-CJ54


I never said a player in a top 1250 guild was at a disadvantage to a player in a top 10 guild because of the rewards. Being in a top 1250 guild is so far away from a top 10 guild, that they are basically playing different games. Why the hell would I compare them? The same goes for free vs gem spenders, if I decided not to spend money on gems, I would never expect to be at the same level as those that do. I really don't understand why you felt the need to start comparing things that are so different.

What I did say, was that if a player missed a few events, they would have a hard time getting back to the same level they were at before. If a top 10 player missed the rewards from a few events, they would have a hard time catching up to the stats of the other top 10 players that received those rewards. If a top 500 player missed the rewards from a few events, they would have a hard time catching up to the stats of the other top 500 players that received those rewards. This was to illustrate the level of stat inflation that was occurring. There is a certain level of rewards that are available to everyone at your tier, regardless of what tier you are in.

Now, here is the main point, those rewards are cumulative, and they increase each event. Using your scoring model the #1 guild received a reward 3 times larger than the #25 guild, and that puts them at an advantage for the next event. If the #1 guild wins the second event, they receive another reward 3 times larger than the #25 guild. At this point, #1 has received rewards of 600k stats, and #25 received a 200k stat bump. In war 3, #1 receives 500k stats and a 10% bonus to gold production, #25 receives 150k stats and a 5% reduction to crafting times. By this point, rewards make up the majority of the stats for each guild, so the #25 guild can't make up much ground by building stats through normal gameplay. As more fixed bonuses are rewarded, the top guild receives even more advantage in purchasing guild bonuses. With each event, the gap between each tier increases, and the rewards and bonuses keep piling up.

The difference in K&D, is that at most you can use 3 armors at a time. By the 4th event, the #1 guild will have 3 superior armors to the #25 guild. They will have a clear cut advantage, but it is limited to 3 armors at a time. In other games, it would be the equivalent of the #1 guild using 4 knights at a time while everyone else uses 3. Pretty soon it gets rather pointless. In the last Modern War event, the #1 team scored twice as many points as #3, and three times as many as #10. The gap between these teams are enormous, and stat inflation is just increasing that gap. In K&D they keep releasing new armors that are better than everything before them, but the increase is much more gradual.

If you want to be able to buy your way to #1, and look at everyone else getting farther behind every day, thats fine. I just don't find that very rewarding. I would rather keep the field a little tighter, and more competitive. That is why I have started playing K&D more than the other games.


Cry me a fricken river. The dude I quoted misquoted you then. I'm still straining to see how faster AE/EE or better heal pots will help us win every war? You people are astounding. Go play call of duty w/o perks & starting gun then QQ about dying. Buy my way to the top of what? I was 35 on boss leaderboard, did kill 61 & jumped to 28. Well if top 25 is mostly my guild, I'm pretty sure minor boosts & extra space to hold my 20 nemesis armors aren't gonna give me more of an edge over other players than Ive already got. You think giving away a ton of comb+ & epics isn't gonna exponentially increase the divide? Riight

Other than that you were disagreeing w/ me then repeating more or less the same points. Or making points that my points already inferred or assumed.

If I'm paying money for this game, why shouldn't I get perks that free players who happen to be in ok guilds or better can't get?

Best part of being one of the longest term players in a growing community?

Having the same argument with new f*cking idiots.

[bentx2]

I skimmed the whole thread but did anyone mention diminishing returns from single knight farming? That could be a nice way to encourage people to look for different opponents. Something like -10% every fight past the first. Or maybe +10% defense every fight past the first. Just a thought.

And, yeah, the "leach" knights is about enough to make me quit the game entirely.

[Eunuchorn]

I skimmed the whole thread but did anyone mention diminishing returns from single knight farming? That could be a nice way to encourage people to look for different opponents. Something like -10% every fight past the first. Or maybe +10% defense every fight past the first. Just a thought.

And, yeah, the "leach" knights is about enough to make me quit the game entirely.

Check my war changes poll thread

[X_Swarpz_X]

I was too lazy to read through all the pages so I don't know if this has been said, but I think a good idea would be allowing the GM to set a guild war point requirement for the wars. Just have a fusion blitz tab and a 3 day war tab where they can set a certain amount of points per war. And any player who doesn't reach the entered score requirement just doesn't recieve the rewards at the end of the war. I think that would solve the whole leeching problem. Anyone else think this is a good or bad idea? Feel free to criticize if need be. I'd just like to hear other people's takes on this.

[SkySD]

I agree 100% Swarpz with that idea. I was actually on my way to post something similar and saw your post. It would be nice not to have to worry about leechers anymore and I'm sure it wouldn't be too hard to implement something like that into the game.

[Eunuchorn]

I was too lazy to read through all the pages so I don't know if this has been said, but I think a good idea would be allowing the GM to set a guild war point requirement for the wars. Just have a fusion blitz tab and a 3 day war tab where they can set a certain amount of points per war. And any player who doesn't reach the entered score requirement just doesn't recieve the rewards at the end of the war. I think that would solve the whole leeching problem. Anyone else think this is a good or bad idea? Feel free to criticize if need be. I'd just like to hear other people's takes on this.

More threads per page & more posts per thread FTW.
Why is everyone too freaking stupid to ever go through "settings".
http://www.funzio.com/forum/profile.php?do=editoptions

Point req is a bad idea & will never happen. All it can do is auto eject ppl after a war. Would you not do this yourself?

Being able to kick ppl, add ppl, or change guild leadership around during a war will also never happen. There are innumerable ways this could be abused to screw other players on a whim.

Go back years of forums in every single Gree game & you will find a constant stream of ppl asking for this, & for HC only war declare.

IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN.

Plz stop bringing it up & plz stop voting.

[Kangaroeland]

Best part of being one of the longest term players in a growing community?

Having the same argument with new f*cking idiots.
Or maybe you just grow to be the biggest idiot of them all. Now I dont mean to insult you but since you felt like starting of like that... im a paying player sure I dont use as many gems as you but I score between 75 and 200k every guild war. Not very impressive to you maybe but for me thats a lot. I dont expect to close the gap with top players nor do I want gree to help me. I do want a fair game so free players dont get my chest epics and you dont get a energy reload bonus no matter how much money you put in. Or to go all the way with ****ty comparisons: no matter how much you level in cod you dont get rewarded an aimbot.

[Eunuchorn]

Best part of being one of the longest term players in a growing community?
Having the same argument with new f*cking idiots.

Or maybe you just grow to be the biggest idiot of them all. Now I dont mean to insult you but since you felt like starting of like that... im a paying player sure I dont use as many gems as you but I score between 75 and 200k every guild war. Not very impressive to you maybe but for me thats a lot. I dont expect to close the gap with top players nor do I want gree to help me. I do want a fair game so free players dont get my chest epics and you dont get a energy reload bonus no matter how much money you put in. Or to go all the way with ****ty comparisons: no matter how much you level in cod you dont get rewarded an aimbot.

Try reading through all the links I shared to threads I've started before responding.
Hint: It's in a different thread with everyone beating the same dead horse. Do you read through other threads?


Kthxbai

[knightsanddraggings]

More threads per page & more posts per thread FTW.
Why is everyone too freaking stupid to ever go through "settings".
http://www.funzio.com/forum/profile.php?do=editoptions

Point req is a bad idea & will never happen. All it can do is auto eject ppl after a war. Would you not do this yourself?

Being able to kick ppl, add ppl, or change guild leadership around during a war will also never happen. There are innumerable ways this could be abused to screw other players on a whim.

Go back years of forums in every single Gree game & you will find a constant stream of ppl asking for this, & for HC only war declare.

IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN.

Plz stop bringing it up & plz stop voting.
I do wish they had a point history section for players.

[Eunuchorn]

I do wish they had a point history section for players.

I had posted that somewhere as well, we need a War profile with detailed player stats. It's all there just not being accessed & shown to us.

Arena matching should be done based on total past war points