#14 Endgame Part 3 (Sites Gameplay)

[NazzaFire]

I'm too lazy to write the whole story, ask your friends they know

 

[S4TW]

I'm too lazy to write the whole story, ask your friends they know

That's what I thought. Now I'll ask devs to give the advantage to low lvls against the big ones since you fancy to kill anyone between 1 and 50lvl so much.

 

[NazzaFire]

That's what I thought. Now I'll ask devs to give the advantage to low lvls against the big ones since you fancy to kill anyone between 1 and 50lvl so much.

as if you didn't lol

 

[_Bad BunnY_]

It seems there are people who don't like the idea of alliances not being as useful as they currently are. Because this way they can gain positions and dominate without doing anything more than having a ghost and inactive clan with portals, like an afk simulator xD, a game is supposed to be for fun and the game is based on PvP and dominance, to create a stability and fun in that. Both sides must exist, but the players and the game method (both things) took it upon themselves to "dedicate themselves to eradicating" even the slightest threat to even a single portal on their servers, so after so much. There aren't that many enemies anywhere, and there never will be if changes aren't made, which is sort of the focus the update is trying to take (although it's not working at the moment). Besides, what's the fun of earning a position or a Rex knowing that there's no satisfaction and you didn't do anything to get it? You don't even need to supply the areas like before, after all. The vast majority of players these days just want to be there, dominating and winning without doing anything else.

 

[Mania]

It seems there are people who don't like the idea of alliances not being as useful as they currently are. Because this way they can gain positions and dominate without doing anything more than having a ghost and inactive clan with portals, like an afk simulator xD, a game is supposed to be for fun and the game is based on PvP and dominance, to create a stability and fun in that. Both sides must exist, but the players and the game method (both things) took it upon themselves to "dedicate themselves to eradicating" even the slightest threat to even a single portal on their servers, so after so much. There aren't that many enemies anywhere, and there never will be if changes aren't made, which is sort of the focus the update is trying to take (although it's not working at the moment). Besides, what's the fun of earning a position or a Rex knowing that there's no satisfaction and you didn't do anything to get it? You don't even need to supply the areas like before, after all. The vast majority of players these days just want to be there, dominating and winning without doing anything else.

this seems to be the biggest thing. it used to be back in 2013/2014 you had to be a lot more diligent about your sites because it was YOU personally supplying them. not your clan or your friends, YOU. if you were offline and you got drained? tough. and i think that was part of what made the game more fun back then. there was a lot more at stake. there were definitely alliances, but there was also enough differences between players that alliances were a lot less likely to form. i remember being a little level 5 or whatever in goldfields back in 2013 and watching one of the big am1 clans invade the map of another am1 clan bc they were trying to steal elections. there were a lot more politics involved, temporary ceasefires, etc.

nowadays? you can be offline most days, your clan will supply for you, and if your map gets attacked you have 4-5 other clans that will kill whoever tried to drain you. or well... i guess it's different now with the newest update, but you get the gist. it's less a war game now and more like an idle simulator as you say. it was already sort of headed that way for a while though, that's not exclusive to this most recent change to war.

i do kind of think that restoring the ability to have individuals hold sites (as pleidian suggested) would possibly be an interesting change. it would give more incentive for people to do their own thing and give server enemies a chance to win fame. however, that would need to come along with more changes to disincentivize forming alliances. but again, like we've all said thus far, there is very much an established culture in the game itself and in separate servers, and anything you might do will disrupt that no matter what. so i guess it's a matter of the devs talking and figuring out exactly what it is they want out of their game.

it seems to me that the biggest problem right now is that what the devs are envisioning and what the players want is directly at odds. not saying that either one is specifically right, but as far as i know the devs don't really play their game and maybe don't quite get how things go in the servers. and i think part of the problem with trying to break up alliances is that a lot of the alliances in this game now have existed for years and those players are close. which again, ties into what i'm saying about disrupting the culture of the game. ultimately, i think that no matter what the solution might be, it will not be simple and it probably won't be as popular as the devs might hope. players like the status quo of their safe servers. it's not fun for the rest of us, but what can you do i guess.

 

[Rockspider19]

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

making defedning useless = ally trade gates amoun themselves

 

[Rockspider19]

I'd honestly prefer the old site gameplay but make supply charges cost dd instead so everyone has a fair shot at gates.

 

[Galaxy]

defenders (large alliances) won't have much advantage?
as the defenders are the majority, it would be easy for them to organize and prepare for the times of the attacks, no?

Well well

 

[Isabella16]

El uso de multicuentas y compartir cuentas entre servidores aún continúa, incluso con las restricciones que se les han puesto, los enemigos con brachy se suicidan en las puertas de viajes y minas para poder tomarlas y usar kits de rescate instantáneo. Brachy sigue fuerte.

 

[- Cause -]

So basicly since 2016 the updates have LIMITED the players.
2016 map update -> we got limited to 2 ways
Pt 1 - Jump links. just jump links. nothing meaningful was added in pt1.
Pt 2 was the only update i've enjoyed.
Pt 3 we got limited on when we can attack.


You dont incentivise activity by limiting players. if a kid has 10 toys and he's forced to play, he's gonna play more with each one coz he knows if he dont like one thing he can change. he has POSSIBILITIES.

But if a kid is forced to play with one toy, the kid wont have fun playing after a while.

some ppl may enjoy to attack at 18:00 but overtime it will become like a second job. like something monotone. coz no matter how many enemies and stuff, everything is gonna be meaningless after the attack phase.

Just give players more freedom man. Some good old american freedom!

 

[- Cause -]

And the updates inbetween are so meaningless that no one thinks of them as updates.

 

[Rockspider19]

After being in all of the wars since the update i can say that the game is way more boring right now.
we use to have 12hr wars a few times a month now we have 1hr wars that end after all gates have been traded between ally clans.
during protection phase everyone can take protection and farm so there is no need to pvp at all unless you want to waste dds.
the servers are active right now because of the event but when the event is over there will be 0 reason to log into the game ... again...

 

[S19]

do kind of think that restoring the ability to have individuals hold sites (as pleidian suggested) would possibly be an interesting change. it would give more incentive for people to do their own thing and give server enemies a chance to win fame.

i think that this would create so much chaos in the server, it will essentially be the player managing his own fame, with his own effort instead of relying on clan members. it might even solve the issue of alliance, i mean, alliance in itself will be very very limited.

supply charge are no longer a thing, the game is now f2p you could say, it would be equal opportunity for everyone to fight and win their thing

 

[- Cause -]

i think that this would create so much chaos in the server, it will essentially be the player managing his own fame, with his own effort instead of relying on clan members. it might even solve the issue of alliance, i mean, alliance in itself will be very very limited.

supply charge are no longer a thing, the game is now f2p you could say, it would be equal opportunity for everyone to fight and win their thing

True but how would you combine it with a clan system?

 

[NazzaFire]

i think that this would create so much chaos in the server, it will essentially be the player managing his own fame, with his own effort instead of relying on clan members. it might even solve the issue of alliance, i mean, alliance in itself will be very very limited.

supply charge are no longer a thing, the game is now f2p you could say, it would be equal opportunity for everyone to fight and win their thing

That's the new current way to reach the goal to obtain rex individually without the limitation from the alliances but it must be fixed as well

 

[S19]

True but how would you combine it with a clan system?

limit the clan member to 40 only

let's be real, despite a clan having 80 spot, there is never 80 active players, there is always some inactive ones. by decreasing the size of the clan, we force them to break themselves down to a level close to individuality and far from an alliance state, then the alliance would not be as powerful as today, because there's a lot to control here, the power is given directly to the player

 

[S19]

to be fair, the update is working as intended in server like asia.

the ones complaining are from server that have a big population, so we cannot say that this update is not working, the solution to find is for big servers with no enemies complaining about boredom

 

[Galaxy]

Attackers must have the freedom to organize themselves and attack at the time they think is best.
And the protection time for portals should be a maximum of 2 hours and be individual protection for each portal, in case it is attacked.
If the attacker takes the portal, it will be protected for 2 hours, producing fame.
If the defender manages to defend the portal, it will also be protected for 2 hours.
it would be much gentler than forcing attackers to face defenders directly.

 

[Rockspider19]

People are setting alarms to wake up early for conflict phases this game feels less like a game and more like a job.
where is the fun?

 

[Mania]

i think that this would create so much chaos in the server, it will essentially be the player managing his own fame, with his own effort instead of relying on clan members. it might even solve the issue of alliance, i mean, alliance in itself will be very very limited.

supply charge are no longer a thing, the game is now f2p you could say, it would be equal opportunity for everyone to fight and win their thing

i think this is a lot of what's missing from the game right now actually. chaos. if you look at any other pvp game (call of duty, fortnite, overwatch, etc) everything feels very chaotic and it's fun. it's somewhat unpredictable, it requires strategy, it requires some semblance of forethought. it's not the same thing every time. and that's part of why people play these kinds of games. every match is different. but that's not how dinostorm is, not anymore. way back when you had to manage your own sites? absolutely it was chaos! enemies held maps at the same time, smaller players could steal sites to get fame, the maps had opportunities to shake off someone chasing you down bc they weren't linear. that's the essence of a pvp game! you want it to be crazy, you want it to be chaos! and from what i see here, it seems like these most recent updates make everything formulaic, set in stone. heck, people barely even betray their alliances anymore. people need more incentive to be a little silly. a little free thinking. there's no point in it being a pvp game if it's not chaotic.

 

[- Cause -]

i think this is a lot of what's missing from the game right now actually. chaos. if you look at any other pvp game (call of duty, fortnite, overwatch, etc) everything feels very chaotic and it's fun. it's somewhat unpredictable, it requires strategy, it requires some semblance of forethought. it's not the same thing every time. and that's part of why people play these kinds of games. every match is different. but that's not how dinostorm is, not anymore. way back when you had to manage your own sites? absolutely it was chaos! enemies held maps at the same time, smaller players could steal sites to get fame, the maps had opportunities to shake off someone chasing you down bc they weren't linear. that's the essence of a pvp game! you want it to be crazy, you want it to be chaos! and from what i see here, it seems like these most recent updates make everything formulaic, set in stone. heck, people barely even betray their alliances anymore. people need more incentive to be a little silly. a little free thinking. there's no point in it being a pvp game if it's not chaotic.

You hit the nail on its head. Bullseye. Simply perfect analogy

 

[Pleiadian]

There's an issue with this 2-hour attack phase that I am starting to notice over time.

You obviously introduced the attack and defense statistics in the clan stat to help leaders better understand who's the most active.

However, I am noticing that there are some of my clan mates that are not able to make it for the attacking phase due to personal life commitments, and I feel like they are extremely left out of the battle on some days when they cannot make it.

Limiting the attacking hours was a very controversial subject when you first introduced the concept, I remember it, I was against it. It still doesn't sit right with me.

 

[- Cause -]

There's an issue with this 2-hour attack phase that I am starting to notice over time.

You obviously introduced the attack and defense statistics in the clan stat to help leaders better understand who's the most active.

However, I am noticing that there are some of my clan mates that are not able to make it for the attacking phase due to personal life commitments, and I feel like they are extremely left out of the battle on some days when they cannot make it.

Limiting the attacking hours was a very controversial subject when you first introduced the concept, I remember it, I was against it. It still doesn't sit right with me.

so? should they put the time back or forward to please some and annoy others? fact is, with theese limited attack hours you will inevitably have some that arent happy. be it coz of life commitments or maybe the timezone since they live in another continent. i think too adding multiple attack phases with a small break would be the best solution.
If one cant make it to say 17:00, then he can fight at the next attack phase which would be earlier.

 

[dragossauro]

I don't know if my idea is good or bad, but it seems like an interesting concept to discuss, it's the following: there should be 2 hours of attack followed by two hours of defense (the amount can be discussed) as soon as the attack time ends the defense time begins, and vice versa, it works exactly as it is now but with a shorter interval, Like i Said the exact time can be changed, but I personally think that only 2 hours for an attack is very little, if there were a wide variety of other events to do in the game besides leveling up I would understand, but unfortunately this is one of the only activities left after you get strong in the game and limiting it to just two hours doesn't seem right to me.

 

[David Moises]

Todas nuestras actualizaciones anteriores fueron impulsadas por la comunidad, por lo que no creemos que sea justo afirmar que los desarrolladores o nosotros no escucharíamos sus comentarios. Le pedimos que comprenda que algunas cosas solo se pueden ver en vivo antes de sacar conclusiones para cambiar algo y mejorarlo para alcanzar la meta. Especialmente con esta actualización, se requiere un enfoque tan iterativo.
Entonces, pasemos a la siguiente idea de diseño que creemos resolverá algunos de los problemas que mencionaste:

HP de construcción basado en el rendimiento
Los edificios obtendrán menos HP cuanto mayor sea su nivel de rendimiento. Con eso queremos aumentar el atractivo de los ataques a edificios de manera que los clanes pequeños y los jugadores individuales puedan luchar por los edificios debido al mayor riesgo de perder un edificio cuando tiene un nivel de rendimiento alto.

Objetivos:

• Los edificios serán más atractivos para ataques espontáneos contra clanes dominantes, permitiendo la participación de clanes más pequeños.

Cambios principales:

• Los edificios tienen diferentes HP iniciales según sus niveles de rendimiento para cada fase del conflicto.
  • El HP inicial disminuye con un mayor nivel de rendimiento (riesgo versus recompensa)
• Los edificios tienen un riesgo cada vez mayor de que Dinoville se apodere del edificio cuanto más tiempo lo mantenga el mismo clan.
  • Al comienzo de la siguiente fase de conflicto, los edificios aleatorios propiedad de DV se liberan nuevamente para llegar nuevamente al número de edificios que DV debería poseer según la actividad del Ayuntamiento.
  • El riesgo aumentará según los ciclos de retención hasta un máximo del 25 % de probabilidad.
  • El riesgo de perder un edificio se aplica diariamente
  • Recuerde que "perder un edificio por culpa de DV" no significa "perder objetos". Estos aún se pueden retirar mientras el edificio esté "Reclamado recientemente".
• La tasa de reparación del defensor aumentará a 1:2 en lugar de la tasa actual de 1:4.
• El nivel de rendimiento básico aumentará del 25% al 50%

View attachment 47368

¡Cuéntanos qué te parece!
[/CITA]

Todas nuestras actualizaciones anteriores fueron impulsadas por la comunidad, por lo que no creemos que sea justo afirmar que los desarrolladores o nosotros no escucharíamos sus comentarios. Le pedimos que comprenda que algunas cosas solo se pueden ver en vivo antes de sacar conclusiones para cambiar algo y mejorarlo para alcanzar la meta. Especialmente con esta actualización, se requiere un enfoque tan iterativo.
Entonces, pasemos a la siguiente idea de diseño que creemos resolverá algunos de los problemas que mencionaste:

HP de construcción basado en el rendimiento
Los edificios obtendrán menos HP cuanto mayor sea su nivel de rendimiento. Con eso queremos aumentar el atractivo de los ataques a edificios de manera que los clanes pequeños y los jugadores individuales puedan luchar por los edificios debido al mayor riesgo de perder un edificio cuando tiene un nivel de rendimiento alto.

Objetivos:

• Los edificios serán más atractivos para ataques espontáneos contra clanes dominantes, permitiendo la participación de clanes más pequeños.

Cambios principales:

• Los edificios tienen diferentes HP iniciales según sus niveles de rendimiento para cada fase del conflicto.
  • El HP inicial disminuye con un mayor nivel de rendimiento (riesgo versus recompensa)
• Los edificios tienen un riesgo cada vez mayor de que Dinoville se apodere del edificio cuanto más tiempo lo mantenga el mismo clan.
  • Al comienzo de la siguiente fase de conflicto, los edificios aleatorios propiedad de DV se liberan nuevamente para llegar nuevamente al número de edificios que DV debería poseer según la actividad del Ayuntamiento.
  • El riesgo aumentará según los ciclos de retención hasta un máximo del 25 % de probabilidad.
  • El riesgo de perder un edificio se aplicará diariamente
  • Recuerde que "perder un edificio por culpa de DV" no significa "perder objetos". Estos aún se pueden retirar mientras el edificio esté "Reclamado recientemente".
• La tasa de reparación del defensor aumentará a 1:2 en lugar de la tasa actual de 1:4.
• El nivel de rendimiento básico aumentará del 25% al 50%

View attachment 47368

¡Cuéntanos qué te parece!
[/CITA]
El principal problema es que aunque sabemos que quieren mejorar el juego con todas las buenas intenciones del mundo, parece que no hacen su juego, porque siempre se ha dicho que el principal problema que tiene el juego ahora es la monopolización de los jugadores. portales por las grandes alianzas y que lamentablemente esta actualización no soluciona.

Porque me dirás si es justo que en un servidor haya 5 a 6 clanes vs 2 a 3 y ahora con este tema de que solo se puede drenar en un momento exacto se hace mucho más fácil defender los portales.

Porque, en mi opinión, ganar fama debería ser algo individual, sin tener que depender tanto ni nada de un clan.

 

[Pleiadian]

Attacking Phase will change back to 20:00 - 22:00 or will they stay the same at 21:00 - 23:00?

 

[yewhuiyuan]

Attacking Phase will change back to 20:00 - 22:00 or will they stay the same at 21:00 - 23:00?

!?!? When they changed it?

 

[David Moises]

Realmente no le veo sentido a esta actualización, desde el principio les dijeron que el principal problema era la monopolización de las grandes alianzas en los portales y sin embargo realizan estas actualizaciones que más bien refuerzan estos comportamientos.

Para tener un cambio real hay que conseguir que la obtención de fama no dependa tanto o nada de los clanes, como han comentado muchos compañeros en comentarios anteriores, que llega un punto en el que las alianzas no son necesarias.

Personalmente me gustaría un modo de juego donde se seleccione un grupo de jugadores donde se repartiera equitativamente el rol de defensor y atacante para que no haya desventajas en cuanto a números y que de vez en cuando luchen por defender los portales en posición. . dinovilla, donde se toman en cuenta datos como muertes, asesinatos, daños hechos y recibidos y el tiempo jugado durante dicho evento, puede ser en un horario predefinido o de forma aleatoria.

Esa sería mi idea muy simplificada, abarcaría más cosas pero el punto al que quiero llegar es que necesitamos un modo de juego donde las alianzas sean innecesarias, ese es el cáncer que se está comiendo el juego poco a poco.
@Highway

 

[Dark_Wolf]

As long as high level players can kill low level players nothing will change, increasing safe spawn time has no use at all because they will just follow you until they can kill you. I really tried to find something good about this update but really can not find one. I was hoping for more and i thought it would be better but after seeing and trying it it made it wors.

Defenders have less gates to defend so they can all just stand and wait for atackers to come and then kill them also they only need to defend fo 2 hours lol that made it even more easy to defend those gates. allies are laughing about this update because it gave them even more power to control a server.

change who and what players can attack, you already started with that by making it impossible for low level players attack high level gates, why not take one more step with that.
Level 55 can not attack level 35 and lower
level 35 can not attack level 15 and lower
This wil make sure that there will be more activity on all maps, and low level clans will have a chance to take claims and gates. Now most maps are not even used.

 

[Dark_Wolf]

As long as high level players can kill low level players nothing will change, increasing safe spawn time has no use at all because they will just follow you until they can kill you. I really tried to find something good about this update but really can not find one. I was hoping for more and i thought it would be better but after seeing and trying it it made it wors.

Defenders have less gates to defend so they can all just stand and wait for atackers to come and then kill them also they only need to defend fo 2 hours lol that made it even more easy to defend those gates. allies are laughing about this update because it gave them even more power to control a server.

change who and what players can attack, you already started with that by making it impossible for low level players attack high level gates, why not take one more step with that.
Level 55 can not attack level 35 and lower
level 35 can not attack level 15 and lower
This wil make sure that there will be more activity on all maps, and low level clans will have a chance to take claims and gates. Now most maps are not even used.

And ofcourse level 55 clans (allies) will have to fight more with each other because there will be less gates available to them. this might brakeup allied clans because ofcourse we all want some fame.