Feedback Wanted: Site Conflict Adjustments Part 2

[OrionZG]

And why not a maximum of 8 different dinosaurs for added drainage? I mean, if we allow 5 different dinosaurs at the same time, why not all at once for more dynamism and craziness?

it's doubt

 

[OrionZG]

I was thinking about your idea, but like I said 1000% yield capacity sounds like it's too much fame, but I got an idea, since yields will be automatically upgraded after every phase that clan defends their site(s) maybe when they reach 400% production yield, after a second full day (5 phases) this yield will be upgraded to 600-800% production as reward, and you also have chances dv takes away this site from you before it reaches this tier of fame production

actually 1000% is not much, a basic building has 960 fame, increased to 1000% would be 11520 as average fame xd

 

[S4TW]

Note:
Let me also drop a little refresher here so it is easy to see how much with a single site is worth depending of the yield and when the DV takeover bonus is applied:

View attachment 48119


Let is know what you think and if something is still unclear how it works etc.

About that, don't you think it would be cool if the fame amounts were boosted x2 for the 2h phase? If I'm correct 2h phase's fame is the same as 1h ones, just a suggestion tho xd

 

[Highway]

I dont think changing the overall fame from buildings is a good idea. We aim that each fame channel occupies 1/3 of the overall cake.

Here you can see the Fame sources and how they are distributed.

Europe Servers (last 30 days)
On Europe where the clans manage to defend the buildings and upgrade to higher yields. Here it is almost perfect as we designed it to be:


America/Asia Servers (last 30 days)
On America/asia servers it does not look good as the clans can not defend and also dont upgrade yields. Here are the buildings a very low fame source. So its totally understandable that players from america servers want more fame from the buildings.



I think when we balance out the defende/attack gameplay to be fair the cake on the america/asia servers will start to look better and therefore provide more fame.

Ok back to the topic for the planed changes

 

[Hardwell]

Will there be some form of gate "special attributes" still like gv gates dropping burn on 3 players within the radius and GV gates dropping freezer module in people within radius kind of concept?

 

[OrionZG]

Will there be some form of gate "special attributes" still like gv gates dropping burn on 3 players within the radius and GV gates dropping freezer module in people within radius kind of concept?

It would be interesting to see, but I would like them to be attributes that clan members can add by upgrading their buildings.

 

[NazzaFire]

I dont think changing the overall fame from buildings is a good idea. We aim that each fame channel occupies 1/3 of the overall cake.

Here you can see the Fame sources and how they are distributed.

Europe Servers (last 30 days)
On Europe where the clans manage to defend the buildings and upgrade to higher yields. Here it is almost perfect as we designed it to be:
View attachment 48125

America/Asia Servers (last 30 days)
On America/asia servers it does not look good as the clans can not defend and also dont upgrade yields. Here are the buildings a very low fame source. So its totally understandable that players from america servers want more fame from the buildings.
View attachment 48126


I think when we balance out the defende/attack gameplay to be fair the cake on the america/asia servers will start to look better and therefore provide more fame.

Ok back to the topic for the planed changes

obviously this is also determined by the fact that there is much more war in America and Asia than on European servers

 

[Ezequiel]

I dont think changing the overall fame from buildings is a good idea. We aim that each fame channel occupies 1/3 of the overall cake.

Here you can see the Fame sources and how they are distributed.

Europe Servers (last 30 days)
On Europe where the clans manage to defend the buildings and upgrade to higher yields. Here it is almost perfect as we designed it to be:
View attachment 48125

America/Asia Servers (last 30 days)
On America/asia servers it does not look good as the clans can not defend and also dont upgrade yields. Here are the buildings a very low fame source. So its totally understandable that players from america servers want more fame from the buildings.
View attachment 48126


I think when we balance out the defende/attack gameplay to be fair the cake on the america/asia servers will start to look better and therefore provide more fame.

Ok back to the topic for the planed changes

It is clear that on the American/Asian servers there are many more wars/attacks and no one dominates because it is a constant exchange of travel gates. Nobody wants to give an advantage of fame and that is why they choose not to upgrade yield

 

[Xx EL LOBO xX]

Howdy,

again it's best to start another fresh topic where we can discuss the upcoming planned changes as the previous feedback one already has over 50 pages . We want to further improve the Site combat mechanics to make it more fun and fair to play with the following set of changes.


Automatic Yield Increase & Unlocked Site Defense Upgrades

With this change, you can decide more freely whether and how quickly you want to improve the defense of your sites.

• Yield level increases automatically with every conflict phase you manage to hold the site.
• Upgrading the site now only affects HP and Repair Level, and you can upgrade directly to the highest level without having to wait between upgrades.

Dino Diversity Boost for Site Drain and Repairs

This change rewards a varied team composition in both site attack and defense.

• Boost your team's drain/repair rates by up to 200% by having up to five different dinosaurs in the site's perimeter.
• Example for drain rate:
  • 1 dino -> 100 drain (100%)
  • 2 different dinos -> 135 drain (135%)
  • 3 different dinos -> 165 drain (165%)
  • 4 different dinos -> 185 drain (185%)
  • 5 different dinos -> 200 drain (200%)
  • 6 different dinos -> 200 drain (200%)
  • 7 different dinos -> 200 drain (200%)

Drain Speed Based Only on Number of Defending Clan's Sites

This change simplifies how drain speeds are determined. We are no longer calculating a difference in held sites between clans, only the number of sites of the defending clan counts.

• The more sites a clan is holding, the faster attackers can drain them.
• As before, drain speed will change dynamically during conflict when the held sites count of the defending clan changes.

Here is a table on how it will affect the times with the changes on site based drain and the dino diversity boost at different levels. Max attacker boost times are similar on how it is live, while the overall repair power is increased by 100% compared to live on max boost.

View attachment 48120
(5 Attacker = max boost, 5 Defender = max boost, Repair+ means drain is lower than repair rate)


Note:
Let me also drop a little refresher here so it is easy to see how much with a single site is worth depending of the yield and when the DV takeover bonus is applied:

View attachment 48119


Let is know what you think and if something is still unclear how it works etc.

i dont know how this would help the main problem that is people dont even try to defend, instead they use their extension clan and drain themselves. defending should be more interesting, maybe not even more rewarding because most player forming an alliance just want to hold the most sites as possible, it doesnt matter if its not as effective as holding a few.
We will still see the brachi problem because 1 brachi with the attacker buff is almost unkillable for another attacker and some people abuse this by using bots too..

 

[Hardwell]

From the update, i can see that the solo drain with tank can be slightly nerfed as most clan will just go into a 1 man clan and drain people but they will only get 100% drain power.

The duration of conflict phase might also improve and last longer... Because attacker need to gather in duos or trios or quad to get good efficient and fast drain so this means.. Though they might get good drain and can down 1 building fast... They need to stay together unlike current drain where 1 brachi stand at one gate and spread across the whole map and hit attack button simultaneously and boom it can't be killed with high drain power.

 

[Hardwell]

Since Alewx touch on special trait on gates. I would like to share my idea of special trait on maps infact that the devs team can gain some inspiration out of it :3


Most MMO have some from of environmental damage which makes game more interesting and fun. I hope Ds could add something like this in future.. hmm such as

Mm have snow blizzard that slow down enemy movement

green volcano ground cracking and lava can damage enemy...

Some quicksand in gf that can root down enemy movement.

Mw have pool of snake scattered across everywhere that will bleed your dino if u walk over it

Ccv have rock and boulder dropping from cliff to damage enemy.

 

[Andersonoliveira]

I dont think changing the overall fame from buildings is a good idea. We aim that each fame channel occupies 1/3 of the overall cake.

Here you can see the Fame sources and how they are distributed.

Europe Servers (last 30 days)
On Europe where the clans manage to defend the buildings and upgrade to higher yields. Here it is almost perfect as we designed it to be:
View attachment 48125

America/Asia Servers (last 30 days)
On America/asia servers it does not look good as the clans can not defend and also dont upgrade yields. Here are the buildings a very low fame source. So its totally understandable that players from america servers want more fame from the buildings.
View attachment 48126


I think when we balance out the defende/attack gameplay to be fair the cake on the america/asia servers will start to look better and therefore provide more fame.

Ok back to the topic for the planed changes

Espero que sim, pois está insustentável, os clãs não sobem rendimento, é preferível trocar a cada ataque( pois há uma grande quantidade de inimigos ) doque tentar defender, não falo isso achando ruim os inimigos pegarem portais, mas fica também inviável para nós defender no cenário atual, tanto nós como nossos inimigos. Não tá sendo compensatório para ambos.

 

[Andersonoliveira]

Espero que sim, pois está insustentável, os clãs não sobem rendimento, é preferível trocar a cada ataque( pois há uma grande quantidade de inimigos ) doque tentar defender, não falo isso achando ruim os inimigos pegarem portais, mas fica também inviável para nós defender no cenário atual, tanto nós como nossos inimigos. Não tá sendo compensatório para ambos.

E outra coisa que quero pontuar, servidores americanos tem mais atividade que os europeus como seu próprio gráfico relata. Nós temos uma grande quantidade de playeras também, por isso dividimos muitas vezes o clã em dois… Dito isso, não haveria possibilidade de aumentar os nossos slots de clã ? Tem clã no Am1 que tem 3 “ filiais “ se de fato a atualização favorece a quantidade de atacante e defensor, deverias repensar sobre a quantidade de membros disponível para cada slot de clã, pois apenas 80 não favorece ninguém!

 

[Itz_Haiz]

Howdy,

again it's best to start another fresh topic where we can discuss the upcoming planned changes as the previous feedback one already has over 50 pages . We want to further improve the Site combat mechanics to make it more fun and fair to play with the following set of changes.


Automatic Yield Increase & Unlocked Site Defense Upgrades

With this change, you can decide more freely whether and how quickly you want to improve the defense of your sites.

• Yield level increases automatically with every conflict phase you manage to hold the site.
• Upgrading the site now only affects HP and Repair Level, and you can upgrade directly to the highest level without having to wait between upgrades.

Dino Diversity Boost for Site Drain and Repairs

This change rewards a varied team composition in both site attack and defense.

• Boost your team's drain/repair rates by up to 200% by having up to five different dinosaurs in the site's perimeter.
• Example for drain rate:
  • 1 dino -> 100 drain (100%)
  • 2 different dinos -> 135 drain (135%)
  • 3 different dinos -> 165 drain (165%)
  • 4 different dinos -> 185 drain (185%)
  • 5 different dinos -> 200 drain (200%)
  • 6 different dinos -> 200 drain (200%)
  • 7 different dinos -> 200 drain (200%)

Drain Speed Based Only on Number of Defending Clan's Sites

This change simplifies how drain speeds are determined. We are no longer calculating a difference in held sites between clans, only the number of sites of the defending clan counts.

• The more sites a clan is holding, the faster attackers can drain them.
• As before, drain speed will change dynamically during conflict when the held sites count of the defending clan changes.

Here is a table on how it will affect the times with the changes on site based drain and the dino diversity boost at different levels. Max attacker boost times are similar on how it is live, while the overall repair power is increased by 100% compared to live on max boost.

View attachment 48120
(5 Attacker = max boost, 5 Defender = max boost, Repair+ means drain is lower than repair rate)


Note:
Let me also drop a little refresher here so it is easy to see how much with a single site is worth depending of the yield and when the DV takeover bonus is applied:

View attachment 48119


Let is know what you think and if something is still unclear how it works etc.

In my opinion that's a good system. In Am_2 isn't getting not even a little bit fun tbh! The conflict phase is 1 hour but in only 10 minutos all of the gates are alr taken by a clan. We aren't defending, we just log our mates and go to drain someone, we don't mind bout losing portals cuz our only goal is to take as much as possible gates. That's why my clan ( Strike Force ) created another clan to take the portals. We drain ourself and that's kinda sucks. I'm not having fun on it and I know that i'm not the only one, many of friends stopped to play cuz isn't getting fun anymore. In Am2 the clans only take their portals and go off, nobody even go to MM or to another map to fight cuz there's no point on it, if u do that u are only losing dds and that's it.

 

[DarkMyth.]

In my opinion that's a good system. In Am_2 isn't getting not even a little bit fun tbh! The conflict phase is 1 hour but in only 10 minutos all of the gates are alr taken by a clan. We aren't defending, we just log our mates and go to drain someone, we don't mind bout losing portals cuz our only goal is to take as much as possible gates. That's why my clan ( Strike Force ) created another clan to take the portals. We drain ourself and that's kinda sucks. I'm not having fun on it and I know that i'm not the only one, many of friends stopped to play cuz isn't getting fun anymore. In Am2 the clans only take their portals and go off, nobody even go to MM or to another map to fight cuz there's no point on it, if u do that u are only losing dds and that's it.

But how these changes will make any difference for you (Am2) if nobody is defending (as you said) you just swap your sites? Unless I missed something

Changes would bring balance to a server which has war(s) but won’t make a difference between allies swapping sites, only thing that affects you is that you’re missing out on the excellent fame production, with this update you’re only gonna swap sites at 100% yield instead of 50% as it automatically upgrades

 

[OrionZG]

I also agree in a way, 10 minutes of pvp is very little, compared to before there was a lot more clan pvp action, right now there is little to none. I really miss wars on a medium or larger scale.

Maybe it is due to the amount of active players on my server, as compared to Europe 1 and America 1, there are a lot more people, so clan wars last longer (On YT you can see recent DS videos, and you will see that EU1 and AME1 have been with a lot of active people these last few weeks).

The current mechanic is really good, but it is more suitable for more active servers, because it makes for more "call to action" between clans (but I am not suggesting that SVs with less people should go back to the old system).

I think first of all the clan vs clan system should have been revised/improved, idk, add things like factions, wars concentrated on X amount of clans vs X amount of clans, war points, individual or group pvp rewards, etc. And then they would have moved on to the building mechanics which would be an extra option or basis for the clan's fame.


But in short, as I said last time: we need more clan pvp action.

 

[DarkMyth.]

I also agree in a way, 10 minutes of pvp is very little, compared to before there was a lot more clan pvp action, right now there is little to none. I really miss wars on a medium or larger scale.

Maybe it is due to the amount of active players on my server, as compared to Europe 1 and America 1, there are a lot more people, so clan wars last longer (On YT you can see recent DS videos, and you will see that EU1 and AME1 have been with a lot of active people these last few weeks).

The current mechanic is really good, but it is more suitable for more active servers, because it makes for more "call to action" between clans (but I am not suggesting that SVs with less people should go back to the old system).

I think first of all the clan vs clan system should have been revised/improved, idk, add things like factions, wars concentrated on X amount of clans vs X amount of clans, war points, individual or group pvp rewards, etc. And then move on to building mechanics that would be the basis of fame for clans.

But in short, as I said last time: we need more clan pvp action.

Most smaller servers are swapping sites as I know, they create clans and swap between themselves, which brings us back to removing free site attacks which would solve more than one problem

 

[OrionZG]

Most smaller servers are swapping sites as I know, they create clans and swap between themselves, which brings us back to removing free site attacks which would solve more than one problem

Well, some solutions to avoid exchanges would be that the buildings have more HP or that they can also be freely attacked during the vulnerability phase, or even that they have the possibility of being attacked at least 3 times per phase. With this, it would give the attacking clans the opportunity to have several options, and buildings that are fully defended would be sites highly protected by players because their performance would be updating automatically, and they would be high-value targets. What I mean is that there would be more movement of clans from one building to another throughout the vulnerability phase, and not just 10 minutes.


Regarding the HP of the buildings I think it would be more viable to add more because now you can attack 200% more with 5 different dinosaurs, so the drainage of the building will be faster.

 

[Hardwell]

how will we know claim medals are worth more fame value when sold as compared to gate's medals is there any indication on the claim's medals to differentiate from gate's medals?

 

[DarkMyth.]

how will we know claim medals are worth more fame value when sold as compared to gate's medals is there any indication on the claim's medals to differentiate from gate's medals?

Claims produce gold medals only, which is the most valuable medal and is worth 320 fame each, basically 33% more than a travel gate

 

[Hardwell]

ouhh

Claims produce gold medals only, which is the most valuable medal and is worth 320 fame each, basically 33% more than a travel gate

ouhh damn... the map trading was so bad I just took whatever was in there without seeing the difference xD

 

[Alewx]

The new PTR just went public.

 

[Highway]

Ok the open PTR is ready. Have fun and give us your feedback here:

PTR 1281 Changelog

PTR 1281 Changelog Automatic Yield Increase & Unlocked Site Defense Upgrades With this change, you can decide more freely whether and how quickly you want to improve the defense of your sites. Yield level increases automatically with every conflict phase you manage to hold the site...

forum.dinostorm.com

 

[OrionZG]

that was fast

https://ptr.dinostorm.com/

 

[Highway]

UI etc. will still get improved but for testing it is ready

 

[OrionZG]

I consider that this stability buff was not necessary , It's almost the same as before xd

 

[Luka Patajac]

you can upgrade yield yet its written as 100% still

 

[DarkMyth.]

Site upgrading went from 83k to 100k dds now for defenders?

 

[Luka Patajac]

for one build?

 

[DarkMyth.]

for one build?

Yeah that's what I was told now on ptr my clan upgraded sites and it was 100k, I didn't see it myself yet