I would like to propose that there be some more detailed statistics for Guild Wars, and/or some achievements as well. For example, perhaps KANO might track guild war slap kills and/or battle kills, as both individual and guild statistics? KANO might also consider introducing some achievements that are based on wps. 10,000 ...50,000....100,000 for individuals. Why is a loss worth three points but a win just 4 points? I think these numbers should be changed to 2 and 5. Also, 10 points for a listing seems too much. Perhaps 8 and 9 for the kill. Seems to me its more of a challenge to win the bounty than it is to place it.
So far this is very disappointing. People seem to think this is just going to happen. I have spoken with lots of people who support this idea. Where are the whiners who said that they wanted guild wars but in order to get involved there needed to be more stats and guild vs guild stats in particular? This will be the last time I post in this forum. Clearly it doesnt work.
Drum up some support in your Guild, for what it's worth you have the devs attention but we want to hear some more opinions!
I like the idea for the most part. i def dont think a loss should be worth almost as much as a win, especially when the highest of levels r already very limited with who they can bounty for points. like the idea of achieves and leader board stats The points for listing is a toughy though...i get your point but the lister is the one putting up the bucks. i still give it a 10 as to increase the overall rating in hopes this thread will be around long enough to get more feedback. But i reserve the right to change it based on the feedback
None of these suggestions are written in stone. They were introduced for the sake of argument. I do think that there needs to be a stronger effort to make wars more inclusive at the moment. There needs to be more incentive and I do believe allowing for some form of guild versus guild stats collecting my drive up enrollment particularly since one of the big criticisms a few weeks back was that this was not happening (CCC seemed to take issue with this). I also think achievements for personal accomplishments would be useful. Changing the point structure is more problematic...but we can work on it.
I like Blackdeth's idea's..But also think that for listing it should stay at 10 as previously stated they are putting up the money for the kill. Also it is a bit strange that losing and winning is so close doesn't really give any incentive for lower levels to level quicker if they can nearly match the wining player I would personally tho keep losing at 3 but up winning to 5.... Just my 2 cents.
Overall, I agree with those ideas. I like the 10 points for a bounty because it's an incentive to bounty more, and more bounties are more fun. I think slap kills should be worth a little more than a battle win. Maybe 9-10 points for those as well. More stats, achievements, and more of a W-L point spread should also be implemented. Finally, I would like to see prizes for guilds that finish in the top 25, 10, 5, and 3rd, 2nd, and 1st. Not just trophy pictures, but xp, cash, etc. (and enough to actually be an incentive). That way CCC, RVV, and others will hopefully join/rejoin.
Okay Devs, Over 140 views and we have a rating of nearly 80% in support of making some changes to Guild Wars. Michael and Unstoppable Force have both made helpful suggestions re the points system that I agree with. Can you now start to propose some ideas for achievements, wp changes, and more detailed statistics? I cannot see this being an issue for KANO since wars is a large part of the game now and there is clearly a mandate for more intricacy in this field. Thanks KANO.
With respect to changes. As leader of one of the more prominent guilds, I would like to see a better reward for the war mode effort than the trophy and the XP reward for the achievement in placings. Example: any guild participating in warmode, gets 10FP's for each member for the full week. Winners get the XP rewards plus also FP's. Bragging rights only go so far as there is "work" involved too and XP losses are also occurring for lower levels, to do it well. First place winners currently get only 1/2 a level of XP each, from the "League." People with a finish are getting an XP bonus but really, its not much finishing 10th or lower. Some low level players are on the 144th listing )))) that is at least 1/2 level down in XP so why would they play much or if at all continue to play????? If they got an FP reward, at least they could get chiefs out of the week, on top of what they are ordinarily doing, if they can advance at all during the week. With regard to individual rewards, they go as a pat on the back at present. We within guild know this person does extremely well, but do they want to be known outside of guild? Not sure. But that point earner I think should have an incentive to do what they do or compete to do what they do: XP/FP reward, top 3 "within guild" point earners. This would encourage lower level guilds to participate in the "new" VC regardless of level of guild members. So ... reward structure is weak. Originally, it was proffered as a combination of XP, FP's and gold. XP only helps only a few and its marginal at best to the vast majority. With respect to the present point structure, as a level 11,000+, I can list anyone over approx Level 3680, for 10 points once a day. This is the handicap that Polish speaks of. I think there are approx 5-7 characters in that category who are listable. My points then come from catching listings, slaps, slap kills, and the wins I am allowed (edge to me/Polish types high levels: but that is 20 v. 15 points for them, a gap of 5 inate as a "gift"). High level circumstances: 24 points versus most. 34 points versus very few. Majority: 34 points versus most. 19 points versus few. 29 points rare. My max potential points versus say a level 4000 is much lower as 10 points for a listing is "richly" rewarded and few higher levels exist to "lose" to. So you have the person with the highest capability, handcuffed in effect for good or bad. So to me, yes point structure favours the middle of the pack. I don't have a solution other than participating to note there is a problem here. With respect to competitive aspects, I have seen guilds in alliance, list each other repetitively, which to me, is just wrong. Alliance guilds in war mode should be hands off to make the alliances work or what is the purpose of an alliance? If some there are going to volunteer to heal and be beat on and be listed for the good of the broader team, and then in the following week be rotated into the main guild, this competitive aspect needs fixing. At present there are no rules so its fair to do, and if someone is going to volunteer to be a bowling pin for others, I guess there is nothing "you" at Kano can do about this. To me, its wrong. Along the competitive aspects, if a guild opts in for warmode, they are in for the week. And face the consequences. Or withdraw and not be able to go back in. This obvious flaw should have been fixed already but I doubt it has. Again in guild families, it is possible for entry into warmode, and withdrawal, and entry and withdrawal, for the main guild to score points at its convenience. Or a wildcat guild to do so as well. This feature should be fixed. End of story. Guild v. Guild scoring is an excellent idea: we have a guild that won't accept enemy status (a few of them) yet in warmode, they play. It would be nice to see how we score versus them and vice versa where albeit the scoring is stacked against us, our harder effort may pay off. I don't know how it would be implemented, but then again, you once said to us, the hows are not important that the magic of the engineers could do the job
C'mon KANO. We do not need more bosses. We need improvements on guid wars. Peeps is dropping out. DO something. Anything.
Accepted! PS- blackdeth, we work on all aspects of the game, including guild wars. Things take time sir! patience
