Join the official Goodgame Discord today!
Are you looking for a community of like-minded gamers to discuss your favorite games with? Look no further than the GoodGame Empire Family Discord Server!
Our server is the perfect place to connect with other gamers from around the world. Whether you're looking to chat about strategy, share tips and tricks, or just make new friends, our community has got you covered.
And that's not all - as a member of our Discord server, you'll also have access to exclusive giveaways and other special events. It's the perfect way to stay up to date on all the latest news and updates from GoodGame Studios.
So what are you waiting for? Join the GoodGame Empire Family Discord Server today and start connecting with fellow warriors from all over the world. Just head to https://discord.gg/goodgamestudios to join the fun!
Comments
For those Beginner / middle player who hanging in between level 20-40 (start feel to be boring / not attractive / not much attack or defense going on) doesn't know whats going on and they will feel like being put a side.
Hope that we will show them the joy and fun of GGE , and of cos for sure they will bringing more friend into the game if they are interested / start enjoy the game.
as we can manage who joins and make them very similar strength
they all have the same amount of members and the members are similar strength
{take into account castellans and commanders stats, defender and attacker numbers}
etc
Chance for people to set aside pacts and NAA's and attack people they never usually would
Also as berimond may be soon it could be planned for after so there is time to work out the technicalities
(e.g people like malabo, aaron and sean all put in a LOT of work to get the best commanders and castellans they can, they shouldn't be disadvantaged for this work)
Here's some comments from Apatus:
"the idea with the two purpose built alliances is a good one because it levels the playing field as far as alliance bonuses work and whatnot.
the scoring system will need some thought. if it's just the number of casualties then people will just pool their men into one or two strongholds and the whole thing will turn into a defensive-showcase to the point where nobody is willing to chance their arm.
trying to classify players as ruby/no-ruby is a can of worms and may spoil it. if i bought a siege tower last june does that make me a ruby player? where's the line..."
Two alliances, numbers go up in 2's, me thinks 15 is a good number for both sides, not too many rubies spent to get to that number.
Either side is allowed to use resource, ruby, or armourer tools. Could have a 3 or 4 day battle (mon-wed/thur). The winner gets Kev in that alliance for the remaining 4 -3 days (thur/fri-sun). Then the pattern resumes on the Monday, Kev would return to his neutral stomping ground during this time, and let the two alliances hit it out again.
Or could do a 5 day (mon-fri) then do the next battle 14 days from the initial one, meaning the players involved in the battle would really benefit from Kevin's time with them (9 days).
Another option would be to get a well known player or the leader of a major alliance (aaron, sean, mal, ton, nuwan, bill69, mack3tt doesn't matter) and get them to pick a team from a couple of small alliances that wish to join, that way the smaller alliances get experience with the more experienced players and the experienced players can see what the smaller guys are like and if they wish to potentially recruit
I agree with what you are saying. I am just going to restate what im sure was already stated but with some more information. I belive that it should be rubie tools and resourse tools only. No armor tools. Now aday you get ruby tools in rankings and just for logging and picking the right chest. This applies to offense aswell defense. Only ruby tools and resourse would be best. If you want to buy them if you run out or something you can just buy yhtm instead of waiting for armor to come around. Just an idea let me know what you think.
As the suggestion has been to create two alliances for this event then they will both be 0 glory. Then if this works and continues, the glory count will have to be advised to Kevin as this will also ensure activity with the war as you all know the alliance will lose its glory if there is none being earned.
Just a suggestion to ensure all are given a fare chance at determining a winner as some players prefer to defend then attack as we have all been involved with wars that have become stale due to certain methods of play by the opposing alliance.
Leaders (judges) are not to be touched by any alliance that wants to participate in this idea.
http://aus1.freeforums.net/board/1/kings-guards-wars
Just did this quickly, if people think that a forum to help organise and discuss this then i will improve it further. Could use this as a point for alliances to discuss rules for there war, find an opponent or even as a general Aus server forum. Also has a chat box that can be used where alliances could discuss matters.
I gave this some thought in last 2 days. I agree with Dan6's idea. I think net increase in glory score for each of the 2 new alliances is way easier to monitor for Kev, rather than nb of units killed, to decide the winner. There will be be so many BRs! But I also like the idea of dividing this by the number of players in each alliance (it should be the same, but just in case it is not).
Bill69
SKINK