The relatively recent addition of minimum banners to Territory Wars has been less than stellar for my schedule. I usually play in the morning when there is between 4-6 hours left before the next phase. On defense, this almost always means all of the defensive spots are already filled. Come the offensive phase, I've missed out on rewards entirely for a few different reasons. Either I'm left with an assortment of teams that have remained unbeatable up to this point, and as a mid level player without GLs I hit a brick wall as well, or my guild has already completely wiped out the opponent.At this point, I've probably missed out on 4 or so sets of rewards and I've seen plenty of other ends the TW with under 50 banners. I brought it up in chat and most people weren't even aware of this change.I don't really grasp how putting literally any two teams on defense, regardless of whether they're actually appropriate teams to use on defense, is worthy of participation rewards compared to throwing your entire roster on offense at the enemy team without taking much ground being rewarded with nothing.It's pretty annoying when you can even be the one to come in and win the TW for your guild and still not get rewards because your third win was pretty messy so you only got 47 banners.This seems like it's more just going to deincentivize participation on offense. Like oh I don't see myself managing 50 banners. Guess I'll just not do anything even though I definitely have a counter to those couple teams there. And yeah, the guild could coordinate more, but plenty of guilds are fairly casual and don't want to have to do that. It seems like this is a some sort of arbitrary protection against people leeching off of guilds, but for a casual guild like my own, we don't really care about that sort of thing. I'd rather our members that have no chance of contributing on offense get the rewards so they can start catching up.

The minimum is not in any way a relatively recent addition.

"TVF;c-2388504" wrote:"StarSon;c-2388502" wrote:"TVF;c-2388500" wrote:The minimum is not in any way a relatively recent addition.It is, though. And pretty sure it was an unannounced addition. Prior to the banner minimum, you merely had to set a defense, or attempt (not even win) an attack.Of course, not CG's fault this player can't even set a couple defenses to hit 50 banners. 50 banners seems like an appropriate minimum, though to keep it in line with how it used to be maybe 10 would have been better.I haven't checked further back but is almost a year considered relatively recent to not know something?https://forums.galaxy-of-heroes.starwars.ea.com/discussion/252262/50-banner-minimumOh it's been a year? Much longer than I thought.But also, it's happened to dude like 4 times. You'd think he'd learn after the first or second time.

It feels a recent addition to me too. If you're getting zero banners in TW again and again, you're simply not contributing. Your GP is added to the match and by not doing anything you're actually helping the other team. Why should you get rewards for that?If defences are being filled up extremely quickly, maybe the defences could be tougher? Or (and this is a lot of work for the officers, particular zones need particular teams that are associated with particular players). 'Khelor has a good defensive GAS team that needs to be in south row 2 etc etc'The bottom line is, I'm happy with the (recent/not recent) change. Reward leeching sucks.

"DarjeloSalas;c-2388660" wrote:There are times I find TW in a 420M+ guild stressful, but reading about how it can be for smaller guilds I wouldn’t want to trade places.You should try a 420M+ guild that is bad at TW, zero stress!

"TVF;c-2388500" wrote:The minimum is not in any way a relatively recent addition.It is, though. And pretty sure it was an unannounced addition. Prior to the banner minimum, you merely had to set a defense, or attempt (not even win) an attack.Of course, not CG's fault this player can't even set a couple defenses to hit 50 banners. 50 banners seems like an appropriate minimum, though to keep it in line with how it used to be maybe 10 would have been better.

TW Minimum Banners | EA Forums

tvsfrink
2 years ago
The minimum is not in any way a relatively recent addition.
Persimius
Rising Traveler
2 years ago
"TVF;c-2388504" wrote:
"StarSon;c-2388502" wrote:
"TVF;c-2388500" wrote:
The minimum is not in any way a relatively recent addition.

It is, though. And pretty sure it was an unannounced addition. Prior to the banner minimum, you merely had to set a defense, or attempt (not even win) an attack.

Of course, not CG's fault this player can't even set a couple defenses to hit 50 banners. 50 banners seems like an appropriate minimum, though to keep it in line with how it used to be maybe 10 would have been better.

I haven't checked further back but is almost a year considered relatively recent to not know something?

https://forums.galaxy-of-heroes.starwars.ea.com/discussion/252262/50-banner-minimum

Oh it's been a year? Much longer than I thought.

But also, it's happened to dude like 4 times. You'd think he'd learn after the first or second time.
harvestmouse1
New Spectator
2 years ago
It feels a recent addition to me too.

If you're getting zero banners in TW again and again, you're simply not contributing. Your GP is added to the match and by not doing anything you're actually helping the other team. Why should you get rewards for that?

If defences are being filled up extremely quickly, maybe the defences could be tougher? Or (and this is a lot of work for the officers, particular zones need particular teams that are associated with particular players). 'Khelor has a good defensive GAS team that needs to be in south row 2 etc etc'

The bottom line is, I'm happy with the (recent/not recent) change. Reward leeching sucks.
tvsfrink
2 years ago
"DarjeloSalas;c-2388660" wrote:
There are times I find TW in a 420M+ guild stressful, but reading about how it can be for smaller guilds I wouldn’t want to trade places.

You should try a 420M+ guild that is bad at TW, zero stress!
Persimius
Rising Traveler
2 years ago
"TVF;c-2388500" wrote:
The minimum is not in any way a relatively recent addition.

It is, though. And pretty sure it was an unannounced addition. Prior to the banner minimum, you merely had to set a defense, or attempt (not even win) an attack.

Of course, not CG's fault this player can't even set a couple defenses to hit 50 banners. 50 banners seems like an appropriate minimum, though to keep it in line with how it used to be maybe 10 would have been better.
tvsfrink
2 years ago
"StarSon;c-2388502" wrote:
"TVF;c-2388500" wrote:
The minimum is not in any way a relatively recent addition.

It is, though. And pretty sure it was an unannounced addition. Prior to the banner minimum, you merely had to set a defense, or attempt (not even win) an attack.

Of course, not CG's fault this player can't even set a couple defenses to hit 50 banners. 50 banners seems like an appropriate minimum, though to keep it in line with how it used to be maybe 10 would have been better.

I haven't checked further back but is almost a year considered relatively recent to not know something?

https://forums.galaxy-of-heroes.starwars.ea.com/discussion/252262/50-banner-minimum
tvsfrink
2 years ago
"DarjeloSalas;c-2388505" wrote:
"chpMINIsolo_77;c-2388503" wrote:
"DarjeloSalas;c-2388501" wrote:
Any guild that allows a player to go into attack phase on 0 banners is poorly led. That’s where you should be looking to make changes.

Disagree. What do you suggest when there are open spots to be filled & there are less than 2 hours until the attack phase begins?

We've had that happen too many times. The guild is on notice to set defenses within the first 12 hours. Everyone is aware of that when they sign up for TW. We cut the guild loose to fill the remaining spots when we have 2 - 4 hours left

Ok - I’ll rephrase…

Any guild that allows a player to sit on 0 banners with 2 hours left in setup phase is poorly led.

If the player remains on 0 banners after that, the player is letting the guild down.

By "allows" I assume you mean that they don't notify. Because that's all that can be done.
tvsfrink
2 years ago
"Khelor;d-259620" wrote:
I usually play in the morning when there is between 4-6 hours left before the next phase.

Surely you can find one other time to get into the game in the preceding 18-20 hours.
Graywolf125
2 years ago
Yeah, you're right. That has been a lot longer than I originally thought. This year has flown by for me.

And yeah, there's certainly solutions. We could just use better organization for how the guild approaches it. Maybe we just need to start being more strict and less fun/casual. I also sort of treat the game as an out of sight, out of mind thing once I'm done in the morning, but maybe I just need to carve out more time in my day for it when TW comes up. All completely valid solutions.

I guess I'm just asking why it has to be like that. Almost all other content in the game allows you to fit it in on a 24 hour cycle. It's mainly just this that you risk entirely missing out by playing at certain times. I mean, I certainly don't miss the days of needing to get marked as participating on rancor before we're allowed to actually attack after so much time. Do you? It seems like a lack of participation is more something that should be handled by officers in guilds that want to monitor that rather than arbitrary "participation" checks. Just my two cents though.
harvestmouse1
New Spectator
2 years ago
While we're on the subject. My pet hate for TW; is players that sign up, post zero defence. Then jump in right away on attacks and cherry pick away the easiest teams (even though they have their best teams available).

This is a super tough one for officers to manage. Making sure players don't cherry pick easy wins....as that's not really contributing either!