#14 Endgame Part 3 (Sites Gameplay)

[_Bad BunnY_]

let me cook an update

each map will have different protection phase times such that only 1 map is ever attackable at a time.
each map will have all buildings avaible to attack
each gate in the map will have a preset amount of fame in them
maps teleport and spawn prices range from lowest(gf) to highest(mm) cost
maps total amount of fame that can be won will range from lowest (gf) to highest (mm)
so gf would have like 150k fame winnable and mm will have like 1M fame winnable
maps will open in the order of gf to mm during the corse of the day so that every single player on the server has a chance to be part of the war.

am i a good cook?

Yes, I definitely think the food was burned.

 

[Mania]

We limited the travel gate use to exactly form these clear fronts of war on the map. The idea was that clans start to position themselves before the conflict phase starts. Like an early attack defend strategy and then start to claim travel camps to open up the attack fronts etc. On servers where war is played buildings are starting to get reclaimed and this opens up new possibilites over the time of the conflict phase to travel & rescue. The proposed change of the yield HP helps on that front that claiming high yield buildings will get faster and could result in usable travel gates after 2-5 min time. In addition the idea that buildings will also fall into DV maintenance based on the risk/fail chance will directly open up more buildings usable to travel directly at the start of the conflict phase. On Lower populated servers they already have multiple travel gates managed by DV on every map.

If we open up buildings to be used again in vulnerable state, then this whole gameplay dyanmic would be lost.

But what could be an option is that the owning clan of a travel gate can use them to travel and rescue when they are in Vulnerable state but not in attacked state. In addition reclaimed gates then also only usable by the clan that claimed them? This would create territorial advantage which could be interessting while players still have clear fronts?

i get the need to have clear fronts but ultimately it's something that only helps the defenders. with the maps being as linear as they are as well, you are extremely limited on what you can do to get into the map. you can definitely teleport in and hide before the attack phase starts, but once you get killed, your options are basically 1) die at teleport sites until you find one that's unoccupied (unlikely) or 2) wait for people to walk away to defend or kill drainers and then respawn at that site or 3) get killed walking between sites and use a kit after your attacker walks away. the issue again though, is that the defenders outnumber the attackers by quite a lot, and so no matter what option you go with you're bound to just get killed right away again anyway. limiting what teleports you can use during the attack phase eliminates the only element of surprise attackers have now that we can only drain sites at a certain point every day.

i think the main issue with this idea is that, while i understand what you're trying to do in theory and i think it's not a bad idea, it heavily favors the defending side simply because of sheer numbers. the attacking side can position themselves before attacking, but the defending side can too, and so if they clash before the sites even open up, the attackers are immediately at a very very heavy disadvantage because now they're dead, the open travel sites are limited and camped, and if they try to come in through another map there are mostly likely defenders there too. i think ideally, it should be harder for the reigning clan to defend than it is for the kos clan to attack, because the reigning clan is reaping the rewards of holding maps. i think that would give more incentive for people to stop just forfeiting and joining the defending alliances. how? i'm not really sure, but the way the attack phase is now just feels fundamentally unbalanced. at least before, attackers had the advantage of surprise (often in the form of attacking at night or early morning when most people are sleeping or getting for work/school).

i think the idea of allowing clans to use their own claimed gates would be a step in the right direction, but again, this heavily favors the attackers just with the logistics of sheer numbers. i don't really know what to do to fix this, but right now, the gameplay being the way it is just isn't a "win by strategy" type deal. it's just numbers.

As for Kos lists:

We never liked that player acted that way in a sort of toxic fashion in the community. But thats something we as developers can hardly avoid in a open PVP enviroment. We can just make changes here and there to lower the impact. The PVP protection helps but also removes a player from participating in PVP. But with the added synchronized protection phase for all buildings the PVP protection can be disabled before the conflict start and a player can savely play in the protection phase. We really try to think all ideas through and I understand its often not clear why a change is made as the subtle things are not directly noticed.

what i mean is, at this point it's kind of too late to be implementing updates that are supposed to be addressing the issue of kos lists/running people off servers as alewx seems to be saying. the culture that's ingrained in the game now has been here for, at this point, over a decade. i think to address the issue of kos lists, and by extension alliances, there need to be more severe changes. the ones implementing now, if they are to try to combat kos lists and give those clans a chance, are not exceeding expectations at what they're supposed to do. again, i don't have many ideas in that regard, but what you all are trying to do is going directly against the culture of the game that has been growing up until this point. things were a bit better back in 2013/2014 when enemy clans could own maps at the same time and attack each other while still holding and trying for elections but i think we are too far gone beyond that point. it would probably be better to try to make kos alliances more viable against defending alliances. again, not entirely sure how, but i'm sure someone with more brain cells than me could come up with something decent.

We think that having syncronized time schedules for conflict and protection phases is important to counter many issues and make the gameplay more interessting and less boring as there are always player around. We can see that CCU spikes during the conflict phase with is great. But I can totally understand that its more difficult to perform sneaky attacks on times where most players are offline or other strategies etc. But it had a also a big downside as players used multis, shared accounts etc to be available 24/7 to counter these attacks. Having a clear time when conflict ot peak times loweres this unfair and CoC breaking behaivor. Especially as you need to really play to able to defend the building and not just idle in the building area.

Right now we are on a single conflict per day but that might change later. Currently it helps to easier iterate changes on the dynamics like with the proposed idea. So we want to focus on the internals first before introducing more conflict phases.

the issue with this, aside from robbing attacking clans of that element of surprise, is the game is genuinely dead outside of those 2 hours. defenders have no reason to log in because they know their maps are safe. attackers have no reason to log in because they know they can't do anything aside from maybe kill enemies who are trying to hunt. but those enemies can just get protection because they don't have to defend their maps from draining. it just feels very... lifeless, the way it is now. it's probably a bit more lively at the moment because of the event, but once that's over, most servers are going to be next to empty outside of the attack hours, which is just... not fun. granted, it was already heading that direction anyway, but now it's 5x worse than before. it is good that it's more difficult to multi account, but it's come at the cost of everything else, so i wonder if it was really truly worth it anyway.

sorry if i repeated myself or if i worded anything poorly, i am currently ill.

 

[smaugwe]

Having huge alliances dominating over the game is really something needs to be taken care of because it simply just kills the hope for attacking side that causes entire server to die. We see that is exactly what devs are trying to fix. It doesn't matter your part of ally or ko list game is simply no good for anyone if its dead.

As for devs I think you are trying to fix this issue wrong way. On the servers where more then 50% of people are allyed together there is no update you can bring that will give a real chance attacker side. number difference will just stay same. all the updates will do is abuse (nerf) defender side which will affect to attackers as well if they manage to hold sites

SOLUTION: What you really need to do is to change gameplay in a way that creating a huge alliance will no more be usefull in the game. How can that be done is by adding new feature maybe similar to today's sites. But in this case this "feature" needs to be in limited numbers and very important for the gameplay. Main thing is only one or two clan should have access to this "feature" and progression needs to be very slow. Not like gates when you can just take turns no it needs to be temporary so when you lose it you lose all advantage clan gained from it

Now lets say one or two clan from ally will start to take advantage of this "feature" other clans in ally will be forced to continue play without this exclusive items or leave alliance and fight their way over it.

This idea is very faulty but I just wanted you to take a general look at how can you fix the game without ruining part of its gameplay (defending). Focus needs to be on breaking alliances apart not nerfing them until another side wins.

 

[Sunshine..]

advantages of defenders: numbers.

advantages of attackers: strategies (currently there is no possibility of having any).

The fact is that it will never be balanced if the defenders always know what time the attackers are going to attack.

 

[Isabella16]

¿Podrías aumentar la curación de las torres de 5 a 10?
El enemigo toma 20 de las torres y contrarrestarlo con 5 no es muy equilibrado.

 

[piotr50000009]

advantages of defenders: numbers.

advantages of attackers: strategies (currently there is no possibility of having any).

The fact is that it will never be balanced if the defenders always know what time the attackers are going to attack.

That's why i suggested different times and stacking (more people more attack/heal points per second)

 

[A.k.a.s.h.i]

There will never be the fun people are looking for or the "equal wars" they talk so much about if no one EVER takes the initiative to abandon the role of alliances, (People talk and talk about how there are no enemies, wars or fun, but they are the same people who never leave the comfort zone of alliances and live non-stop feeding that way of playing). The worst thing is seeing people say that "alliances have always existed" when that is not the case, at least on my server in the early years of the game, each class depended on each other and the maps for each one ran out, Without intervention and rest. . Over time, people started alliances and thus slowly became bored and killed the game. I don't know what the purpose of the game is if it isn't war for current players, being connected, hunting endlessly and living endlessly. For me one of the things that should be addressed are the following:



1. The fact of reviving ONLY ONE portal per map (at least in am1, because it is DV's possession) makes the job easier for the defenders, it is very easy to gather 30 people in the revive portal, and... . So?



2. The attacks are too predictable by only having a specific time of day, the surprise factor is lost when attacking, which is what gives the attacker an advantage, the defender does not know when you are going to be there attacking the portal.



3. Currently, after the vulnerability phase the game completely loses its meaning. What logic does it have to be able to spend 22 hours of protection, remove it for the 2 hours of vulnerability and once finished put protection back on? People participating in a portal's dominance (whether attack or defense) should not be able to place protection until the next phase of the conflict. In this way, there is an incentive to wear down your enemy knowing that he will have to be careful when hunting, and that if you want a portal, you must have the resources to maintain it in every way. This way it doesn't become "Active only in the vulnerability phase and see you the next day..."

I agree with you, and what you said is basically that the former update stills better than the current update. I already said it, but i will say for the 3º time, if something is already perfect, you cant improve it more. The update before, where we have supply packs, was the better way to make wars, you have a low cost, but still a cost that some people cant afford, win who have more numbers or who have less numbers, more gold, and more persistence. And before you could attack everyday and everynight, forcing the allies just listen to you, our the enemy consider accept you in the ally.

When i talked about it, i read the follow sentence ''but if we put more time to attack it would be no difference between this update and the current version", yeah, maybe this was a signal that would be better stay like it was, no?

BUT, at all i cant complain, cus i still with map and i dont need to stay on 24h like before defending map all day, or when going to work worried if the enemy will take map cus everyone is working and have no one to defend the map, so for me, for a while, its ok. Although, i think about when i got in the same situation of my enemies, allies can change, one clan can betray other and etc... just common, and when it happens, my clan or other will have to wait someone betray again, they cant even force someone betray by continuing attacking making them fight with themselves due to ''why x clan isnt helping? why are they off? (even if you have 10 on, if the number is lower than the other clans, there is always a clan off complaint)"

However, i have my doubts if devs will really back in the update, its all about pride after all, they wont come back in what they worked for a few couples of days. Maybe they try make more hours to attack, but stay and still ineffective if you cant claim back the zones once its taken.

 

[VioletRosa]

As for Kos lists:
We never liked that player acted that way in a sort of toxic fashion in the community. But thats something we as developers can hardly avoid in a open PVP enviroment. We can just make changes here and there to lower the impact. The PVP protection helps but also removes a player from participating in PVP. But with the added synchronized protection phase for all buildings the PVP protection can be disabled before the conflict start and a player can savely play in the protection phase. We really try to think all ideas through and I understand its often not clear why a change is made as the subtle things are not directly noticed.

2. Ohh yes that sounds bad and not great. Check out the answer above as it might help in this regard. We could also increase the invulnerable time on rescue to allow to flee better (This will also increase the travel sick effect)?

1. we don't care. some people deserve it. further more war irl has kos aka enemies killed on site

2. that MAY work in some situations but I'm letting you know right now that if someone wants to kill someone that bad they will follow them until they can attack. there is no escape

 

[yewhuiyuan]

You guys are fr putting in too much thoughts for this update.... Now it feels like the more stuff u add the messier and the more unpleasant it gets just like a murky water and you guys keep stirring it hoping it gets better some how but it get more dirty....

1) get more cycle through out the day
2) find a mechanic and system that can break the alliance


We don't care Abt election seat ohh we got a new system to calculate DV hold how many buildings bla bla bla

 

[DalekRaptor]

But it had a also a big downside as players used multis, shared accounts etc to be available 24/7 to counter these attacks. Having a clear time when conflict ot peak times loweres this unfair and CoC breaking behaivor. Especially as you need to really play to able to defend the building and not just idle in the building area.

players still are using multis even with your changes XD

 

[Suguygyu]

Even though it might sound like nonsense, actually making defending useless and very hard is the thing bring enjoy to both sides.

If 5-10 person attacker group can easily take down your gates and also next attack phase you as big alliance can do same, would you wait your turn for election in big alliance or take action knowing attacking is easier for getting fame that you dont have to wait for months.

Also this idea supports the purpose of End Game Part 3 update that gates change hand continuously.

Last Note:
-Everything that tries to balance defending and attacking actually counts for defending since defenders have massive numbers. Defenders that lost gates will be attacker of next phase, dont forget that.

-Every attacker should be rewarded according to their efforts in a day and not acording to single vulnerable phase. Thanks for reading

 

[S4TW]

Ok this topic will be unlocked later. Let me try to explain the fundamentals element of the presented idea again in a different way.

More Rewards = Higher Risk
If a clan wants more rewards from the buildings the clan can choose to upgrade the yield of the building. Now with the planned change there will be an added risk doing so. The Max Hp the building will have at the beginning of the conflict will be lower than basic and so on. The higher the yield the more the attacker is encuraged to attack to steal the fame because it will be quicker to drain the building. (Yield will be shown to all players as well)
The exact numbers of HP per yield etc is not fixed yet and must be tested first. But what we also change that the repair rate will be raised from 5 to 10 points so that the defender can repair the building faster after defeding an attack or slow the attack down more than currently.

Long ownership = Risk that building needs maintenace repairs from DV
Currently we have a system in place that calculates how many buildings are held by dinoville based on the townhall activity. This number will change every 14 days based on the townhall election activity in that period. If the activity rises, DV will free random buildings to be claimed again by clans. As this happens at a slow pace you most likely will see 1-3 freed or DV claimed buildings at the time.
So what the planned idea does is to build on top of this system that there is risk that a building needs to go into maintenace when it is held by a single clan for a longer time. A DV maintenace will only last one protection phase and will be free to claim by clans again. This will result that the buildings held by DV will change more often as all the DV buildings, even the one of the townhall activity scaling, will can be freed again. Also keep in mind that you will still get the item producion without the need to defend the building as compensation when the building goes into maintenance.

Why these changes?

• On peace servers this change will create a dynamic that cause the buildngs change over time and adds a potential for small clans to grab exellent yield buildings with lower effort than currenty. At least the temptation will be a lot greater to attack than right now.
• On full war servers this change will help to easier defend lower yield buildings and to overall gain more fame with that. When a clan is not able to defend the building only "GOOD" yield is achieved which we already saw as issue on asia. It also gives clan a bit of tactic which buildings to upgrade and which to keep to allow easier defence.
• Overall it gives the clans a bit more variety as there will be changing buildings over the map with different rewards and risks to claim them.

Please ask your questions if something remains unclear. Also keep your feedback constructive otherwise it will move into the trash bin. Also keep it civil between all parties involved. So keep that in mind when you take your time to post your feedback & questions. Thanks

Hello, I see few issues with this idea and I guess some people will agree with me, some will disagree.

The first issue is that you don't exactly know how certain server dynamics work right now, you are looking at the matters from your point of view (correct me if i'm wrong tho). I don't know about other servers, but for a very good example - eu2.
Eu2 is a server that has so many enemies that I could count on the fingers of my one hand, and some of them are already trying to get peace and join our side (the majority of them actually). In that case we're left with neutral players who log for the events only and our alliance. It was earlier mentioned that nothing happened on eu2 during the attack phase - and this is true, we had 5 people draining gates (for about 20mins till the gates were claimed) and 15+defending them aswell. Since the first phase our gates had been attacked one time by the enemies.
I want to add, that there is no signs of any miracle in the form of ''insane comeback to eu2'' happening. There is basically nobody to come back.

Another issue, I think you rather based this update on what you thought was happening - again, correct me if I'm wrong - and this is where the update to ''support'' smaller clans came from. There's no such thing as putting someone on KOS list for nothing and never letting them have peace/elections and I could prove it in many different ways. You might wonder why is eu2 so deserted, it used to be active once in past, but then many wars happened, then your updates made people leave aswell because the game has gotten extremely nostalgic and boring. Some people got banned, other people sold their accounts, others just quit and forgot that the game existed, and the majority joined our alliance and most of them have rex by now / (there's LESS than 5 enemies without rex left,and 1 out of them plays). For most of the servers it works the same way, ''KOS LISTS'' are made so the alliance knows who to kill, but individual people that leave their former clans are mostly welcome to remain neutral or join the other alliance, then work as everyone else does and get elections. We're not that greedy to keep individual people still involved even when they openly show they want to get out of trouble.

Another thing that you guys missed, this is a game yeh, played by real people, and most of the people that are listed as enemies all across the servers have taken the game to the personal level, I know many examples of people who'd drag someone's families into the game matters, insult their loved ones, friends, share their personal pictrues all around Dino Storm groups, make memes with them, edit their pictrues into p*rn ones etc, etc. then come to complain on the forum and wonder why are they being killed and blocked away from elections and peace - and then you guys come to the rescue, deciding that what we do is unfair and think of the ways you could make this game even less playable than it already was, because you base your decisions on the fate of minority and make the game harder for the majority, instead of finding suitable solutions for both. People can forgive and be forgiven if they are willing to change, but if they keep repeating their mistakes - there won't be any update that could fix the reality.


Therefore I may add that destroying the point of alliances and basically taking out all the fun that was in the game is simply lowering the point and value that was created for this game all these years. It had been a normal thing to have alliances with other players, and to have enemies, people created bonds over years and taking it away from them will only make them quit even faster than they already do. The ''KOS LISTS" and ""ALLY LISTS" had always been a thing, since the game was created and nobody was bothered by that, so consider making something for these instead of desperately trying to get rid of them (It will not work the way you want).


With that I also want to add that you can most likely expect the drop of activity, both during attack phase and protection phase. Since march 26th alone I've seen ''account sale'' posts in amount of tens all across facebook, and they've been just hanging there, even when the prices are extremely low and accounts are good, nobody wants to buy them, which will lead players to just quit and never come back.

The last thing, you're posting here and asking us for the feedback on the updates, people share their opinion, I know that some of the people might've gone too far, but some devs approach to players is full of disrecpect (i will not drop the names but i guess you know who i mean), despise, attitude and it clearly shows picking sides and pettiness towards the matter. This is not helping anyone especially your team, because all this does is to make people hate you. You're also bringing up new ideas for the updates even tho the current one's named ''Endgame Pt.3" (and suppossedly the last). I'm very sorry to say that, but you've ruined the game with the "Pt.1" already , and it's not as enjoyable as it used to be back in 2012-2022. No matter what new you'll bring it can only make the game even less attractive and more boring, you can't undo the damage that you've done. So better just leave it at what it is and hope for the best. However if you intend to continue with further updates, be aware that it will most likely end up as a further damage. Try to listen to everyone's complaints though, because all this End Game idea was not given by the majority - that plays, provides you with money by buying gold coins and is interested in continuing to play this game.

 

[_ARROW_]

uma das piores atualizações dessa forma perderam jogadores, pois antes as atualizações tinham pontos negativos e positivos, voces tiraram algo que dava prazer aos antigos e novos jogadores, pois drenar portal e não ter hora para ataca-lo fazia , com que o jogo fosse divertido ,estou vindo como todo jogador que gostava do jogo que maioria ira migrar para outro jogo ou jogar pouco ate mudar essa atualização que não tem fundamento, pois não da pra jogar só farmar, si o jogo fosse pve poderia ser dessa forma, mas é um jogo pvp, voltei com o antigo modo de atacar portais deixem como estavam, isso é tudo !!!

 

[NazzaFire]

Btw , neither the most toxic player deserve to be kos , and every player deserve to play freely.

 

[S4TW]

Btw , neither the most toxic player deserve to be kos , and every player deserve to play freely.

It's just simply a consequence of going personal with the ones in charge, it's well-known that it can't be really solved otherwise, people have a choice after all, and they mostly choose to do this (tho i don't really understand why exactly someone's going personal with others over a game), knowing what's gonna happen, so the fault is on their part, tho as I said everything can be forgiven, people deserve a second chance, it all depends on it they will change the way they act towards others or not.

 

[NazzaFire]

There is always a solution and making Kos a player is not the right solution

 

[S4TW]

There is always a solution and making Kos a player is not the right solution

What's the solution if the one that had commited such acts doesn't even want to apologize (I'm not speaking on your example, but the majority's). Anyway that's just a part of the main issue.

 

[NazzaFire]

Like me they can apologize even now but there are players who don't even accept this, and you know it better than me, I have been Kos for years and no one deserves to be

 

[S4TW]

Like me they can apologize even now but there are players who don't even accept this, and you know it better than me, I have been Kos for years and no one deserves to be

How many chances did you get? I think I lost the count. Because you also got multiple chances, as I said above, everyone deserve it, no idea what you've done to end up where you are, but I'm aware that you had your chances.

 

[NazzaFire]

How many chances did you get? I think I lost the count

Don't talk about it since you're not in the same situation , ''changes'' ? I never asked of being a puppet, when in the past I asked for neutrality I meant not to attack anyone not even the few players who attack as mentioned above by you

 

[ThiagoXDestruidor]

@Highway @Alewx
Allied clans are draining themselves to leave their portals protected in 15 minutes. Rotation of maps, even if it is with little fame produced...

 

[Pleiadian]

''Endgame Pt.3" (and suppossedly the last). I'm very sorry to say that, but you've ruined the game with the "Pt.1"

Agree with everything you have said, except that part.

To say that this update is ruining the game is pure nonsense.

Take for example, before this update, if you were the enemy clan against the entire server, you would need the same amount of players to even get some elections, it would be a war of attrition, and whoever lasts longer wins. Naturally, the alliance will win.

Now they are trying to make this situation better in favors of small attacking clans. From what I've read, some people who are giving good feedback have their clans against the whole server. If this update didn't happen, this wouldn't give those small clans hope.

No matter what new you'll bring it can only make the game even less attractive and more boring, you can't undo the damage that you've done.

Unattractive for the players who have been playing since 2015 state.

They can still revive the game through advertising and bringing in new players who are willing to play in this new game concept— or give us (the current demographic) what we are asking, which is the previous state of the game in the golden days. Choice is theirs.

It is normal for players to say that all of these updates seems rather unattractive. All of these people's expectation is that the game would go back to the state it was in 2016.

How was the game back in those golden days?

1. You could apply in the same election even after winning it.
2. Maps were not linear
3. Alliance were not so dominant because the culture in all servers was still transforming from "player holding site" to "clan holding site"

At any given page of the thread, you will always see someone asking something about the old state of the game.

 

[Pleiadian]

If the problem is seriously about alliances, then we should break down the clans.

Only players should be given the ability to hold Sites. Not Clans. This would possibly mean that they would need to re-structure the map layout (as they should have since everyone is asking)

Either this safe option, or we go ahead in uncharted territory and bring in changes that many would not be so happy about.

 

[VioletRosa]

Btw , neither the most toxic player deserve to be kos , and every player deserve to play freely.

I forgot to reply to this but yes in theory no matter what game someone plays they should have the right. but in practice? it doesn't work. here's some reasons why:

1. TOS/COC

2. PERSON A wants to be the only person on the server

3. PERSON B only wants their friends and family with achievements in game

4. PERSON C wants to kill literally every person they see without protection

5. PERSON D doesn't want to use protection and wants to be left the hell alone

6. PERSON E wants to steal your husband/wife

So how can we make games fair for EVERYONE? No matter what you choose, there will always be groups of people left out. Me personally, I miss the old maps and old items to get. I miss the hunters which may or may not come back :v

 

[Pleiadian]

Situation where players were abused to leave the game, has been engineered by the Developers— indirectly, you created the environment, you created everything. You cannot blame this type of problem on the player base. So it is unfair to place all the blame on the community for players who left the game.

Dinostorm has an ongoing election system, a player will always be wanting to have his piece of the cake of the elections. However, in the previous state of the game, attackers were just not rewarded for any of their attacks. Attackers continued to attack despite being outnumbered. Naturally, over the years, their attacks became less and less as they got de-motivated and eventually, they didn't get anything from their attacks so they left the game.

So in that regard, an enemy list will always exist in Dinostorm, due to its gameplay.

Now you have pushed an update that fixed the environment where attackers are given favorable outcomes, so this already fixes your so-called problems about players being pushed out of the game.


This whole paragraph by @S4TW really explains the idea behind why all KOS lists are formed. KOS list are simply enemies. This whole topic of the KOS list should have never been your point of focus.

There's no such thing as putting someone on KOS list for nothing and never letting them have peace/elections and I could prove it in many different ways

Different servers, different cultures, different rules, different ways of playing. Overall, this whole culture thing was never really understood by you Devs. That's why we have so many players from different server, complaining about different things that are overwhelming you.

but what you all are trying to do is going directly against the culture of the game that has been growing up until this point.

 

[S4TW]

Agree with everything you have said, except that part.

To say that this update is ruining the game is pure nonsense.

Take for example, before this update, if you were the enemy clan against the entire server, you would need the same amount of players to even get some elections, it would be a war of attrition, and whoever lasts longer wins. Naturally, the alliance will win.

Now they are trying to make this situation better in favors of small attacking clans. From what I've read, some people who are giving good feedback have their clans against the whole server. If this update didn't happen, this wouldn't give those small clans hope.


Unattractive for the players who have been playing since 2015 state.

They can still revive the game through advertising and bringing in new players who are willing to play in this new game concept— or give us (the current demographic) what we are asking, which is the previous state of the game in the golden days. Choice is theirs.

It is normal for players to say that all of these updates seems rather unattractive. All of these people's expectation is that the game would go back to the state it was in 2016.

How was the game back in those golden days?

1. You could apply in the same election even after winning it.
2. Maps were not linear
3. Alliance were not so dominant because the culture in all servers was still transforming from "player holding site" to "clan holding site"

At any given page of the thread, you will always see someone asking something about the old state of the game.

I've been talking mainly on eu2 example, because before theEndGame update this server was pretty active,both enemies and allies were playing and working for their elections, because everyone wanted rex, and the only way to obtain it was to get elected as sheriff, back then I've been seeing maujak full of people everyday, even tho the sheriff lists were long and sometimes lasted years, people would keep being active just to get it for the time being at least. After this update came on Live Servers, Eu2 became the less active server for a while untill Eu3 peace happened - from what i know. People would work for rex, get it and then disappear after a very short period of time.

Tho I do admit that this update is good for the enemies (only on the servers with both sides being strong tho). Take Asia and Eu1 for example. Asia's forces used to be equal on both sides - before the Ban Wave - and the gates were changing owners pretty much everyday. Eu1 from the other hand had a lot of inactive enemies, and they could log anytime if they WANTED to.

The part I hate the most is the current one and what they're planning to do next.

Fine, it might work out for Asia and America servers (the active ones) but it's completely killing Eu servers. Back when gates were many and attackable anytime of the day enemies had the advantage of surprise - could drain any time of the day/night. Now that there's an announced time for the attacks - they gave up. Even Europe1 became boring, 4-5 enemies drain during attack phases and yet - they are unable to do any damage.

What I also don't get is all the excitement for the activity during attack phases - simply because that's it. People don't have to be online 24/7 to guard their gates anymore - while doing that most of them would hunt, upgrade, play for fun - not anymore. So many servers are inactive for 22 hours day just to come for a show-off that will last 2 hours - sometimes less if the gates are claimed.

I'm basically giving my thoughts, becaue as silly as this might sound, I really like this game, and I've played it since 2012, but I am aware that it might be unplayable anytime soon, which is sad - because so many years, money, and joy would be simply going to waste.

 

[S4TW]

If the problem is seriously about alliances, then we should break down the clans.

Only players should be given the ability to hold Sites. Not Clans. This would possibly mean that they would need to re-structure the map layout (as they should have since everyone is asking)

Either this safe option, or we go ahead in uncharted territory and bring in changes that many would not be so happy about.

I still don't get it, where did the problem suddenly come from? Alliances were formed on Dino Storm since the very beggining of it and it was never an issue, if they weren't, every clan would be draining each other, and nobody would have elections instead of everyone with formed alliances. This being said, for the last 12 years people have been creating bonds / hatred with / towards other people, There is no update that can fix that.

I do get that some servers might not let so-called ''KOS'' go for elections, but I also believe there's a reason to that. I personally am a leader on Eu2, whoever there was to take in from enemy side - We took, and now we're working on their future elections.

However changing the game to suit individual players OR weaker clans was an issue from the beginning, because these are minority as I said, and I know multiple, MULTIPLE ''KOS'' who disagree with this and further updates aswell.
The game should not be made to suit individuals on certain servers, because this way the servers with no enemies were forgotten.

 

[Pleiadian]

Alliances were formed on Dino Storm since the very beggining of it and it was never an issue

They were not as problematic as today. There were micro alliances, not large ones. Currently, you go on a server and you'll see an alliance as if it's a corporation or something.

If the problem is about alliance, then you go back to day 1 and learn how this problem never occurred in the past.

If you'd go browse the changes and the previous Dev Shack where "everything started to go wrong", you will see that many of these changes favors big group battles instead of individual ones. Obviously, the developers didn't foresee this consequence at that time.

I still don't get it, where did the problem suddenly come from?

There's no one specific change that led to this. it's a series of them.

 

[piotr50000009]

If you'd go browse the changes and the previous Dev Shack where "everything started to go wrong"

The first big update (where maps became one squiggly line and a lot of other things)

 

[Luka Patajac]

what was point of maps being as they are now anyway?(I never quite understood that even at time when it was just released update.)