Feedback Thread · Endgame Part 3 Open PTR Test

[TheDinoWarrior]

Taking down a single attacker once doesn't matter in that scenario. The only thing that matters is defending a site. The attacker can still drain the site while he is being attacked by the defenders. He isn't fighting back, which means that he can survive a long time on a tank dino. If the defenders cannot heal the damage he dealt to the site before he comes back they are in a losing battle. If the attacker chooses to repeatedly run back to the same site, that site becomes impossible to defend (unless the defenders find a way to defeat him before he can get close enough). The problem only becomes more apparent with the usage of Recovery Kits - there is no journey to the site and it can be attacked with no end until its fully drained.

What about adjusting the healing a site receives to be based on the amount of defenders around it? For example: the attacker drains a site for 1% every 10 seconds, each defender heals a site for 0.2% every 10 seconds. In that scenario 5 defenders would be able to negate the attack and defend their gate even if the attacker isnt fighting them. The attackers wouldn't be able to passively take over gates and would always need a more active approach. And the defenders would need to choose between protecting a site and healing it together faster or splitting to fight over/defend more sites.

This scenario isnt ideal either, as 5 defenders would be able to stop the attack of 10 attackers for as long as they stay alive. Perhaps the amount of attackers would also need to affect the damage dealt to a site, but the increment for attackers should be lower. If one initial attacker can drain for 1% every 10 seconds, 10 attackers shouldn't be able to drain 10% every 10 seconds as it would be too difficult to gather enough forces to even attempt defending the site before it is lost.

aha currently we are unable to use recovery kits in PTR when site is under attack

 

[Czarna]

aha currently we are unable to use recovery kits in PTR when site is under attack

I imagine Recovery Kits are not going to be removed from the live server so it's important to think how they can affect the gameplay as well.

 

[TheDinoWarrior]

I think the solution is to not look ways to punish small clans by putting tax on draining just cuz few use multis etc.
rather look for ways where small clans can actually put up a challenge to big clans.
we know the big clans uses many unorthodox/illegal ways and are adamant to hold a whole map due to greed and wanting to cause stalemate on small clans in the least
that's why they complain about yielding costs and on more stuff they feel that brings negative impact on them.

The thing is this update should support the small clans while keeping an eye on big clans and observe what they do to minimize such attacks in a tactical perspective against small sided teams who are yet looking for better ideas against fighting big teams.

 

[Malekith]

The friend above mentioned, it takes 8 players time to kill 1 brachy full techs and defensive implas. Please review this, brachy is very tanky. This is not only on the PTR, but in the game this is usually the case, most wars are fought with brachy and gat

 

[Alewx]

What about adjusting the healing a site receives to be based on the amount of defenders around it? For example: the attacker drains a site for 1% every 10 seconds, each defender heals a site for 0.2% every 10 seconds. In that scenario 5 defenders would be able to negate the attack and defend their gate even if the attacker isnt fighting them. The attackers wouldn't be able to passively take over gates and would always need a more active approach. And the defenders would need to choose between protecting a site and healing it together faster or splitting to fight over/defend more sites.

but that would go back to pure power in numbers, i bring more ppl so i just steamroll everything. we want to get away from that.

 

[Pleiadian]

I like this idea actually. Many people use multi accounts (like opening 9-10 low level accounts and drawing simultaneously). This will be devastating for all defending clans after the update especially those who hold gates in low level maps such as gf/mw. Adding an attack price will discourage attackers to exploit multi-accounts in general since they would just be dead weight only used for afk draining and not real fighting.

This idea is polarising.

Now what about those players that do not break the rules? Those who are part of the attacker's team. You penalize them in the long term. You de-motivate them to attack.

DDs is not easily obtainable.

If the attackers are de-motivated to attack, there's no attack at all. Gradually the defenders will always have the upper hand.

The solution for shared multi-accounts of low levels would be to implement a sort of limitation. An account should not have the ability to attack unless it has passed a certain hour of gameplay.

 

[Alewx]

The solution for shared multi-accounts of low levels would be to implement a sort of limitation. An account should not have the ability to attack unless it has passed a certain hour of gameplay.

Solved with just afk time in the game. That is the reason you can only attack building once certain level is matched.

 

[Pleiadian]

Its not a bug. Read the change log carefully. You need to keep the attackers away from the building.

In that case, attackers hold all the power to obtain a gate while defenders can do nothing.

Someone described it very perfectly.

The attacker can still drain the site while he is being attacked by the defenders. He isn't fighting back, which means that he can survive a long time on a tank dino. If the defenders cannot heal the damage he dealt to the site before he comes back they are in a losing battle. If the attacker chooses to repeatedly run back to the same site, that site becomes impossible to defend (unless the defenders find a way to defeat him before he can get close enough). The problem only becomes more apparent with the usage of Recovery Kits - there is no journey to the site and it can be attacked with no end until its fully drained.

As an attacker, I just have to keep repeating this until I takeover the defender's tower and their fame becomes mine.

 

[Pleiadian]

What's the fate of Maujak Mountain?

I have asked this question but perhaps it got lost.

What about Maujak?

Are we going to see some layout change or we'll be stuck with that linear design forever?

That's not even a proper map at this point. Just a curved line.

NPC's Quests, Veteran Bandit, and fighting zone for towers, all cramped into 1 single point. I spawn at a building, I walk 3 steps, I get a Veteran bandit, and the group already attacking me.

I remember Devs reacting to the idea of re-doing this map, is that still on the table or has it been scrapped?

 

[TheDinoWarrior]

The friend above mentioned, it takes 8 players time to kill 1 brachy full techs and defensive implas. Please review this, brachy is very tanky. This is not only on the PTR, but in the game this is usually the case, most wars are fought with brachy and gat

Thanks for teaching me this btw

 

[..Arcadius..]

This idea is polarising.

Now what about those players that do not break the rules? Those who are part of the attacker's team. You penalize them in the long term. You de-motivate them to attack.

DDs is not easily obtainable.

If the attackers are de-motivated to attack, there's no attack at all. Gradually the defenders will always have the upper hand.

The solution for shared multi-accounts of low levels would be to implement a sort of limitation. An account should not have the ability to attack unless it has passed a certain hour of gameplay.

More real players = More players who can hunt and pay for attacks
I'm not saying it has to be an extreme amount, such as the amount used for upgrading gates, but there should be some kind of limitation like before. For example, both defending and attacking players use supply charges in order to attack/hold gates at the moment. However, now defenders have to use DDs in order to get significant fame from buildings, but attackers can still steal all that with literally no cost.

 

[- Cause -]

Solved with just afk time in the game. That is the reason you can only attack building once certain level is matched.

This way you see them afk and then we can report them. Or implement some anticheat to the game where the ip is checked

 

[TheDinoWarrior]

This way you see them afk and then we can report them. Or implement some anticheat to the game where the ip is checked

Bruh with this imagine real afk players getting reported just coz they went for a W.C break xd we need hardcore evidence and players are smart to fake evidences.

 

[- Venimeuse -]

Subject:
Recognize allies clan/Alliances

Problem:
I noticed something which missing with the ptr, we need to ask to other members which clan is enemy/ally. In wars, it become messy because we don't know why other clans (not mentionned as enemy by a clanmate) attacking us.

Possible solution:
Clans can send alliance requests into each others (like sending friend requests), only leaders and right hands can accept/reject those requests.
Effects:
- During Vulnerable phase, allies cannot attack each other (to avoid killing an ally by miss clicking).
- Can see which ally clans attacking a site/made the most attack points in an attacked site.
- Add a new channel chat "Alliance" (because we talk between alliances on other platforms like Discord, Messenger, etc... So should be better to get a channel chat in game to talk with other allies without checking our phone)

UI changes:
- Clan -> More options -> Alliances : New window to see alliances of the clan (limited to 20), Leaders and Right Hands can end an alliance with a clan (<name of the clan> -> End Alliance), all clanmates can see the clan's details (<name of the clan> -> More infos)
- Colors on the mini-map/Map : Like Clanmates/Friends, they will be visible on the mini-map with a color (Devs, i let you choose it) Same color for sites holded by ally clans.

When?
Please make possible to add this when the 3nd endgame uptade is released in live servers.
@Alewx

 

[- Venimeuse -]

More real players = More players who can hunt and pay for attacks
I'm not saying it has to be an extreme amount, such as the amount used for upgrading gates, but there should be some kind of limitation like before. For example, both defending and attacking players use supply charges in order to attack/hold gates at the moment. However, now defenders have to use DDs in order to get significant fame from buildings, but attackers can still steal all that with literally no cost.

Something i wanna add, why not make the cost of attacking a site like the live servers?
Choose if we wanna attack with dds or not. Attacking with dds will put automaticaly the site to 100% yield, even if the attack isn't successful, dds won't be used.
But only the clan who openned the attack with dds will get 100% yield is attack successful and made the most attack point on it.

 

[Pleiadian]

Subject:
Recognize allies clan/Alliances

The whole point of this Endgame Mechanic Update is to prevent big alliances from forming monopolies.

Give smaller clans a way to fight the big alliances and win.

Your proposed idea would have the opposite effect in our current situation.

 

[..Arcadius..]

The whole point of this Endgame Mechanic Update is to prevent big alliances from forming monopolies.

Give smaller clans a way to fight the big alliances and win.

Your proposed idea would have the opposite effect in our current situation.

Alliance option would benefit both attackers and defenders, its just a matter of communication. This is almost the only benefit people can get from alliance option being added in game.

 

[-Kiwi-]

Subject:
Recognize allies clan/Alliances

Problem:
I noticed something which missing with the ptr, we need to ask to other members which clan is enemy/ally. In wars, it become messy because we don't know why other clans (not mentionned as enemy by a clanmate) attacking us.

Possible solution:
Clans can send alliance requests into each others (like sending friend requests), only leaders and right hands can accept/reject those requests.
Effects:
- During Vulnerable phase, allies cannot attack each other (to avoid killing an ally by miss clicking).
- Can see which ally clans attacking a site/made the most attack points in an attacked site.
- Add a new channel chat "Alliance" (because we talk between alliances on other platforms like Discord, Messenger, etc... So should be better to get a channel chat in game to talk with other allies without checking our phone)

UI changes:
- Clan -> More options -> Alliances : New window to see alliances of the clan (limited to 20), Leaders and Right Hands can end an alliance with a clan (<name of the clan> -> End Alliance), all clanmates can see the clan's details (<name of the clan> -> More infos)
- Colors on the mini-map/Map : Like Clanmates/Friends, they will be visible on the mini-map with a color (Devs, i let you choose it) Same color for sites holded by ally clans.

When?
Please make possible to add this when the 3nd endgame uptade is released in live servers.
@Alewx

pirate galaxy has this system down to the details you mentioned,idk why we cant have this much needed qol update

 

[-Kiwi-]

The whole point of this Endgame Mechanic Update is to prevent big alliances from forming monopolies.

Give smaller clans a way to fight the big alliances and win.

Your proposed idea would have the opposite effect in our current situation.

the benefit goes both ways,this is a core issue that numbers are everything in dino storm not the fact that allies can communicate better,at the end of the day we can just use discord and it will have the same effect,just makes it instead of going to an outsider app we have it in the game

 

[Pleiadian]

I do not think we're moving in the right direction with the attack phases.

It's too less in 24 hours, the game would be practically empty the rest of the protected hours.

I think the attack phases should be

• 1 hours mid day
• 2 hours afternoon
• 3 hours at peak time

 

[-Kiwi-]

I do not think we're moving in the right direction with the attack phases.

It's too less in 24 hours, the game would be practically empty the rest of the protected hours.

I think the attack phases should be

• 1 hours mid day
• 2 hours afternoon
• 3 hours at peak time

i agree,there should be multiple attack phase.which i think should be once for every time period one for the morning,one for the evening one for the night to make the game somewhat active at all times and not completely screw over the attackers by only having the attack phase at peak hours which means 90% of the defenders will be online to trample over the already outnumbered minority

 

[Pleiadian]

Alliance option would benefit both attackers and defenders, its just a matter of communication. This is almost the only benefit people can get from alliance option being added in game.

It benefits defenders more than attackers.

This communication advantage for the defenders will solidify their alliances and power hold further.

1. Attackers are less than defenders.

2. If there are multiple attacking clans, then they will most likely attack for themselves. Not helping other attackers. Why should they? They're getting the fame directly themselves.

They're attackers, fame stealers. No need to forge alliance with another small clans for such attack. Moreover, if you're saying that it benefits attackers strategies, then it's minimal compared to how much this benefit defenders. Defenders will get better coordination with that feature.


3. Let's say you have multiple attacker clan, most of them will be in their clan, using their clan chat, attacking whatever they want.

 

[Isabella16]

Sería muy agotador tener más de 3 ataques por día ya que la mayoría de los jugadores trabajan o estudian y tienen poco tiempo para jugar y serían matadores tanto para Dino Storm como para los jugadores que quieren jugar pero no pueden por falta de tiempo. tiempo. Deberían tener esto en cuenta, no todos pueden estar 24 horas al día, 7 días a la semana defendiendo el mapa de los atacantes, muchos tienen una vida social, por así decirlo. 3 ataques sería el mayor despropósito y acabaría el partido y muchos se irían.

 

[-Kiwi-]

It benefits defenders more than attackers.

This communication advantage for the defenders will solidify their alliances and power hold further.

1. Attackers are less than defenders.

2. If there are multiple attacking clans, then they will most likely attack for themselves. Not helping other attackers. Why should they? They're getting the fame directly themselves.

They're attackers, fame stealers. No need to forge alliance with another small clans for such attack. Moreover, if you're saying that it benefits attackers strategies, then it's minimal compared to how much this benefit defenders. Defenders will get better coordination with that feature.


3. Let's say you have multiple attacker clan, most of them will be in their clan, using their clan chat, attacking whatever they want.

pirate galaxy has alliance systems,and it works just fine

 

[-Kiwi-]

It benefits defenders more than attackers.

This communication advantage for the defenders will solidify their alliances and power hold further.

1. Attackers are less than defenders.

2. If there are multiple attacking clans, then they will most likely attack for themselves. Not helping other attackers. Why should they? They're getting the fame directly themselves.

They're attackers, fame stealers. No need to forge alliance with another small clans for such attack. Moreover, if you're saying that it benefits attackers strategies, then it's minimal compared to how much this benefit defenders. Defenders will get better coordination with that feature.


3. Let's say you have multiple attacker clan, most of them will be in their clan, using their clan chat, attacking whatever they want.

and at the end of the day,i am using discord its the same thing so? just add the system ingame

 

[- Venimeuse -]

The whole point of this Endgame Mechanic Update is to prevent big alliances from forming monopolies.

Give smaller clans a way to fight the big alliances and win.

Your proposed idea would have the opposite effect in our current situation.

This idea is neutral with the end game update, it only organizes players and visible effects, giving an advantage to large clans as well as small clans.

So prove to me which points could have the opposite effect in our current situation

 

[Pleiadian]

and at the end of the day,i am using discord its the same thing so? just add the system ingame

When you send a message on Discord about an enemy location, it's not necessary that every allied defenders will read the message immediately, perhaps they'll read after 10 second.

By the time that happen the attackers already changed location.

Whilst if you send a message in the proposed in game "Alliance chat", every allied clan and members immediately read it and the coordination is faster.

In turn, increasing the difficulty of attackers and making things way more easier for defenders.

If I remember correctly a similar idea was proposed 4 year ago by a GM. If Developers had plan to implement this idea, they would have already done it I believe.

Allied/ Rival system

 

[Igaflys]

The whole point of this Endgame Mechanic Update is to prevent big alliances from forming monopolies.

Give smaller clans a way to fight the big alliances and win.

Your proposed idea would have the opposite effect in our current situation.

That's truth but in the end no matter what devs do aliances will continiue to be formed. Its something that cant be washed off so easily because it makes people feel some kind of power? That makes them feel better and more worthy than others and in advance that makes them feel that they deserve specific elections, like sheriff one, more.

 

[Alewx]

pirate galaxy has alliance systems,and it works just fine

na it does not really because in the end ppl just abuse it, and stay afk or make agreements outside of it.

 

[- Venimeuse -]

When you send a message on Discord about an enemy location, it's not necessary that every allied defenders will read the message immediately, perhaps they'll read after 10 second.

By the time that happen the attackers already changed location.

Whilst if you send a message in the proposed in game "Alliance chat", every allied clan and members immediately read it and the coordination is faster.

In turn, increasing the difficulty of attackers and making things way more easier for defenders.

If I remember correctly a similar idea was proposed 4 year ago by a GM. If Developers had plan to implement this idea, they would have already done it I believe.

Allied/ Rival system

Same for Attacker side, they will know where defenders are and how many are at a site.