#14 Endgame Part 3 (Sites Gameplay)

[S19]

no war would be fun if the "recently claimed gates" cant be drained again

you can reclaim the tower after the next phase, we have multiple phases in a day now

 

[Pleiadian]

Con estas actualizaciones viven en una realidad alterna, que no va con la realidad de los jugadores, todos tenemos vida fuera del juego, trabajo, estudios, obligaciones, salidas con amigos, novia. Estan tratando de activar el juego de manera equivocada y lo único que estoy logrando es matarlo.

A pathetic excuse to keep sites instead of fighting for it.

 

[_Bad BunnY_]

Con estas actualizaciones viven en una realidad alterna, que no va con la realidad de los jugadores, todos tenemos vida fuera del juego, trabajo, estudios, obligaciones, salidas con amigos, novia. Estan tratando de activar el juego de manera equivocada y lo único que estan logrando es matarlo.

That was completely the system for YEARS, because you could attack and defend 24/7, this is rather beneficial from what you yourself say. Because instead of 24 hours that you have to worry about, it is less than 12 hours. What do you want? Have portals with all their benefits without doing absolutely anything to maintain it? Furthermore. It's not an obligation to play, it's a game. Why would you prioritize a game over your personal life? If you can fit in a schedule, you can have fun. If you can't one day, nothing happens. Rather, having different schedules helps people who currently cannot for some reason enter the only phase of vulnerability that exists

 

[Suguygyu]

we didn't sleep and with this idea we're literally going back to the same thing same goes to other servers, who's gonna wake up at 7am on eu servers to defend? where most are either going to their jobs or to schools? 1am conflict phase that's fine okay but 7 am? even 11 am it's where most of the players aren't even available and i'm not specifically talking about maps holders same goes to the enemies, they also got jobs schools, life whatever, the idea before this one was actually fine 2 conflict phases during the evening yeah okay but early mornings?

No attacker side attacking gates in middle of night bc its fun. Its primarily because thats the only time available for them to get gates.

You are complaining about people going for job or school, i understand that but defenders contain many people from diffirent time zones due to their big numbers.

And only thing attackers want is holding gates in the times when they are slightly more than defenders, you are against it but shouldnt you be also against when defenders holding gates in times when they are more?

Also there is a thing that attackers get fame in night without effort but actually defenders get fame in a day without effort.

For last i cant believe i am 'defending' attackers this much as defender in my server

 

[yewhuiyuan]

Is it to difficult to hold/defend the sites on asia?

It's so hard the European invaders looks more asian than us in the Asia server


Man we are being hammered by tryhards american server ppl waking up early morning and Dem European ppl after finishing their after lunch come whooping our arse in asia 1

 

[pablo.millo]

A pathetic excuse to keep sites instead of fighting for it.

That you have nothing to do outside of the game is not my problem

 

[_Bad BunnY_]

If a person cannot enter "to defend at dawn or at night." Well, a clan is made up of many people, there is always someone available at certain times, and if there is not. It shouldn't be a problem, because you have many phases a day to regain fame, stop seeing the game as "someone must always dominate 24 hours" without even doing anything to maintain

 

[_Bad BunnY_]

That you have nothing to do outside of the game is not my problem

Why weren't you complaining about that before the update? When anyone could take away portals from you at any second of the 24 hours a day, why only now?, It seems like people liked the new system of just covering 2 hours, getting fame for 22 hours a day for free without worries and that's it. Because I've never seen anyone complain before that "we have lives" (when you could be attacked at any time) asking for a new system.

 

[pablo.millo]

That was completely the system for YEARS, because you could attack and defend 24/7, this is rather beneficial from what you yourself say. Because instead of 24 hours that you have to worry about, it is less than 12 hours. What do you want? Have portals with all their benefits without doing absolutely anything to maintain it? Furthermore. It's not an obligation to play, it's a game. Why would you prioritize a game over your personal life? If you can fit in a schedule, you can have fun. If you can't one day, nothing happens. Rather, having different schedules helps people who currently cannot for some reason enter the only phase of vulnerability that exists

si fue el sistema durante años pero no con un horario fijo que te obliga a atacar o defender en un horario determinado

 

[Pleiadian]

That you have nothing to do outside of the game is not my problem

Dinostorm is a game, you are not obliged to be online 24/7 over some pixelated tower.

You have to accept that there's a risk you lose and an opportunity for you to win at every conflict phase. If you lose your tower at night, you regain it in the morning, full of fame.

Now there's equal opportunity for both the defenders and attackers. It's fairly balanced for both sides.

stop seeing the game as "someone must always dominate 24 hours" without even doing anything to maintain

 

[pablo.millo]

Why weren't you complaining about that before the update? When anyone could take away portals from you at any second of the 24 hours a day, why only now?, It seems like people liked the new system of just covering 2 hours, getting fame for 22 hours a day for free without worries and that's it. Because I've never seen anyone complain before that "we have lives" (when you could be attacked at any time) asking for a new system.

antes de la actualizacion los jugadores elegian el horario para atacar no te lo imponian

 

[Czarna]

Is it to difficult to hold/defend the sites on asia?

When the defending and attacking side are similar in size, it is quite difficult to defend a site. Imagine 40 defending players trying to kill 30 attacking players in one site. They are slowly winning the fight and killing the attackers, but at the same time they are slowly losing the site. All the attackers have to do is keep coming back and they will eventually take the site anyway (if they can make it in 2 hours).

It is much easier to split your forces into 2 clans and let one half drain sites that the other half holds, which is why it has become a viable and popular strategy.

 

[pablo.millo]

Dinostorm is a game, you are not obliged to be online 24/7 over some pixelated tower.

You have to accept that there's a risk you lose and an opportunity for you to win at every conflict phase. If you lose your tower at night, you regain it in the morning, full of fame.

Now there's equal opportunity for both the defenders and attackers. It's fairly balanced for both sides.

yo he estado de los 2 lados, atacante y defensor y cuando atacaba lo hacia en el horario que queria y no con una imposicion de horario, que era mucho mas divertido que ahora porque estaba la sorpresa de drenar o que te drenen y no como ahora que ya sabes el horario, donde esta lo divertido?

 

[_Bad BunnY_]

si fue el sistema durante años pero no con un horario fijo que te obliga a atacar o defender en un horario determinado

The fact that there is a conflict phase does not mean that there will necessarily be an attack, which is possible. Yes, but that was also the case with the old system. People should stop seeing it as possible to ''maintain 24 hours'', here the issue is... If you cannot defend a map at certain times, the best thing would be to release it at that time and you would recover it at your favorable time. Maybe you (hypothetical case) being accustomed to 24 hours of fame, due to the schedules, now only manage to dominate 18 hours, the enemy would have 6 hours. You still have an advantage over him, but of course. It partly benefits the enemy because IF YOU STRIVE, you manage to have a share of the fame, and perhaps, as long as you win 10 positions, the enemy. Only 2, making the game more dynamic and fun because there is a PvP incentive

Instead of ''Well, I'm an enemy, I have no chance'', and that the defenders, knowing that, constantly look for any alternative (whether clean or dirty) to have even fewer enemies and therefore, fame without worries Killing the PvP of the game, with both sides (attackers and defender) having their chances, it becomes more fun and meaningful to strive for what you want to obtain. Furthermore, enemies would also become defenders at some point

 

[yewhuiyuan]

When the defending and attacking side are similar in size, it is quite difficult to defend a site. Imagine 40 defending players trying to kill 30 attacking players in one site. They are slowly winning the fight and killing the attackers, but at the same time they are slowly losing the site. All the attackers have to do is keep coming back and they will eventually take the site anyway (if they can make it in 2 hours).

It is much easier to split your forces into 2 clans and let one half drain sites that the other half holds, which is why it has become a viable and popular strategy.

Asia is bad state..... There is like only one Asia server.... And for American it's morning and European it's afternoon those allied ppl in all euro and america server can come together and invade asia together xD... Asian not gonna hav gates lmao

 

[Suguygyu]

When the defending and attacking side are similar in size, it is quite difficult to defend a site. Imagine 40 defending players trying to kill 30 attacking players in one site. They are slowly winning the fight and killing the attackers, but at the same time they are slowly losing the site. All the attackers have to do is keep coming back and they will eventually take the site anyway (if they can make it in 2 hours).

It is much easier to split your forces into 2 clans and let one half drain sites that the other half holds, which is why it has become a viable and popular strategy.

Its true but we shouldnt forget that defenders of that conflict phase will be attackers of next conflict phase and its more likely for 40 people to succeed

 

[_Bad BunnY_]

Its true but we shouldnt forget that defenders of that conflict phase will be attackers of next conflict phase and its more likely for 40 people to succeed

Exactly, and then it becomes an "I take and now you take" for fame. Whoever wants to participate for fame will fight for it, having PvP and having fun in the times that exist, and of course. It is not mandatory to enter, just as the defenders get tired, the attackers get tired too and vice versa xD

 

[Czarna]

Its true but we shouldnt forget that defenders of that conflict phase will be attackers of next conflict phase and its more likely for 40 people to succeed

This again only proves that defending is difficult. And would mean that both sides share the sites equally in long term.

 

[_Bad BunnY_]

The big problem is that people got used to always dominating and dominating and dominating without making much effort, when it is a game based on PvP, when both sides have possibilities they must take into account that you will not always be able to win, and that is fine , the issue here that each clan should think about is: ''How much fame can I get in the moments that I manage to maintain it?", and act in a certain way that, with the fame achieved at a precise moment, you can obtain a position

 

[Kaisen]

Is it to difficult to hold/defend the sites on asia?

yes, u cant defend your own gates, its just impossible

 

[yewhuiyuan]

BUNNY G running for 2025 election of the ds universe

 

[Suguygyu]

This again only proves that defending is difficult. And would mean that both sides share the sites equally in long term.

If servers would be equal in number (attacker and defender), then yes it would prove defending is difficult.

End Game Part 3 update's purpose was gates to change hand continuously so if both sides can have gates then update succeed its purpose

 

[Highway]

We can adjust the defence rate on asia to give the defenders a better repair ratio vs attackers?
Lets say up the repair rate to 8? This makes the building still lose HP but slower when a defender is present.

It could also be something we could set up for the weekend together with the new conflict cycle schedule.

 

[yewhuiyuan]

I

We can adjust the defence rate on asia to give the defenders a better repair ratio vs attackers?
Lets say up the repair rate to 8? This makes the building still lose HP but slower when a defender is present.

It could also be something we could set up for the weekend together with the new conflict cycle schedule.

Is this to make map trading less viable?

 

[Czarna]

We can adjust the defence rate on asia to give the defenders a better repair ratio vs attackers?
Lets say up the repair rate to 8? This makes the building still lose HP but slower when a defender is present.

I don't know how much it would change things since people already got accustomed to this new way of playing. We might not even get the chance to properly test it, depends on players' willingness to adapt their plans again.

 

[- Cause -]

Man dictated eu 1 now he wanna dictate the devs too . Fr obsessed and control freak huehuehue

I already started a revolution. I will recruit an army and cause chaos in eu1 muahahhaha

 

[yewhuiyuan]

@Highway , could you add a mechanic where current map holder are forced to be healer and defender and can't go and attack other people gate.... To stop map trading...

 

[yewhuiyuan]

I already started a revolution. I will recruit an army and cause chaos in eu1 muahahhaha

Heard their server got bored they picked one of the 9 clan alliance as scape goat and kos them just for server to be enjoyable again i think saviors

 

[Suguygyu]

@Highway , could you add a mechanic where current map holder are forced to be healer and defender and can't go and attack other people gate.... To stop map trading...

Thats already benefit of multiple conflict phase, it will get harder and harder for them to trade depending on how much conflict phase present.

Before latest update -that will be tested in weekend- allies just can trade maps once per day but now they have to trade multiple times which is harder

 

[yewhuiyuan]

Thats already benefit of multiple conflict phase, it will get harder and harder for them to trade depending on how much conflict phase present.

Before latest update -that will be tested in weekend- allies just can trade maps once per day but now they have to trade multiple times which is harder

Ouhhh