Feedback Wanted: Site Conflict Adjustments Part 2

[Orochii]

Based on what I see, the issue on Eu1 is related to the disproportion between alliances on the server:

Suggestions:
Implement a new item, DrainBooster, which can be purchased with clan dino dollars. This booster would increase the attack rate by 1.5x or 2x for 15 or 30 seconds, but there would be a significant cooldown before it could be used again.

Similarly, to make it fair for everyone, there would also be a RepairBooster that increases the repair rate by 1.5x or 2x, also with a significant cooldown.

This could create new opportunities to quickly take over at least 1 or 2 zones or save them in the final moments, but this only applies if the feedback provided is indeed genuine.

 

[Nebulon Galaxus]

And just as predicted, they started to appear on day 1. Nearly inconquerable site holder clans with only a few sites(1-4) but a whole alliance of manpower behind them(and all of them get attacker buff).

your data is not very accurate since not only did all of these clans exist long before today your saying sites are inconquerable while at the time you posted this message you didnt even try to attack one single guy from a different clan showed up to attack at the 11 am phase thats it and he left within 10 minutes and you posted this before 4 pm phase so your judging how things are without actualy trying them? thats not very accurate data to base your feedback on

 

[DarkMyth.]

And just as predicted, they started to appear on day 1. Nearly inconquerable site holder clans with only a few sites(1-4) but a whole alliance of manpower behind them(and all of them get attacker buff).

Thank you for showing everyone that most clans hold 5 sites, I think with 20 attackers you can capture a lot

Stop complaining without making an actual point

You have no excuses to come writing most clans are holding 1-2 sites, look at the number of sites below, log your 20 attackers, stop spamming on forum, and get on with it, 11am & 4pm phases passed and there's been 0 attacks yet you're here complaining on forum

 

[Nebulon Galaxus]

Based on what I see, the issue on Eu1 is related to the disproportion between alliances on the server:

Suggestions:
Implement a new item, DrainBooster, which can be purchased with clan dino dollars. This booster would increase the attack rate by 1.5x or 2x for 15 or 30 seconds, but there would be a significant cooldown before it could be used again.

Similarly, to make it fair for everyone, there would also be a RepairBooster that increases the repair rate by 1.5x or 2x, also with a significant cooldown.

This could create new opportunities to quickly take over at least 1 or 2 zones or save them in the final moments, but this only applies if the feedback provided is indeed genuine.

while your idea probably is not meant in a bad way i fear it would do badly in what its suposed to do getting rid of attackers when proper defenders are not present in large enough numbers or cant even get there in time was a big problem before which was a huge problem for defenders and even when they do come there its not like the attackers will roll over and die instantly they do fight back and can already kill defenders giving them option to go back to killing gates withing just a few seconds really is a bad choice in my opinion while the heal version sounds cute but if they drain for like 700 hp a second it wont matter at all which they can do in a group of 5 on diferent dinos this drain rate would kill a max tier gate in literaly 110 seconds thats less then 2 minutes even if its for just 30 seconds and then no other member of the clan can get that effect if we calculate it they take away 25% of the sites health (on max tier btw) before defense can even arrive let alone in numbers capable of stoping them if they choose the right target the problem before today was defense being worthless we dont want to go back to that again but amplified by 10

 

[Queenie]

while your idea probably is not meant in a bad way i fear it would do badly in what its suposed to do getting rid of attackers when proper defenders are not present in large enough numbers or cant even get there in time was a big problem before which was a huge problem for defenders and even when they do come there its not like the attackers will roll over and die instantly they do fight back and can already kill defenders giving them option to go back to killing gates withing just a few seconds really is a bad choice in my opinion while the heal version sounds cute but if they drain for like 700 hp a second it wont matter at all which they can do in a group of 5 on diferent dinos this drain rate would kill a max tier gate in literaly 110 seconds thats less then 2 minutes even if its for just 30 seconds and then no other member of the clan can get that effect if we calculate it they take away 25% of the sites health (on max tier btw) before defense can even arrive let alone in numbers capable of stoping them if they choose the right target the problem before today was defense being worthless we dont want to go back to that again but amplified by 10

Right, plus imagine what it would do on other servers as well. The fact that in one server there's small group of attackers isn't big of an issue. We should always look how it would effect all servers

 

[DarkMyth.]

@istencsaszar brother, you spent whole day complaining and you just captured 12 excellent sites on eu1 with around 10-15 attackers

Let me do the calculations for you:
fekete lovag: 6 gates / 3 claims = 56,640 fame
Ordo Regalis Crucis: 3 gates = 16,800 fame

Basically, you just made more fame than 2 holding clans combined
I guess you don't have anything to complain about anymore



Meanwhile holding clans are strictly forced to hold a little amount of sites, you attackers are free to capture as many as possible, because you don't attempt to defend anyways

 

[NazzaFire]

@istencsaszar brother, you spent whole day complaining and you just captured 12 excellent sites on eu1 with around 10-15 attackers

Let me do the calculations for you:
fekete lovag: 6 gates / 3 claims = 56,640 fame
Ordo Regalis Crucis: 3 gates = 16,800 fame

Basically, you just made more fame than 2 holding clans combined
I guess you don't have anything to complain about anymore

View attachment 48205View attachment 48206

Meanwhile holding clans are strictly forced to hold a little amount of sites, you attackers are free to capture as many as possible, because you don't attempt to defend anyways

I think sites must have more medals in both claims/towers , to attract more player to attack and for extra medals I mean like in PTR +I think it's right to write it here too to create a clan war system and dino storm pass + daily missions to get more rewards

 

[DarkMyth.]

I think sites must have more medals in both claims/towers , to attract more player to attack and for extra medals I mean like in PTR

I disagree, that would be WAY too much fame especially for a free attacking system, look at the screenshot I shared above, imagine a clan captured 9 excellent sites with the same amount of fame as you get on PTR but on a live server, you do realize this fame is enough to block an election already simply from 1 phase?
Even for holding clans it's too much fame

It is too much as it is right now because attackers are getting that fame for free, that's my personal opinion
And if you ask me, attacking clans shouldn't be able to capture so many sites for free, for example above one clan made 56k fame, which is considered a lot, there should be a limit since a defending clan is strictly holding less sites so they avoid an insane drain rate, why attackers have the opposite advantage of where they can take as many as possible?

Maybe a feature of where you have a limit of capturing 5 sites for example and once you capture 5 the 6th and so on won't be for free anymore, it'll cost a price, it's just a suggestion since obviously devs want to keep a free attacking system, but maybe a free attacking system with limitations

 

[NazzaFire]

I disagree, that would be WAY too much fame especially for a free attacking system, look at the screenshot I shared above, imagine a clan captured 9 excellent sites with the same amount of fame as you get on PTR but on a live server, you do realize this fame is enough to block an election already simply from 1 phase?
Even for holding clans it's too much fame

It is too much as it is right now because attackers are getting that fame for free, that's my personal opinion
And if you ask me, attacking clans shouldn't be able to capture so many sites for free, for example above one clan made 56k fame, which is considered a lot, there should be a limit since a defending clan is strictly holding less sites so they avoid an insane drain rate, why attackers have the opposite advantage of where they can take as many as possible?

Maybe a feature of where you have a limit of capturing 5 sites for example and once you capture 5 the 6th and so on won't be for free anymore, it'll cost a price, it's just a suggestion since obviously devs want to keep a free attacking system, but maybe a free attacking system with limitations

not only them would get more fame but also your alliance , think about it , it can benefit both sides , your ally also complained about the few medals they would get in towers.

 

[DarkMyth.]

not only them would get more fame but also your alliance , think about it , it can benefit both sides , your ally also complained about the few medals they would get in towers.

Yes multiple users on forum suggested to boost the fame income from sites, but not make it same as PTR income, read again what I wrote

 

[NazzaFire]

Yes multiple users on forum suggested to boost the fame income from sites, but not make it same as PTR income, read again what I wrote

I did and not every server works like eu1 and you mean less medals than PTR income? , I think more medals can be always good for everyone

 

[DarkMyth.]

I did and not every server works like eu1

What I wrote also has nothing to do with eu1 though I replied to your suggestion about making fame income on live servers same as PTR and then I suggested making a limitation to free attacking depending on how many sites you've captured

I'm pretty sure site swapping between allies isn't solved, i've seen it happening on a America server

 

[Nebulon Galaxus]

Right, plus imagine what it would do on other servers as well. The fact that in one server there's small group of attackers isn't big of an issue. We should always look how it would effect all servers

Indeed not to mention based on implementation if it was clan wide cooldown what is to prevent them from using more clans and killing any site in 2 minutes and as you mentioned this would just be insane on servers Where both sides are about equaly matched the curent way it is feels fine in my opinion

 

[Nebulon Galaxus]

@istencsaszar brother, you spent whole day complaining and you just captured 12 excellent sites on eu1 with around 10-15 attackers

Let me do the calculations for you:
fekete lovag: 6 gates / 3 claims = 56,640 fame
Ordo Regalis Crucis: 3 gates = 16,800 fame

Basically, you just made more fame than 2 holding clans combined
I guess you don't have anything to complain about anymore

View attachment 48205View attachment 48206

Meanwhile holding clans are strictly forced to hold a little amount of sites, you attackers are free to capture as many as possible, because you don't attempt to defend anyways

Also might as Well mention it for every reading this these Numbers are just the minimum some of these gates might not have been colected i aint gona lie my curent clan lost a claim to fekete and that claim alone had 20k fame in it so Yeah tones of fame have been gathered up by the attackers last phase so thats just to add on whats already been said

 

[Nebulon Galaxus]

I did and not every server works like eu1 and you mean less medals than PTR income? , I think more medals can be always good for everyone

Yes and no for a holding and attacking clan Yeah maybe Yes but for someone thats neither of those? No it would inflate election prices Like a ballone making it hard for others to reach it if their just mining gold for example it gives decent fame but not that much to outcompete the two groups mentioned if they had more fame to work with since they also mine gold this would just make things closer to as Bad as before for solo players and small groups just having no chance to outcompete the big boys

 

[DarkMyth.]

Also might as Well mention it for every reading this these Numbers are just the minimum some of these gates might not have been colected i aint gona lie my curent clan lost a claim to fekete and that claim alone had 20k fame in it so Yeah tones of fame have been gathered up by the attackers last phase so thats just to add on whats already been said

Yes that's my point, yes we did suggest to increase fame income, but imagine increased fame income and an attacker clan is still able to capture a huge number of sites (whether it was on eu1 or any other server), simply ruined economy between a holding clan and an attacking clan

That's where I believe my suggestion from earlier about a free attacking system with limitations fits perfectly:
- Clan captured x sites and collected the fame for completely free
- If this clan is planning to take even more sites, they need to pay a price for more, there'd be a limit for all clans generally
- This will prevent attackers from taking way too many sites, even as a small group of 10 they can take too many
- Will prevent allies from swapping maps (depending on the limit)
- The free fame you win is limited and if you want to win further you're paying for it

I don't think it's normal economy for non site holder clans to make more fame than site holder clans (as what they're capturing has no limit)
Mining ores / farming fame from clothes has nothing to do with this, I speak about sites income

 

[DarkMyth.]

Yes that's my point, yes we did suggest to increase fame income, but imagine increased fame income and an attacker clan is still able to capture a huge number of sites (whether it was on eu1 or any other server), simply ruined economy between a holding clan and an attacking clan

That's where I believe my suggestion from earlier about a free attacking system with limitations fits perfectly:
- Clan captured x sites and collected the fame for completely free
- If this clan is planning to take even more sites, they need to pay a price for more, there'd be a limit for all clans generally
- This will prevent attackers from taking way too many sites, even as a small group of 10 they can take too many
- Will prevent allies from swapping maps (depending on the limit)
- The free fame you win is limited and if you want to win further you're paying for it

I don't think it's normal economy for non site holder clans to make more fame than site holder clans (as what they're capturing has no limit)
Mining ores / farming fame from clothes has nothing to do with this, I speak about sites income

I will share again 2 screenshots of the attackers on eu1, who again captured 10 excellent sites (12 excellent sites last phase), making more fame than 2 holding clans, in these 2 phases, they collected more than 100k fame, while a clan holding 4 sites is producing around 22k fame / phase

Please don't mind the fact that I'm sharing stuff from eu1 but it's where I'm currently a defender and providing my feedback from, your servers has different situations but my suggestion still fits however

 

[OrionZG]

There was more clan activity this time but for pride, they were fighting over a 50% mine haha, it was very interesting and fun honestly, but nevertheless I find it very overwhelming that all the players pile up and none fall to the ground, (well a few fell), what I mean is that this is weird. Would it be right that the defender and attacker benefit was valid for 5 players minimum?

This way it would force some players to move to other buildings or fight separately.




On the other hand, there was a lot of variety in the buildings, I think 60-40 (attackers-defenders). Meanwhile, there was only one clan that got a 100% building, but I can't say much, it was completely defended by the whole alliance and no attacker could get there (during the middle-end of the conflict), so I'll tell you what happens later.

 

[DarkMyth.]

There was more clan activity this time but for pride, they were fighting over a 50% mine haha, it was very interesting and fun honestly, but nevertheless I find it very overwhelming that all the players pile up and none fall to the ground, (well a few fell), what I mean is that this is weird. Would it be right that the defender and attacker benefit was valid for 5 players minimum?

This way it would force some players to move to other buildings or fight separately.


View attachment 48211

On the other hand, there was a lot of variety in the buildings, I think 60-40 (attackers-defenders). Meanwhile, there was only one clan that got a 100% building, but I can't say much, it was completely defended by the whole alliance and no attacker could get there (during the middle-end of the conflict), so I'll tell you what happens later.

Am2 was the server I was giving an example about, sites getting swapped by allies

 

[Nebulon Galaxus]

Yes that's my point, yes we did suggest to increase fame income, but imagine increased fame income and an attacker clan is still able to capture a huge number of sites (whether it was on eu1 or any other server), simply ruined economy between a holding clan and an attacking clan

That's where I believe my suggestion from earlier about a free attacking system with limitations fits perfectly:
- Clan captured x sites and collected the fame for completely free
- If this clan is planning to take even more sites, they need to pay a price for more, there'd be a limit for all clans generally
- This will prevent attackers from taking way too many sites, even as a small group of 10 they can take too many
- Will prevent allies from swapping maps (depending on the limit)
- The free fame you win is limited and if you want to win further you're paying for it

I don't think it's normal economy for non site holder clans to make more fame than site holder clans (as what they're capturing has no limit)
Mining ores / farming fame from clothes has nothing to do with this, I speak about sites income

Hmm your idea has a potential to it ofcourse i fear their try to avoid it by splitting to two half clans for example but it sound Like its worth exploring it at the very least since 12 sites at peak hours is incredible and for the end i was just trying to say if gates made a lot more fame Like they do on ptr as someone here wanted it would be near impossible to outcompete someone by mining or with cloths fame for example if you were not a defender or an attacker i wasnt trying to go to a different subject then the gates

 

[Queenie]

Hmm your idea has a potential to it ofcourse i fear their try to avoid it by splitting to two half clans for example but it sound Like its worth exploring it at the very least since 12 sites at peak hours is incredible and for the end i was just trying to say if gates made a lot more fame Like they do on ptr as someone here wanted it would be near impossible to outcompete someone by mining or with cloths fame for example if you were not a defender or an attacker i wasnt trying to go to a different subject then the gates

Right. Also it seems kinda off if clan holding a gates must pay for health which few attackers can later take anyway and make more fame for free than a clan that's actually holding the gate, making holding the gate little pointless lol

 

[TrollHectorBectorTroll]

Right. Also it seems kinda off if clan holding a gates must pay for health which few attackers can later take anyway and make more fame for free than a clan that's actually holding the gate, making holding the gate little pointless lol

Did someone put A gun to your head for upg buldings? You guys wanted the update now no more brachio army no more solo or small clans have chance aganist alliance what eles you guys want come on

Edit by Faye
reason: warning everyone

​

 

[Ostral]

Did someone put A gun to your head for upg buldings? You guys wanted the update now no more brachio army no more solo or small clans have chance aganist alliance what eles you guys want come on

the issue is we pay 3x times dds than you would ever do yet u would get the gate with good bonus, i highly think its fair to put a stop to drain once a healer inside the circle like old times in supply time. it would force your crew to actually kill the healer since ''attackers want themselves to be untouchable in circle for other ally''.

 

[Ostral]

i know idea wont be implemented but the issue is still going., if u want allies of defenders to be having untouchable status for you when u drain their ally, then i assume that drain stops once a healer of same number would be in.

 

[DarkMyth.]

the issue is we pay 3x times dds than you would ever do yet u would get the gate with good bonus, i highly think its fair to put a stop to drain once a healer inside the circle like old times in supply time. it would force your crew to actually kill the healer since ''attackers want themselves to be untouchable in circle for other ally''.

That'll be a massive advantage to holding clans

But attacks need to cost a price, if you want to be rewarded with fame, you need to pay a price to collect it at least

There's my ideas,
- You can keep a free attacking system, but in order to collect the fame after you captured the site you need to pay an amount of dds depending how much fame it has, if you don't pay the fame remains in site and another clan can capture it on next conflict phase & pay to collect them (if a clan is holding the site after phase they don't have to pay, this only goes if site has been recently captured)

- Make attacking sites cost dds depending on the site's yield (without making it cost an insane amount because attackers aren't guaranteed to win it)

- Make a limit of how many free sites you can capture once you exceed the limit you pay to capture more

 

[TrollHectorBectorTroll]

That'll be a massive advantage to holding clans

But attacks need to cost a price, if you want to be rewarded with fame, you need to pay a price to collect it at least

There's my ideas,
- You can keep a free attacking system, but in order to collect the fame after you captured the site you need to pay an amount of dds depending how much fame it has, if you don't pay the fame remains in site and another clan can capture it on next conflict phase & pay to collect them (if a clan is holding the site after phase they don't have to pay, this only goes if site has been recently captured)

- Make attacking sites cost dds depending on the site's yield (without making it cost an insane amount because attackers aren't guaranteed to win it)

- Make a limit of how many free sites you can capture once you exceed the limit you pay to capture more

With all the respect small clans whouldbe destoryed And they alredey can't take buldings in eu1

Edit by Faye
reason: warning everyone



​

 

[DarkMyth.]

With all the respect small clans whouldbe destoryed And they alredey can't take buldings in eu1

Sorry but destroyed how?
You have players who log on a daily basis, why can't your players farm and contribute to the clan in order to make attacks and earn fame, after all they're taking this fame for elections

And with all due respect to all the attackers on eu1 please stop saying that you already can't take buildings in eu1, you're taking half a map with about 3-5 attackers, scroll a little upwards and you'll see how many they're able to take

I'm not attacking you or anyone specifically I shared my idea and you provided me with a invalid reply, don't misunderstand me

That's a total of 29 excellent sites eu1 attackers have captured in the last 3 phases, so please reply to me with a valid point


Also my ideas aren't eu1 based, it's universally based and would fit for every server including servers which alliances are abusing map swapping

 

[TrollHectorBectorTroll]

Sorry but destroyed how?
You have players who log on a daily basis, why can't your players farm and contribute to the clan in order to make attacks and earn fame, after all they're taking this fame for elections

And with all due respect to all the attackers on eu1 please stop saying that you already can't take buildings in eu1, you're taking half a map with about 3-5 attackers, scroll a little upwards and you'll see how many they're able to take

I'm not attacking you or anyone specifically I shared my idea and you provided me with a invalid reply, don't misunderstand me

3-5 attackers? Sorry to say this but you failed in math 10+ attackers 11 am yesterday 20:00 server Time 20+ you also were happy that attackers now have to be more tactical in their attacks, so we adapted our tactics and you are complaining again 0 buldings was 400% devs can check.

Edit by Faye
reason: warning everyone

​

 

[DarkMyth.]

3-5 attackers? Sorry to say this but you failed in math 10+ attackers 11 am yesterday 20:00 server Time 20+ you also were happy that attackers now have to be more tactical in their attacks, so we adapted our tactics and you are complaining again 0 buldings was 400% devs can check.

20:00 server time 20+

 

[TrollHectorBectorTroll]

20:00 server time 20+
View attachment 48213

View attachment 48214

Regroup at two gate? No Way

Edit by Faye
reason: warning everyone

​