Another Suggestion to Improve Guild War's - Get Rid of PVP

@Fluxxx @zbot @Vane 

I am no expert but I've played the game for a number of years now so bear with me if I say something wrong

My suggestion is to do with the basic gameplay format.

I think there's an awful lot of us enjoy GW's but ignoring the bugs it can become a bit of a grind and can take all day dependant on where guilds and guild members come from.

My big beef is PVP's.

I do understand it is an attempt to give some kind of feel that you are head to head with the other guild but in reality they are just a win for the attacking team 99% of the time. Also the defending team cannot use the full potential or have any control of their picked teams so it is no real test of one guild against the other. The only guild against guild is the final result.

As well as that the weaker element of the guild, (and that weaker element contains many players who score well in excess of 2.5k in the challenge),  get stuck doing the PVP's and greatly reducing their fun and ability to score and gather better rewards or gain experience by playing the main missions of GW's. As an example only, my best GW score is 660 but my average is under 400 and normally 360 because generally I'm on PVP duty.
My proposal is to get rid of PVP's in their entirety and finish each sector by completing another ordinary mission. That way every team member gets to play missions up to their ability, has a chance every time to push themselves if they wish, and shorten each team members need to be around all day waiting to finish off a sector for a measly 20 points.
To be honest when our plan comes out and I see 18 PVP's next to my name I wish I hadn't bothered. I cannot not play GW's as I would have to leave our guild as participating is a must, although on occasions I've thought seriously about it.
There is no doubt that the best organised, strongest teams using the ultimate plan will always win but at least it will make the game more enjoyable for everyone who takes part in GW's.

Ditching PVP will still leave GW's one guild against the other as it is now but far more pleasurable for 100% of the team.
GameonSarge_FuriousMoldovanSnewfDiggitykade_fallstarambiencestang95

Comments

  • GameonGameon Member Posts: 39
    I fully agree. All it does is to divide the team into a them and us situation. To have a fair and much more of a fun guild wars, please ditch the pvp part as it serves no purpose 
  • ATLAS-ZATLAS-Z Member Posts: 5,084
    On one hand, I agree.

    On the other hand, if you're not doing pvp... And your STILL not scoring as high as you're other teammates...? Then why would they keep you? 

    Lots of guilds survive on the fact that lower ability players can still contribute by closing PVP. If these lower players are no longer needed for PVP that is now gone, then they become instantly a drag on the rest of the team.

    So on teams where everyone's pretty equal in strength PVP really sucks, but on all the other teams getting rid of them would suck much worse.

    I personally find PVP very annoying and a pretty big waste on most of my Guild's but I also understand how much the dynamic would shift even further toward the upper guilds if we got rid of them


    #Zombrex (Neo / Rising / (OG) / Genesis / Prime / Elite) 

    Are you Lost? Alone? Looking for a killer team to have your back?
    Join ZOMBREX! We have a tiered guild structure so players of every level and ambition can find a home they fit in.
    Remember, search ZOMBREX SATISFIES. 
    Our page :
    https://m.facebook.com/Zombrex2015/

    LegintheLegendhunter_xShadowWalkerkade_fallstarZaTTeRiZeD
  • BurmeliinisBurmeliinis Member Posts: 936
    Yeah but what if the pvp:s would be replaced by regular missions but with a lower difficulty? So let’s say on a lvl 43-45 island the ex-pvp mission would be lvl 38? Then these ex-pvp players could participate in high lvl sectors but get more interesting missions. 

    Maybe leave one pvp per sector (instead of four) so you still could see a bit of what kind of defenders your opponent has. A lot of Carl, obviously 🙄 
    Ingame username: Jubjab
    LegintheLegendambience
  • LegintheLegendLegintheLegend Member Posts: 4
    Lots of guilds survive on the fact that lower ability players can still contribute by closing PVP. If these lower players are no longer needed for PVP that is now gone, then they become instantly a drag on the rest of the team.

    I understand what you're saying Atlas but if those lower players could do the full range of missions at a lower level but with higher rewards than PVP they would gain experience of how to play them and not necessarily be expendable :-) 
    Sarge_kade_fallstar
  • LegintheLegendLegintheLegend Member Posts: 4
    Also not all guilds can afford to boot players as getting replacements ain't so easy ;-) 
  • LegintheLegendLegintheLegend Member Posts: 4
    Yeah but what if the pvp:s would be replaced by regular missions but with a lower difficulty? So let’s say on a lvl 43-45 island the ex-pvp mission would be lvl 38? Then these ex-pvp players could participate in high lvl sectors but get more interesting missions. 

    Maybe leave one pvp per sector (instead of four) so you still could see a bit of what kind of defenders your opponent has. A lot of Carl, obviously 🙄 
    Burmeliinis you may very well have explained it better thanks 😁👍
  • hunter_xhunter_x Member Posts: 378
    ATLAS-Z said:
    On one hand, I agree.

    On the other hand, if you're not doing pvp... And your STILL not scoring as high as you're other teammates...? Then why would they keep you? 

    Lots of guilds survive on the fact that lower ability players can still contribute by closing PVP. If these lower players are no longer needed for PVP that is now gone, then they become instantly a drag on the rest of the team.

    So on teams where everyone's pretty equal in strength PVP really sucks, but on all the other teams getting rid of them would suck much worse.

    I personally find PVP very annoying and a pretty big waste on most of my Guild's but I also understand how much the dynamic would shift even further toward the upper guilds if we got rid of them

    spot on
    Low level player can contribute too in GW
    to be honest having one low level player in GW is better than having high ranks player
    It'll make tactical change a bit easier
    LegintheLegend
  • akanailakanail Member Posts: 23
    Honestly, the problem is your guild more than anything else 
    We always leave certain missions for our members who are handling the pvp missions and give them a chance to do more, even if we risk losing 
    ShadowWalker
  • ClydezdaleClydezdale Member Posts: 21
    Lots of guilds survive on the fact that lower ability players can still contribute by closing PVP. If these lower players are no longer needed for PVP that is now gone, then they become instantly a drag on the rest of the team.

    I understand what you're saying Atlas but if those lower players could do the full range of missions at a lower level but with higher rewards than PVP they would gain experience of how to play them and not necessarily be expendable :-) 
    They can get that some-what experience in the Outpost. At least that’s what I did when I was new & green behind the ears.
    ATLAS-Z
  • ClydezdaleClydezdale Member Posts: 21
    edited March 30
    I think the problem is the reward points structure. Why not up the pvp points as sector levels increased to match those other battles within the sector? 

    As a Leader, I don’t like the fact of having a few players raking in points while the cleaners (lower level players) always end up with a 360 score for helping them. The unfairness is the higher level player is raking in more points & will be able to purchase a whole lot more in the guild shop compared to their teammate that helped him get that high score.

     I can see how some would be discouraged & often don’t feel valued because the one that gets the glory & guild shop sweepstakes is the higher lvl player.. all the time.
    So, how can I compensate those members clearing pvp? I can’t. 
    This is why I say the problem is the points structure. It needs to change. Heck put a bonus in there if you kill a tank or two in pvp before that battle ends you get extra reward point..

    If the guild idea came about to get members to collaborate & work together as a team then pvp battle needs to change the reward because the pvp cleaners aren’t  compensated equally as his counterpart.
    What say you @Fluxxx @zbot @Vane ?
    ShadowWalkerSnewfDiggityambienceZaTTeRiZeD
  • n00bn00b Member Posts: 55
    edited April 2
    Individual VPs don't matter, the most important thing is to win as a team. Somehow you didn't mention that PVPs require less resources, basically no tools and small amount gold, thus players killing humans don't need to buy tools from GW shop. However, an increase of RP per PVP mission is good idea, since newbie players can get more components/hero tokens and improve their accounts.
    Removing PVPs completely will affect many guilds in a negative way and will increase the gap between top tier guilds. For example, we have few developing players in our guild that are low level, they can do human missions, but can take +5-+6 PVZ maps at max while the rest of guild is doing minimum +12.
    Karajocakade_fallstar
  • ClydezdaleClydezdale Member Posts: 21
    n00b said:
    Individual VPs don't matter, the most important thing is to win as a team. Somehow you didn't mention that PVPs require less resources, basically no tools and small amount gold, thus players killing humans don't need to buy tools from GW shop. However, an increase of RP per PVP mission is good idea, since newbie players can get more components/hero tokens and improve their accounts.
    Removing PVPs completely will affect many guilds in a negative way and will increase the gap between top tier guilds. For example, we have few developing players in our guild that are low level, they can do human missions, but can take +5-+6 PVZ maps at max while the rest of guild is doing minimum +12.
    I’m telling y’all, it’s the RP’s! Increase them and watch how it’ll boost morale! 
    ZaTTeRiZeD
  • kade_fallstarkade_fallstar Member Posts: 10
    edited May 16
    I personally dislike PvP's for much of the same reasons listed. As to low levels, there are areas already within thier range that allows them beneficial contribution. The bonus areas and other low level battlezones are at about the same difficulty as many of  the PvP areas. This is where I fought as a low level and I never needed special tools, just a little time in the forums and some time speaking with guild mates learning how to build up my characters and put effective teams together.
  • ambienceambience Member Posts: 114
    I also think the PvP element leads to unfairness in scores within a team, and high scoring guildmates seeing the PvP battles as a waste of gas.
    I think there's a need for a third map in each set which can be tackled by lower level players, but it should also give them potential to score on par with their guildmates.
    I suggest two changes:
    * Allow maps to be completed in any order (so low level players don't need to wait for other maps to be completed first)
    * Have a map where the score is determined by how long the player lasts, with a cap equal to the score of the other maps in the set. The death of a survivor, or clicking "flee" determines score.
Sign In or Register to comment.