Home English (UK) Ideas, Suggestions & Feedback

We need new Moderators!


ModeratorWe are always on the lookout for talented people to join the team. That means you! If you think you could help us organise and inform the community while entertaining everyone then apply. We need people to help out on the forum, behind the scenes with announcements, on Discord and on our other Social Media channels.


If this is something you think might be of interest to you, HERE

What do you feel needs to be done to fix PvP?

It is clear that many players are not that interested in PvP anymore, especially lower level legendary players who get stomped by strong players. What changes to PvP do you think needs to be made to make it more enjoyable for all?

I feel like these changes needs to be made:

- Make it so strong players are incentivized to attack other strong players.
- Change the glory system so it doesn't reward overwhelming wins, as that incentivizes attacking weaker players and glory farming/stacking. Give more glory for a defeat for instance, so players don't feel like they wasted their troops and tools.
- Reward defending much more.
- Maybe a tutorial for attacking in PvP, as many players have no clue how to set up an attack against real players.
- Let us keep unused tools in an attack even in a defeat. Many players don't want to lose a ton of tools and maybe get nothing out of it. Then they feel it is more worthwhile to attack NPC targets. And with 5/6 waves you have to use a lot of tools.

Please contribute with your own suggestions if you are interested in improving PvP   
MrKennyKRH lvl 800 @ skn 1
«1

Comments

  • Rework the honour system so the rewards are actually good as at the moment they are crap, this will encourage pvp as honour can only be gained in pvp

    Not active ingame anymore  [email protected] (back again) 

    [email protected] 

    Non-ruby buyer 

    [email protected] ResilientEmpire 

    Pop me a PM ingame or on forums if you want to join :) 


    My loot, first week back: 

  • Add a nob contest for player vs player. Add an event for player vs player like we had many moons ago


    We have shady but it sucks maybe time its reworked too lol
  • Perhaps for shadys there can be a bounty system of some sorts.
  • ang1243 (GB1)ang1243 (GB1) GB1 Posts: 3,834
    Personally I think that something done with honor would be a good idea, whether it is improving the weekly rewards for it, or creating an event focussed around it, or creating more bonuses when earning honor, like a bounty as @mikesmight123 (GB1) posted, maybe you get certain rewards for getting certain amounts of honor in one go.

    This could present problems with players dropping honor just to get it back up again if there wasn't an incentive to keep it long term however.

    There's my two cents put in :p

    Angus
    Support | Community Guidelines | Short Questions | Bugwatch Thread | WebsitePrivate Message

    Check out my website with loads of cool tips about GGE: http://www.ultimategge.co.uk
     




  • MrKennyKRH (SKN1)MrKennyKRH (SKN1) Posts: 300
    edited 17.11.2016
    I think it's a great idea with improving rewards for honor. But I'd like to also see multiple brackets for legendarary players, so more players in all levels can compete. Like for instance make the first bracket be legendary lvl 1-120, then 121-300. That would make it easier for many more players to be in the top, instead of now where only the biggest rubywhales are at the top of the honor chart. 

    Perhaps for shadys there can be a bounty system of some sorts.

    Sounds interesting, so you choose which bounty/player to attack or how would that work?
    Post edited by MrKennyKRH (SKN1) on
    MrKennyKRH lvl 800 @ skn 1
  • dylan42 (US1)dylan42 (US1) US1 Posts: 158
    1) For me there needs to be some sort of multiplier, possibly based on Powerpoints?  that gives more points or glory for hitting stronger opponents.  Meaning if you do farm a much weaker player you will hardly get any points. Stay away from Legendary level, a legendary level 1 ruby whale could be exceptionally strong for example.

    2) Re work Honour, so it actually means something, and players actually want to fight to get / keep it.

    3) make stacking of castles, either worthless or pointless.  Dealing with multis would be a good start!

    4) take into consideration the Cast strength when calculating glory, ie if someone removes the cast on a stacked castle they will get almost no glory, as weak / no cast mean low / no glory.

    5) Give the defender some incentive to defend, for most players there really is none.  They see a big attack coming in and its a simple decision either OG or fire cast.  Maybe come up with another league table / glory rank, specifically for defending.  Just like attacking you would have to give carefull thought to stop this being abused.  Make it so if if the defender loses, If they defend well they still get good points.

    6)  Make recruitment / replacement of DEFENSIVE troops MUCH quicker and easier, even if its just in Alliance tourneys or specific Pvp Events.  If you make it so a few thousand defense can be replaced pretty quickly and easily not take someone 2 weeks to rebuild, then you are much more likley to see them defend more often.

    7) make some sort of penalty for tool cleaning, either in the defenders rankings, and also do not penilise the attacker, ie do not strip all glory tools / banners.  and make sure ALL tools come back to the player in these sitautions.  For example if the attack is 100x (example figure) more powerfull than the defense, then the attacker will get all his tools back regardless of type.  And the defender will lose ranking points on his / hers. Defense Rank list.

    8)  put bounties on players that have higher levels of glory / honour.  To incentivise stronger players being attacked.

    If you did all these things it would reduce the effectivness of hitting shells.  Would get rid of the scenario we have now in that a player sees 6 waves coming in at them and KNOWS they are going to lose the fight, Knows that are going to lose 6,000 defenders, and get fires,  and it will take them 2 weeks to recruit the defense back and will cost them a load of time and coin to do so.  If the player knew they could get their def back pretty quickly and cheaply AND they were going to get something for defending, then it may well change the mindset of do i defend or do i OG.


    I agree with most of what you said except 7 and 8, 7 because if an alliance is warring another it would be relatively easy for an alliance to stack defense without worrying about losing a ton of defense. toolburning is a part of the game and a part of wars again taking out of the war side of the game that some people still play by for en this would work maybe but imo 7 and 8 would turn that event into bullcrap.
  • I have an idea


    A PvP tourney


    You would earn so and so amounts of points for gaining glory, and you would also gain point for getting honor. The rewards would be split into a level 10-69 reward pool, and a 70+ reward pool. the rewards would vary from tools to attackers to defenders. that way you can keep going, further encouraging PvP. maybe the event would happen once every 1-2 months?
    my esophagus big. 
  • I have an idea


    A PvP tourney


    You would earn so and so amounts of points for gaining glory, and you would also gain point for getting honor. The rewards would be split into a level 10-69 reward pool, and a 70+ reward pool. the rewards would vary from tools to attackers to defenders. that way you can keep going, further encouraging PvP. maybe the event would happen once every 1-2 months?
    Yes, would be nice with a PvP tournament, but goodgame needs to fix it so players can't glory farm/stack. As I and many others have suggested, making a point system like e.g. 10k glory gives you 3 points could be a solution. Would make it much harder to "cheat" than now.

    BUT it still doesn't change the fact that most players just open gate or use fire cast, because of the massive power difference between weak and strong players. Only the strongest allys will defend and there is no point in attacking them, as you will never win against them since they all have password sharing, at least on SKN1 server. You'll just lose all your troops and tools for little glory.

    PvP needs an overhaul, badly.
    MrKennyKRH lvl 800 @ skn 1
  • give more moat tools as rewards in events, not everyone can afford to spend lots of rubies on moat tools, that may only end up being used for 1 hit
  • Anyone know whats happening with the Alliance Tournament? If/when is it coming back?
    grewbops @ en 1
  • Anyone know whats happening with the Alliance Tournament? If/when is it coming back?

    No one knows yet, no word from goodgame. But this thread is not about the alliance tournament. This is for suggestions as to how we can fix PvP. Please stay on topic.
    MrKennyKRH lvl 800 @ skn 1
  • Mikeshot2 (GB1)Mikeshot2 (GB1) GB1 Posts: 301
    Perhaps Player V Player hits have become emotional to the degree of obsessive, given the players who have an appetite for such game play are so often referred to as "bullies" - A few fires in a castle - the battle scars of wars, brings about a rush to some skype room with over active diplomats waving fingers and so on. Okay that is the worst case scenario granted, however, the very nature of this game is player v player - alliance v alliance and a good code on conduct if followed should be all that's needed. The kala cast and a little crafting is an amazing defence, with a little alliance support can see off some of the greatest 6 wave hits, switching HoL to defence gives even more defence power for those who enjoy defending. Time skips to fast fix burning castles are frequent hand outs from events, maybe a slightly more generous techi - would help those good game Castilians power up a little faster, other than that, all it needs is players to accept the concept of the game, stay with in a reasonable code of conduct - lose the emotions, praise a good hit - and as an attacker praise a good defence, Sportsman like approach, that would make a far better game.  Bad losers are dragging the game down, not the concept of p v p - You know it's a game of battles and strategy right? 
  • Batten (GB1)Batten (GB1) GB1 Posts: 1,104
    Player v player traditionally occured when players of roughly equal level and ability face off, for me that would be battles in Ice against Iuli, Green asgainst Barun or fire against Brian when we were coming up, sometimes you win sometimes you lose but you improve each other's play and it's a challenge.  It was pretty good natured and if somebody did something you hadn't seen before you'd drop them a line and ask them about it.  If you are asking why good players keep their armies at home there are several factors which have changed the game:

    1.  Cost - the cost of tools and troops as you get to the higher level of the game becomes expensive and that is probably the biggest disincentive, I wouldn't waste money attacking a player when I could be spending the money on other aspects of the game that would strengthen my account for example buying a banner food bonus which has an extended benefit as opposed to buying troops which you may use once and not achieve the result you desire.   Essentially this why less active players, and lower level players with less developed castles are attacked it's cheaper for the attacker and they have a greater chance of winning which means they get better value from the troops they by.  

    2.  Password Sharing - Essentially a lot of players decline to send on alliances where the account of a player of roughly level or experience could be suborned by a player with significantly greater experience and resource or where you end up facing not one player but troops from a whole alliance that miraculously reached.  If you can't be sure who is playing the account or there are queston marks over an account then you don't hit it.  People won't waste money on accounts that are being played outside of the rules, in effect rewarding players who cheat.  

    3.  Multi-accounting - largely in early player v player players knew each other or had interacted and had more faith in the player they were facing being the player the believed them to be.  That has eroded to the point you hit a player in one alliance you cop three hits from the same players other accounts in other alliances.  Hitting a player becomes too much of a risk under those circumstances.  

    4.  Lack of real reward - glory, resources etc are easier to obtain from events, robber barons and through ruby purchases than through the risk of attacking a player you can't be sure is the actual player - player in lower level alliance hits the shell of a player ranked in twenty is looking at a lot of fires.  The risk is greater than the reward.  

    5.  Desire to control the outcome - a lot of recent wars the outcome is pretty clear at the beginning of the contest and is reflected by the brevity of the war, they are now shorter than they used to be one wave and out in a lot of cases. The desire to win is greater than the willingness to learn through losses.  Competitive fights are more enjoyable but from a practical point of view expensive, hit the wrong player and of their financial resource is greater than yours you may be competitive once but long terms your in trouble.    

    6.  Loss of Berimond - Berimond encouraged PVP by providing a more level playing environment.  There were some spectacular battles there in the early days as alliance ties didn't hold and the balance of players meant you could hit anyone with less fear of it costing your whole alliance.  The desire to protect your alliance by not attacking players in certain alliances whose response would be war or something equally disproportionate is strong.  You could be successful but your alliance would suffer I know how that works from bitter experience I stopped taking those risks because whilst I could beat players without difficulty the consequences for less strong colleagues and allies weren't pretty.  A lot of attacking alliances who claim to like PVP like it when they are winning when they lose...




    Batten @ en 1
  • a helpful adjustment would be to introduce a alliance legendary level maximum, meaning the total legendary levels could not exceed say 10,000 so whilst  players could still play there own games it would spread the strength of alliances much more widely and prevent domination of the server by just 3 or 4 alliances
  • Batten (GB1)Batten (GB1) GB1 Posts: 1,104
    Agreed great idea
    Batten @ en 1
  • a helpful adjustment would be to introduce a alliance legendary level maximum, meaning the total legendary levels could not exceed say 10,000 so whilst  players could still play there own games it would spread the strength of alliances much more widely and prevent domination of the server by just 3 or 4 alliances
    But what happens if a player levels up and exceeds the alliance limit? Meaning he would have to leave his alliance because of this, not really fair tbh 

    Not active ingame anymore  [email protected] (back again) 

    [email protected] 

    Non-ruby buyer 

    [email protected] ResilientEmpire 

    Pop me a PM ingame or on forums if you want to join :) 


    My loot, first week back: 

  • RD5 (RO1)RD5 (RO1) RO1 Posts: 85

    - Reward defending much more.


  • RD5 (RO1)RD5 (RO1) RO1 Posts: 85

    5) Give the defender some incentive to defend, for most players there really is none.  They see a big attack coming in and its a simple decision either OG or fire cast.  Maybe come up with another league table / glory rank, specifically for defending.  Just like attacking you would have to give carefull thought to stop this being abused.  Make it so if if the defender loses, If they defend well they still get good points.

    6)  Make recruitment / replacement of DEFENSIVE troops MUCH quicker and easier, even if its just in Alliance tourneys or specific Pvp Events.  If you make it so a few thousand defense can be replaced pretty quickly and easily not take someone 2 weeks to rebuild, then you are much more likley to see them defend more often.

    7) make some sort of penalty for tool cleaning, either in the defenders rankings, and also do not penilise the attacker, ie do not strip all glory tools / banners.  and make sure ALL tools come back to the player in these sitautions.  For example if the attack is 100x (example figure) more powerfull than the defense, then the attacker will get all his tools back regardless of type.  And the defender will lose ranking points on his / hers. Defense Rank list.

    8)  put bounties on players that have higher levels of glory / honour.  To incentivise stronger players being attacked.

    If you did all these things it would reduce the effectivness of hitting shells.  Would get rid of the scenario we have now in that a player sees 6 waves coming in at them and KNOWS they are going to lose the fight, Knows that are going to lose 6,000 defenders, and get fires,  and it will take them 2 weeks to recruit the defense back and will cost them a load of time and coin to do so.  If the player knew they could get their def back pretty quickly and cheaply AND they were going to get something for defending, then it may well change the mindset of do i defend or do i OG.


    defend its the part ignored on gge. that and recovery time destroy pvp.
    OG mut not be at all, thats very strange and unreal, other games doesnt have it. lets the players to decide, talk and negociate to stop an attack. if not possible then let an option to surrender with no damage for a resource fee percent (1-20%) until a revolt happen. 
    make the off line defend worthy, at least to survive 12-16 hours, somehow like that.
    other thing is the assistance, ppls that send it lose troops even the commanders may be better than attacker commander one, that doesnt matter right now, only defender castelan bonuses are applied, i have played before things like that and any reinforced troops took the bonuses from the best hero, defender one or reinforcing one. this is more real. think that a good commander may give better strategy to all troops than the castelan. it happened in the history of wars.
    about shells i cant tell nothing else than that if they send all sametime attacks then all lands despite the cooldown time, and thats a big bug that its allowed bcoz that stupid coordinated attacks, so better remove cool down as it is not realy one, just a SF fantasy.  bad design again, things borrowed from other games and not balanced in ages ... only big players and big alliances fixed rules instead of gge to have all of us a nice experience at least a bit.
    SORRY FOR CAPS, PROGRAMMERS MUST PLAY THE GAME ! play like us all to see what it is wrong and what can be fixed. the company rules it is bad, isnt the only company that do that, all i know is that who used that rule did disappearing of a game.

    i have quoted the part what i approved from my point of view, Philt123 (GB1), about the rest i dont say nothing.

  • edited 12.11.2016

    there is nothing that can be done to please everyone. there are rules within the game, set by the players (uk server) if you get attacked by stronger players then tough, providing they are within the level perimeter.

    Everybody has the same opportunities to get the rewards for their levels, and there cannot be any jealousy if you miss out. yeah some people buy ruby's but they  cannot be criticised for doing so, they have earned the right to buy them by going to work, this is a business for GGE so ruby's will never not be a part of the game, so you either use ruby's or you don't, you either play a war game or you don't.

    PVP will become a main focus when alliance tourni starts again, and maybe should run once every 2 weeks, or once a month.

                                                      

                                      Mankind must put an end to war before war puts an end to mankind.

                                                           Image result for war


     

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file