Redundancy of gold for attacks

[lem0nhead]

Leander

For most players gold is incredibly easy to come by and all guilds of any decent size tend to have a full 10 million bank.

Why therefore does it cost a max of 25,000 to attack a top guild? One quest for one player can net you 5, 10 or 50x that amount!

Could we not have the price to attack a guild structured so that it actually meant something instead of a trivial nonsense amount which demeans the whole process of having to pay to attack a guild depending on how big it is....

Thanks

[Leander]

This would basically mean you suggest that people will have less gold because guild attacks should be more expensive. I don't think people will like such an idea.

More gold means you can level up faster by raising your attributes. The Tower adds additional gold, too...to make things faster. If guild attacks were more expensive it would be the opposite to the Tower's gold bonus and its purpose.

[lem0nhead]

Valid points certainly, so let me put it another way.

Why bother costing an attack at all? Theyre absolutely irrelevant amounts so why not just cut it if you dont make it worthwhile.

Its a joke that a lvl 50 guild is only 25k to attack...

[GeorgeKen]

It's rather simple actually. It's low cost enough to NOT prevent guilds from attacking each other (and thus making the servers less active), but expensive enough for low level guilds to make it a challenge

[lem0nhead]

It's rather simple actually. It's low cost enough to NOT prevent guilds from attacking each other (and thus making the servers less active), but expensive enough for low level guilds to make it a challenge

Guilds will attack each other no matter the guild cost George. Dungeons are very rare for a guild to be able to be strong enough to do the next one so attacks are the ONLY thing that makes a guild worth participating in besides getting bonuses with no required effort or input.

And when you say lower guilds? You mean anything below about rank 50? Well id say 95% of the active players are in the top 50 guilds so thats a waste of time targeting a minority group!

Its still a stupid imbalanced cost. The only guilds with 50 members are the top ranked ones anyway which a low guild couldnt beat anyway so no point attacking, so the fact 25,000 is a lot to small guilds is irrelevant. Plus you have the 3000 rule.

I dont see a counter argument for the waste of paltry cash the feature adds.