World boss totally unfair for lower level players!

[Howie1]

Hi there Firstly apologies! I meant to say Guild War NOT world boss!! I will wake up soon If all your servers are similar to mine when the new patch comes out with 8 guilds participating in the GW, there will be probably 3/4 high strength guilds and the rest "ghost guilds" under ten players!...

Most guilds select their top BR players. As a result lower level players under level 50 lose out badly. They often don't even get a chance to participate in the guild war as there is a maximum of 50 players. This is unfair. My own guild of which I am leader has max number of mostly active players. I can understand the GW limitation of numbers re problems with lag, etc, and why numbers can't be increased to say 100 people. However I would like to make this suggestion...

The new GW will be over three days. I would suggest in addition to the three days, that R2 introduce another three days GW for under level 50's! There would have to be some sort of programmed mechanism to prevent players participating in more then three GW's in a week.

I feel that if my suggestion was implemented, it would benefit all. How does everyone else feel about this? - Howie

[kattuktk]

Actually if your guild is facing a very weak guild then u can give a chance to the low level players to participate.

[CreamySaucepan]

Hi there Firstly apologies! I meant to say Guild War NOT world boss!! I will wake up soon

Good morning! :P

If all your servers are similar to mine when the new patch comes out with 8 guilds participating in the GW, there will be probably 3/4 high strength guilds and the rest "ghost guilds" under ten players!...

Most guilds select their top BR players. As a result lower level players under level 50 lose out badly. They often don't even get a chance to participate in the guild war as there is a maximum of 50 players. This is unfair. My own guild of which I am leader has max number of mostly active players. I can understand the GW limitation of numbers re problems with lag, etc, and why numbers can't be increased to say 100 people. However I would like to make this suggestion...

The new GW will be over three days. I would suggest in addition to the three days, that R2 introduce another three days GW for under level 50's! There would have to be some sort of programmed mechanism to prevent players participating in more then three GW's in a week.

I feel that if my suggestion was implemented, it would benefit all. How does everyone else feel about this? - Howie

For my server the new GB setup will be an improvement. Only 7 guilds are active in the GB's anyways, the rest of the 16 never show up. 6 of the 8 guilds that won't join anymore even have a total guild BR that could belong to just one person. They're pretty dead anyways.

[Howie1]

Actually if your guild is facing a very weak guild then u can give a chance to the low level players to participate.

My guild has over 200 players - With only 3 GW's it would be impossible to please the majority, even if some higher levels offer to step down as they do...

The thing is not only would an additional 3 GWS be better in that almost all low levels can participate 3 times a week, but they would end up fighting roughly their own levels and not L70's+ so it would be fun for them. We had one server merge already but there are still only four guilds that are truly active and all others usually have 10 taking part or a lot less! The whole point is to keep interest going for all levels...

[CreamySaucepan]

My guild has over 200 players - With only 3 GW's it would be impossible to please the majority, even if some higher levels offer to step down as they do...

The thing is not only would an additional 3 GWS be better in that almost all low levels can participate 3 times a week, but they would end up fighting roughly their own levels and not L70's+ so it would be fun for them. We had one server merge already but there are still only four guilds that are truly active and all others usually have 10 taking part or a lot less! The whole point is to keep interest going for all levels...

Idk, that kind of defeats the purpose of a Guild Battle, for me. Its GvG, not Player of a Guild vs Player of a Guild. So if one guild sends in 50 level 60+ and the other guild 50 level 20s, so be it. Is that boring: sure. Is it predictable: sure. Is it fun for the second guild to be torn a new one? Absolutely not. But it *is* a *Guild Battle*.

[kattuktk]

My guild has over 200 players - With only 3 GW's it would be impossible to please the majority, even if some higher levels offer to step down as they do...

The thing is not only would an additional 3 GWS be better in that almost all low levels can participate 3 times a week, but they would end up fighting roughly their own levels and not L70's+ so it would be fun for them. We had one server merge already but there are still only four guilds that are truly active and all others usually have 10 taking part or a lot less! The whole point is to keep interest going for all levels...

Dont tell me that *all* of the 200 players that u have are active, just look at the offline time and ull get to know who takes this game seriously enough, hell alot of people would be offline during the gb itself so that narrows down the possibility by a great deal, add people who are close to getting to the next rank or people who are not crusaders yet(and who dont stay offline for the majority of the day, it shows that they are not so serious), identify the people who *really* wanna grow and add them, managing a guild aint as easy..