GvG ranking system/battle selection

Yes, my original post did say +/-5, and yes I agree that is maybe to small a margin but I was actually only trying to make a point about a system that could work. There is absolutely no way truly top 5 guilds will float down the order as you suggest. Think about it, surely it would then have happened by now. Making the margin to large though will just discourage some players/guilds. We are a top 10 guild currently, but let me tell you, the guild 5 positions above us are way more powerful than us!

I understand your point.

With 5 battles a day, two guilds per battle, you almost have to have it be +/- 10 margin at minimum just so each battle is against a different guild. If we remain in the single ranking we normally see.

Now if they broke it up Into leagues as is done during the GvG campaigns then they may need to still do a minimum of +/- 10 minimum, but if a guild holds a top spot in a league for 1~2 days straight they could be moved to a higher league.

The issue then is how to give lower power/level guilds a fighting chance at getting into the top 5, who would still be able to dominate and hold those spots because there is no higher level for them to go.

I'm pretty sure the systems currently working great now no? +\- 20 is pretty much where it's at

Is that based on campaign leagues or pre-campaign match ups Bubb?

Before the campaign started back up I saw a few imbalanced match ups.

I have a imbalance example form battle 5 of the first day of the campaign.

My guild, which is in the platinum league, was faced off against a guild that has no 100+ level players in it. My guild has enough 100+ players to fill the front line and have a few in rear guard (depending on how we equip ourselves). Their overall power is a fraction of ours, and that of many others in the platinum league. Based on their stats they seem more fitting to be in the gold or silver leagues. Even taking it easy (conserving and using ap efficiently) we had them desynced in just a couple min, and was a very low scoring battle.

I understand there will sometimes be stronger/weaker opponents. Just as sometimes you'll face a guild who is mostly on-line and others when they are mostly off-line. It happens. But even taking that into consideration the matching occasionally produces a drastic mismatch.

Before this event matchup sweet perfect, during the event we have had completely random matchups. We haven't lost yet and we're still fighting teams with like 6 losses pretty often

We've had to fight the top ranked guild in our division twice in one day.

They have miltiple level 180+, with a couple level 200's. We have one above level 150. Not easy for us to recover from 490k single hit slaughters.

So we faced forsaken 3x in 4/5 battles.... If it's gonna be a league- u shud face everyone at least 1 before going back on old battle targets again and again

I agree Assassino. In the last campaign I believe we fought Lib3eration twice in one day, with only one other battle between the two match ups. And then again a 3rd time early the next day. That's too frequent for any system.

Maybe instead of basing match ups on BP and win/loss ratios the system should factor in total guild power and average member ranking (all members ranks added then divided by number of guild members).

Yesterday, 10/13/14, over a span of 6 battles my guild faced the same opponent 3 times.

After discussing this with other guild members I found out that other guild had similar situations where they face a single opponent multiple times a day, in one case in back to back battles.

With over 8000 guilds ranked, that frequent of match up shouldn't happen.

This new system has been in place now for a while so it should be getting better, but it doesn't appear to be.

Here's an idea to toss around for the ranking issues. And it might not be ideal, but you guys might have your own ideas to tweak it and add to or take from it. What are your thoughts on say a weekly reset on rankings? Or a different time period, maybe every two weeks. At that time, all guilds rankings are reset and a new climb to the top ten starts. Have a page in the rankings menu for all time rankings, monthly, weekly, etc and just the monthly and weekly would reset. All time would keep a running rank so technically destiny and the big guys keep their tops spots, but other guilds have chances to be up top, even briefly. And this could be put onto the league system mentioned. Might not be fair for the first couple days after each reset unless you could have a way to prevent the all time top 10 from fighting the small guilds. Maybe base matchups off of total guild power. Just a thought to run by everyone and maybe get some feedback on the ideas everyone is putting out from obspho as well.

I've suggested using total guild power and average guild member level as ways to match up battle competitors.

The leagues/division used in campaigns should also be permanent, but with one difference: as guilds in lower leagues/divisions get better they need a way to be promoted to the next higher league/division. Maybe every week the top 10 winners of a lower league/division get moved up as the bottom 10 losers of the higher league/division get moved down.

A short term win/loss reset is what we see when they start a new campaign cycle. They can still do that as part of the campaign to have a battle between division winners, and award medals for those who win/place in the campaign cycle.

I like that part about the weekly shifting of the top ten/ bottom 10. That would make things pretty competitive the last day or two of the week with everybody trying to bust their tails for a spot.

So it's still the same situation as it was before, facing one opponent multiple times. We mostly appear to be facing only higher ranked teams, once in a whole getting a lower ranked team- there doesn't appear to be an evenness to this. Facing higher ranked teams is great, in proportion, after facing them so often the chances and optimism of winning against an opponent you have seen to outclass you before become rather dull and uninspiring. Battle variety is needed

Facing the same guild multiple times is fine, over more than a day or two. If it's multiple times the same day that when it becomes problematic.

If you have a big enough pool of potential competitors and logic in the selection process that limits frequent repetitive match ups.

They said it'll work itself out, so it's the aul 'wait and see what happens'

And that as how long ago?

I think it's beginning to work a bit. I've noticed a little change in opponents the last day or two and they are closer to an even matchup than it has been before. Maybe it'll be noticeable for you guys soon. Might take a little longer with your guilds being larger.

I'm not convinced it is working better Blade.

My guild (Ghosts) just faced an all but dead guild with just one inactive player in the second round of the campaign. It took 3 attacks, 2 snipes and a death mark, to desync him. That gave us a whopping 18k BP for that battle.

This weak dead guild is in the platinum league, division B!?!?!?

Due to ranking being based on wins, then BP, my guild dropped from 3rd after B1 to 6th after B2.

It's real frustrating to work hard to build a contending team and get a majority of them on in mid-day or mid-night (depending on their time zone) only to be faced with such a ridiculously imbalanced matchup.

Then when the ranking drops despite a win......it made a few guild mates question why they bother.

And then I go look at the rest of the divisions win/loss & BP. We have at least 22 such dead guilds, and possibly more partly active guilds who aren't very active or just don't bother when faced with a stronger guild.

Because of the random draw my guild could end up facing many more guilds like this in the next few days....making any chance at being a top 5 or even 10 contender impossible even if we have a perfect win streak.

When rewards are based on placing then anything that handicaps an active guilds potential placement is detrimental to player moral. When player moral is gone, so are they.

Yeah I've been back to facing mostly either guilds that have no chance against me, or guilds I have no chance against if more than one gets online for the battle. I don't know what to say on this one anymore haha.

The Cohort found a second dead/inactive solo player guild in our division during B3.

I have no problem with these solo guilds, but they should be in a league/division where they are matched up with each other or even multi-player guilds who's power is comparable to them.

Hey don't be slamming the solo's I do pretty well most of the time lol. But yeah I see what you're saying. Sucks for you guys because they're dead before anyone gets a chance at any bp and drops the rewards payout for everyone.

I actually see how a solo guild could work, under the right conditions. I'd even love to see a solo PvP battle system along side the GvG system, then let players opt wich system they wish to participate in.

I'm not intending to knock them, just saying they don't belong in the top leagues unles their individual power is so high that they are competative (and only a few players could come close to this level of power today).

By dead I mean they aren't even trying. Making no attacks/earning no BP suggests they are essentially a dead guild (solo or 20 strong).

I see what you're saying. I'm in gold division b group 1 I think and I'm the second strongest individual player in the division. Right ahead of me is another solo player Tom whose guild is Toms Fight. And he outclasses me easily. His power is about 1.3-1.5 mil, not sure, while mine is 900k. And in an actual fight where both sides get online and join the gvg, there doesn't appear to be another guild in our division that could take us and he's the only one that could beat me, out of the guilds I've faced and seen in rankings. The only chance from guilds I've seen is if they get a lot of their people on and make some big combos and Tom might still win. They might could get me. Solos are good if used correctly and have plenty of ranged defense, but we still wouldn't be much of a match for a top guild with lots of active members. Power can be beaten through sheer numbers. But sometimes the no attack thing is simply to save ap for the next battle. If I get on late and am against a guild that has desynced me and has 20k bp already, I'm not wasting my ap. I'll hit the next battle hard instead. But the ones that are truly dead are a problem.

Maybe solo guilds should get their own league with two divisions. It would add a whole different aspect to the game with minimal changes to the existing game.

In the platinum leagues we had a lot of solo or inactive guilds this last campaign.

Can we get a dev to tell us what parameters determine which league/division a guild gets put in?