Waspy Tiger :
What concerns me most about this proposal is that it hurts the smaller guys most - both in reducing the chances of lower-level guilds to earn recruiter points, but also within guilds, reduces the chances of smaller teams playing and earning cash or training points.
In common with many guilds, we try to ensure that we give the smaller teams a chance to play so that they can grow faster - if they lose the odd game, it doesn't matter. Under this proposal, we would probably play the best team every time, and even within that team, make the best players play 2 games each and the weaker ones none. Thus the gap between top and bottom players widens, and the game becomes less competitive overall - fine for those at the very top, no good for anyone else.
As Taff says, it's beneficial to both sides to play as many games as possible - not just for cash, but also for training points from home games. Put this sort of rule in, and weaker teams will be encouraged not to play. Seems to me that's far worse than some teams deliberately losing - and for the record, I've never deliberately thrown a Guild Challenge game, although I have thrown some training games so as to have more matches and earn more training points.
What concerns me most about this proposal is that it hurts the smaller guys most - both in reducing the chances of lower-level guilds to earn recruiter points, but also within guilds, reduces the chances of smaller teams playing and earning cash or training points.
In common with many guilds, we try to ensure that we give the smaller teams a chance to play so that they can grow faster - if they lose the odd game, it doesn't matter. Under this proposal, we would probably play the best team every time, and even within that team, make the best players play 2 games each and the weaker ones none. Thus the gap between top and bottom players widens, and the game becomes less competitive overall - fine for those at the very top, no good for anyone else.
As Taff says, it's beneficial to both sides to play as many games as possible - not just for cash, but also for training points from home games. Put this sort of rule in, and weaker teams will be encouraged not to play. Seems to me that's far worse than some teams deliberately losing - and for the record, I've never deliberately thrown a Guild Challenge game, although I have thrown some training games so as to have more matches and earn more training points.
I agree 100% with this argument. It's the weaker teams that need the recruiter points most. The way to the gvg works at the moment helps the weaker to at least get something for their efforts. And let's be brutally honest, does a few hundred recruiter points really make a difference? Looking at the prices some players go for nowadays in the Auction house I think the rewards from either winning a drawing a guild challenge does not go far enough.
Maybe revise the rewards available?
Another suggestion is gold ball rewards for the teams that were undefeated in a guild challenge? Or similarly a gold ball if a weaker team beats a stronger team in a guild challenge (rating or level)? Just mix it up a little. Apart from the reduction in MB the guild challenge has remained unchanged and players are getting bored in my opinion.
Thanks!