#14 Endgame Part 3 (Sites Gameplay)

[yewhuiyuan]

I think 1hr 30 conflict phase you could fit 3 cycles in without over lapping one another

 

[David Moises]

The game has simply been like this for over 10 years now. A game that allows you to create alliances and create enemies for them. It's very difficult for an update to break the way the GAME WAS BUILT. The complaints are the same petty things. If your server has no players to play with, nothing the devs do will bring free fame to your table. They're already doing a lot to satisfy one party that insists on saying that the alliance is the problem, when the lack of players is the REAL PROBLEM. AM1 and EU1 are crowded servers, and months ago, AM1 had a war in which the "Kos" won, even the server needing a second instance to house the amount of players willing to fight for the server. So? If there are players, there will be a fair fight. On a server where 20 people join a day and only 5 of them are enemies, what do you expect to happen? Simply nothing will happen.

My humble opinion: If you want a game where you can farm without anything getting in the way, download Minecraft. Dino Storm is also a PVP game. And if you want to bring down alliances so much, ask the devs to create a totally different gameplay for the game, from scratch. I recognize that alliances are part of the problem, but they're not the whole problem. Balancing it out would be enough. Create clashes that force clans to fight each other and that keeping an alliance is more punitive than rewarding, so clans will only fight for themselves. Clan-only events where others have to get in the way, higher rewards, whatever. There are many brilliant ideas on this forum, several that almost everyone has agreed would be very interesting to implement.
This update is a good thing, but don't expect everything to fall into your hands because you just want it to or because "the game should be like this". No. The game is PVP, fight for what you want and earn it, understand the combat and simply play the game as it is.

I disagree, alliances are the biggest problem in Ds, obviously it is not the only one but if it is more influential, why? Because if we take a look at the entire history of the alliances in Ds we always see that from a certain year on, alliances of 6 clans or more began against alliances of 3 or 4, always one part being larger than the other to ensure victory and consequently, positions in elections.

And what have you all this led to? When disconnecting players tired of always being the repressed minority, since you are from the America1 server you must remember the alliance that existed between Black and Silent where they spent 1 year practically dominating all the maps with their other allies where in each attempt to Taking away the portals were unsuccessful due to the absurd number of participants.

Now to cover another point which is the main objective of the game, which is to win Rex and how is it done? Getting fame through the objects that the portals give and how do you get them? Fighting with other clans to dominate certain portals that give you those objects and how do you do that if the portals you are fighting with are 80 vs 50 or less? You simply can't and what happens if you can't? 2 options, you join them or you go against them and you never get to have rex, leaving the game in the process or entering from time to time to see if any clan betrayed the alliance to see if you can get portals with your clan.

I understand the fact that it's a pvp game, but it's absurd that the main objective of the game to get there is as linear as the maps.

 

[Pleiadian]

Let us know what you think of this time schedule?

I think that it will not change anything, and you will waste 1 weekend's worth of testing simply to arrive at the same conclusion.

Defenders will still be waiting for the attackers to show up. Attackers will still be killed just like we have in the 1 conflict phase. You're just forcing the attackers and defenders to show up earlier. That's all.

To really change things and give attackers a chance, you need to add multiple attacking window. Not just 2.

Remember, the only thing that is missing in the game is the surprise factor.

Maybe a 2-hour attacking window, followed by a 4-hour protected phase, in a 24-hour cycle will actually shake things up.

What's the matter if they overlap anyway?

 

[- Cause -]

Remember, the only thing that is missing in the game is the surprise factor.

Shiii thats deep

 

[Highway]

I don't think it will change much, why not have attack times in the morning, afternoon and night?
I believe it's already clear that players want a little chaos

I think that it will not change anything, and you will waste 1 weekend's worth of testing simply to arrive at the same conclusion.

Defenders will still be waiting for the attackers to show up. Attackers will still be killed just like we have in the 1 conflict phase. You're just forcing the attackers and defenders to show up earlier. That's all.

To really change things and give attackers a chance, you need to add multiple attacking window. Not just 2.

Remember, the only thing that is missing in the game is the surprise factor.

Maybe a 2-hour attacking window, followed by a 4-hour protected phase, in a 24-hour cycle will actually shake things up.

What's the matter if they overlap anyway?

I must admit that I am personally not a big fan of multiple conflict phases. It removes the character of a daily pvp event where everyone can prepare to fight for. The suprise factor is still there as the defender does not know where and when and how many attacks will come upon them. Tell me what fun is there when there are no defenders showing up when attacking in the middle of the night? Low effort stealing for attackers and frustration for the defenders to stay awake at night? How will that be for servers that have a fair balance between clans fighting for buildings?

The proposed schedule to test on the weekend is to generally see how it feels for the players when it is split into two phases. Most likely it does not change things for the better?

We also could just increase the single conflict phase duration and let it start earlier? Start at 16:00 and let it end 22:00 as example? Then defenders must be there all the time while attackers can just pick their time of attack.

Its very diffult to find a balance here thats also why we started with one single phase in the prime time.

Open for suggestions. Weekend is still a bit away

 

[Xx EL LOBO xX]

I must admit that I am personally not a big fan of multiple conflict phases. It removes the character of a daily pvp event where everyone can prepare to fight for. The suprise factor is still there as the defender does not know where and when and how many attacks will come upon them. Tell me what fun is there when there are no defenders showing up when attacking in the middle of the night? Low effort stealing for attackers and frustration for the defenders to stay awake at night? How will that be for servers that have a fair balance between clans fighting for buildings?

The proposed schedule to test on the weekend is to generally see how it feels for the players when it is split into two phases. Most likely it does not change things for the better?

We also could just increase the single conflict phase duration and let it start earlier? Start at 16:00 and let it end 22:00 as example? Then defenders must be there all the time while attackers can just pick their time of attack.

Its very diffult to find a balance here thats also why we started with one single phase in the prime time.

Open for suggestions. Weekend is still a bit away

the duration of the conflict phase must not be incrased, i love that gates can't be taken back once another clan takes them but most of them cant be drained after 30 minutes, so having a long single conflict phase would not make sense

 

[Xx EL LOBO xX]

also there should be a variation in the conflict phase scheudle, because some people can't miss work/school or anything just to be active and defend in dinostorm. honestly i think it should be at a random hour

 

[Suguygyu]

I must admit that I am personally not a big fan of multiple conflict phases. It removes the character of a daily pvp event where everyone can prepare to fight for. The suprise factor is still there as the defender does not know where and when and how many attacks will come upon them. Tell me what fun is there when there are no defenders showing up when attacking in the middle of the night? Low effort stealing for attackers and frustration for the defenders to stay awake at night? How will that be for servers that have a fair balance between clans fighting for buildings?

The proposed schedule to test on the weekend is to generally see how it feels for the players when it is split into two phases. Most likely it does not change things for the better?

We also could just increase the single conflict phase duration and let it start earlier? Start at 16:00 and let it end 22:00 as example? Then defenders must be there all the time while attackers can just pick their time of attack.

Its very diffult to find a balance here thats also why we started with one single phase in the prime time.

Open for suggestions. Weekend is still a bit away

Well i think in current situation defenders get free fame without defending while attackers should put even more effort than before for getting fame. I think you have a point about attacking in middle of night isnt fun and without any defender they get free fame but we shouldnt also forget that defenders actually getting free fame in the middle of the day without attackers, that isnt fun.

Defenders as big numbered should deserve that fame with actually hard defend. They have advantage with their number and should get disadvantage with defending while attackers disadvantaged cause of their number and should be advantaged about attacking.

For last i totally agree with you multiple conflict phase is bad thats why we should bring 22 hour vulnerable and 2 hour protected phase

There is no harm coming for trying that

 

[Pleiadian]

It removes the character of a daily pvp event where everyone can prepare to fight for.

The problem currently is still big numbers against a small group of players.

I am assuming that you are going from server to server to witness the update. In many servers, you will see big alliances are still dominating because they are camping at their gate. This leaves no room for attackers to do surprise attacks whatsoever.

In the previous state of the game, there were attackers who were a small group, and defenders from alliances who were the majority.

In the previous state, if the attackers wanted to take a tower, they would have to wait until the defender's number was reduced, and then they would obtain the tower. Now, even after obtaining the tower, they would still have to hold the Site, because they do not immediately receive the fame, unlike in the new state. (One of the best additions to the game IMO)

Low effort stealing for attackers and frustration for the defenders to stay awake at night? How will that be for servers that have a fair balance between clans fighting for buildings?

I understand what you are trying to say here, but in the previous state, that's how things were and nobody had any issue with that. We had the freedom to attack and defend at every hour. And do not forget, that in many servers, there would be players from different timezone. The Site's ownership will just rotate constantly at every Conflict Phase granted that server is very active. If Defenders are good enough, they will hold. And if they are smart, they will reap the rewards of the "Excellent" yield Sites.

The proposed schedule to test on the weekend is to generally see how it feels for the players when it is split into two phases. Most likely it does not change things for the better?

We also could just increase the single conflict phase duration and let it start earlier? Start at 16:00 and let it end 22:00 as example? Then defenders must be there all the time while attackers can just pick their time of attack.

One call to the other defenders and they will be here in no time to defend. It really does not change anything in my opinion.

This comment below perfectly sums up the situation.

the duration of the conflict phase must not be increased, i love that gates can't be taken back once another clan takes them but most of them cant be drained after 30 minutes, so having a long single conflict phase would not make sense

 

[Suguygyu]

If Defenders are good enough, they will hold. And if they are smart, they will reap the rewards of the "Excellent" yield

I think Excellent gates should be result of hard defending, being able to defend for a long time, cause of their x8 fame value.

 

[Pleiadian]

I think Excellent gates should be result of hard defending, being able to defend for a long time, cause of their x8 fame value.

And if they choose to add multiple conflicts throughout the 24-hour cycle, then DV should not take the tower.

Because DV taking tower is like a penalty to those Sites that are "excellent".

Instead, those Sites that are excellent, will attract many attackers.

Defenders did a good job at defending? Well great, so they keep it.

Attackers are hard at work trying to find a way to take those reward items from that excellent building. Well, they will reap the rewards if they can.

 

[Sunshine..]

I must admit that I am personally not a big fan of multiple conflict phases. It removes the character of a daily pvp event where everyone can prepare to fight for. The suprise factor is still there as the defender does not know where and when and how many attacks will come upon them. Tell me what fun is there when there are no defenders showing up when attacking in the middle of the night? Low effort stealing for attackers and frustration for the defenders to stay awake at night? How will that be for servers that have a fair balance between clans fighting for buildings?

The proposed schedule to test on the weekend is to generally see how it feels for the players when it is split into two phases. Most likely it does not change things for the better?

We also could just increase the single conflict phase duration and let it start earlier? Start at 16:00 and let it end 22:00 as example? Then defenders must be there all the time while attackers can just pick their time of attack.

Its very diffult to find a balance here thats also why we started with one single phase in the prime time.

Open for suggestions. Weekend is still a bit away

the idea of protecting the portals after being taken/cured is good.
but it should be something with a maximum of 2 hours of protection and it should be individual and not the entire map.

without the need to have a specific time for attacks.

the attackers took the portal, 2h of protection.
the defenders managed to heal the portal, 2 hours of protection.

the element of surprise would still exist and the attackers would be rewarded for their effort, after all they would not lose the portal in 10 minutes and this would motivate them to always try to take portals.

 

[yewhuiyuan]

I must admit that I am personally not a big fan of multiple conflict phases. It removes the character of a daily pvp event where everyone can prepare to fight for. The suprise factor is still there as the defender does not know where and when and how many attacks will come upon them. Tell me what fun is there when there are no defenders showing up when attacking in the middle of the night? Low effort stealing for attackers and frustration for the defenders to stay awake at night? How will that be for servers that have a fair balance between clans fighting for buildings

The proposed schedule to test on the weekend is to generally see how it feels for the players when it is split into two phases. Most likely it does not change things for the better?

We also could just increase the single conflict phase duration and let it start earlier? Start at 16:00 and let it end 22:00 as example? Then defenders must be there all the time while attackers can just pick their time of attack.

Its very diffult to find a balance here thats also why we started with one single phase in the prime time.

Open for suggestions. Weekend is still a bit away

Different server are doing different things.... Some severs are hard camping, some servers are doing map trading...(Draining in each other fast so that enemy stand no chance as all gates will already be recently claim when they log)

So y'all gotta find a phase solution to fix the two problems i assume. Mainly the real problem contributing to the above factor is still server to other server invasion.

 

[Mania]

the idea of protecting the portals after being taken/cured is good.
but it should be something with a maximum of 2 hours of protection and it should be individual and not the entire map.

without the need to have a specific time for attacks.

the attackers took the portal, 2h of protection.
the defenders managed to heal the portal, 2 hours of protection.

the element of surprise would still exist and the attackers would be rewarded for their effort, after all they would not lose the portal in 10 minutes and this would motivate them to always try to take portals.

was just discussing this idea with someone else and i think it by far makes the most sense. it gives attackers more of a chance to steal portals and get some fame without immediately losing it again which it seems is what the devs are most aiming for. that is, just generally trying to help smaller clans or even lower levels who otherwise wouldn't have a chance against the big alliances in each server.

i see the point in having a set conflict time. however. i think that would really only work if there was more to do outside the actual conflict phase to combat these alliances. the new fame pve mechanic only adds so much and like questing or hunting is very monotonous. it also just doesn't work considering how strong the dominant alliances in each server are.

 

[- Lilith -]

I disagree, alliances are the biggest problem in Ds, obviously it is not the only one but if it is more influential, why? Because if we take a look at the entire history of the alliances in Ds we always see that from a certain year on, alliances of 6 clans or more began against alliances of 3 or 4, always one part being larger than the other to ensure victory and consequently, positions in elections.

And what have you all this led to? When disconnecting players tired of always being the repressed minority, since you are from the America1 server you must remember the alliance that existed between Black and Silent where they spent 1 year practically dominating all the maps with their other allies where in each attempt to Taking away the portals were unsuccessful due to the absurd number of participants.

Now to cover another point which is the main objective of the game, which is to win Rex and how is it done? Getting fame through the objects that the portals give and how do you get them? Fighting with other clans to dominate certain portals that give you those objects and how do you do that if the portals you are fighting with are 80 vs 50 or less? You simply can't and what happens if you can't? 2 options, you join them or you go against them and you never get to have rex, leaving the game in the process or entering from time to time to see if any clan betrayed the alliance to see if you can get portals with your clan.

I understand the fact that it's a pvp game, but it's absurd that the main objective of the game to get there is as linear as the maps.

And all of this is due to the same problem, the LACK OF PLAYERS. How many thousands of PVP games do you find with exactly the same thing as the DS? Think about it. A PVP game WORKS LIKE THIS. Forming alliances and having opponents is one of the points of the PVP game style. Fight alone or with others. It's so simple that it bothers me what they're currently trying to implement in the game.
There are clans that have been formed since the beginning of Dino Storm, and if they dominate a server today, it's because of the efforts of EVERYONE. Nothing was handed to them and nothing gave them power overnight. "The repressed minority" is nothing more than the result of the obvious: A game without players is nothing new. A game without players doesn't create wars. If 20 new people joined the server every month, I don't think the attackers would always lose. Most of the players left are old, meaning they've been in a clan for years and aren't going to leave, whether you want them to or not.

Let's follow your logic: If the game changed from now on, and all the clans fought each other. There would be no more alliances. Who said the attackers would win? They don't HAVE PLAYERS. THE GAME HAS NO NEW PLAYERS. Even if you give them fame for free, they don't even show up, simply because there's no one to show up. Giving 2% more chance or 50% more chance doesn't change the fact that without players, your clan will win absolutely nothing.

For me, the game should be attractive enough for people to want to play it. But now the only thing I'm seeing is the loss of the only ones left. As I said above, I recognize that alliances can be part of the problem, but I disagree with you that they are the whole problem. And unfortunately the lack of players won't be cured by any update they implement here...

 

[Galaxy]

And all of this is due to the same problem, the LACK OF PLAYERS. How many thousands of PVP games do you find with exactly the same thing as the DS? Think about it. A PVP game WORKS LIKE THIS. Forming alliances and having opponents is one of the points of the PVP game style. Fight alone or with others. It's so simple that it bothers me what they're currently trying to implement in the game.
There are clans that have been formed since the beginning of Dino Storm, and if they dominate a server today, it's because of the efforts of EVERYONE. Nothing was handed to them and nothing gave them power overnight. "The repressed minority" is nothing more than the result of the obvious: A game without players is nothing new. A game without players doesn't create wars. If 20 new people joined the server every month, I don't think the attackers would always lose. Most of the players left are old, meaning they've been in a clan for years and aren't going to leave, whether you want them to or not.

Let's follow your logic: If the game changed from now on, and all the clans fought each other. There would be no more alliances. Who said the attackers would win? They don't HAVE PLAYERS. THE GAME HAS NO NEW PLAYERS. Even if you give them fame for free, they don't even show up, simply because there's no one to show up. Giving 2% more chance or 50% more chance doesn't change the fact that without players, your clan will win absolutely nothing.

For me, the game should be attractive enough for people to want to play it. But now the only thing I'm seeing is the loss of the only ones left. As I said above, I recognize that alliances can be part of the problem, but I disagree with you that they are the whole problem. And unfortunately the lack of players won't be cured by any update they implement here...

Even if the game welcomes new players, most would choose to go to the big alliances anyway (for obvious reason).

Due to some updates in the past, attackers ended up being more limited than they already were.

What is missing are mechanics that motivate and make life easier for attackers.

 

[Galaxy]

i see the point in having a set conflict time. however. i think that would really only work if there was more to do outside the actual conflict phase to combat these alliances. the new fame pve mechanic only adds so much and like questing or hunting is very monotonous. it also just doesn't work considering how strong the dominant alliances in each server are.

I can't imagine what would make players stay online outside of the conflict phase...

 

[- Leyenda -]

Players who are protecting should not be able to attack Gold bandits, because they attack other players' bandits without risking losing anything

 

[yewhuiyuan]

Regarding the alliance it's unfortunate it became so broken is due to the dynamics of the server...

Eu 1 and AM 1 generally for people who don't touch grass... You can't expect them to have a balanced war if that happens they will keep wasting GC and DD (Before EG3). It's naturally for them to have I want all and control all 247 mindset so they will use all means to hold the server like their life even if it requires overkilling enemy and outnumbering them... This is their life...

Asia and Am5 is for well balanced war . People there play for fun and
Chill compared to other server. Hence EG3 working well for these 2 server....
Sometimes the alliance will do map trade but enemy could intervene and make the EG3 war still fun.

 

[DalekRaptor]

Tell me what fun is there when there are no defenders showing up when attacking in the middle of the night? Low effort stealing for attackers and frustration for the defenders to stay awake at night?

so, was all this because people (perhaps a gm) cryed they wanted to sleep XD? this is ridicolous. If they can't protect the map 24/7 then they don't deserve a map 24/7, its simple its easier and allow others to take maps on another hours. Also less defenders on certain hours, on some way balance the lack of attackers; that makes for example a more fair fight: 2 attackers vs 4 defenders, etc.

And the fun was kill people and also steal their maps or leave them without fame at nights due they didn't collect it before we took the map.

A good update would have been the same system as before but with a option for buy supplies with dinodollars, and also steal the fame from the previous owner if you took the portal/mine.

There isn't any fun on your system with people taking all the zones on less than 20 minutes, making usless the 2 hour window and then all the day protected, or people rotating maps. And then boring pve for 22 hours due if you want to kill some one, they put protection or go offline

 

[Rav3n]

well only if instead of focusing on changing war mechanics which no one wanted even the ones wanted now just agreeing with majority you guys COULD HAVE JUST FOCUSED ON IMPLEMENTING MORE EVENTS OR CREATING NEW SKINS(INSTEAD OF JUST CHANGING THE CURRENT COLORS) / IMPLEMENTING NEW THINGS LIKE IMPLEMENTATION OF FUR CLOTHE IN DINOBALL WHICH WAS A BRILLIANT THING IDK WHY U STOPPED BUT ANYWAYS STILL JUST FOCUS ON IMPLEMENTING MORE EVENTS AND ADD THINGS TO GAME NO NEED TO CHANGE OR REMOVE ANYTHING

 

[Suguygyu]

the attackers took the portal, 2h of protection.
the defenders managed to heal the portal, 2 hours of protection.

I agree about 2 hour protection to gate after attackers get it (not the defending part).

In 22 hour of vulnerable phase it might be good solution for not running out of attackable gates

Also might be good solution for map trades between allies cause they will have to do a lot times in a day

 

[yewhuiyuan]

Soooo @Highway any new changes to the conflict phase timing,

If it overlap well you can expect to see server invasion and you can see large scale war

If it doesn't overlap, there will be lesser invasion and fights will so called be "fair" and less intriguing fight.

Depends what the community and the dev team wants if they wanna achieve fair and less intriguing fight or massive scale war... You could start the poll to see what the community wants

 

[Suguygyu]

I dont know if i am repeating myself a lot but 22 hour vulnerable phase should really be considered with 2 hour protected (for every specific gate) after capturing gate.

Besides having 22 hour vulnerable wont hurt hunting players due to availability of travel and rescue.

 

[Highway]

That was a good feedback round! Thx

And if they choose to add multiple conflicts throughout the 24-hour cycle, then DV should not take the tower.

Because DV taking tower is like a penalty to those Sites that are "excellent".

The chance DV takes towers depend on on how many cycles (days) the clan holds the building. The longer the building is held the higher the chance DV takes it. Sure this mechanic also correlates with the yield as it can only be updraded once per cycle. This is an element we can fine tweak later on if that is an issue.

but it should be something with a maximum of 2 hours of protection and it should be individual and not the entire map.

Conflict should be in sync with all buildings on a server to have a proper gamemode where everyone prepares for. Core mechanic that ties everything together in the concept. Many elements would not work anymore if we stray away from it.


Ok here is the updated schedule for the weekend. Shorter conflict phases spread evenly around the day and one prime time conflict for 2 hours. Times also try to avoid to much overlap and stay away from usual server maintenance and game update time. (Even when the server maintenance mostly only occur once per week)

Conflict Phases (Server Time)
1:00 1 hour
7:00 1 hour
11:00 1 hour
16:00 1 hour
20:00 2 hour



Is this better?

Edit: Updated the image for a more clear understanding and added conflict phases as text.

 

[yewhuiyuan]

What does the white box mean?

 

[Suguygyu]

What does the white box mean?

I guess it means protected phase and maintenance means the time dv will take and release gates

 

[Alewx]

I guess it means protected phase and maintenance means the time dv will take and release gates

Maintanance is the time where the servers restart in case that no update gets deployed, but otherwise correct.

 

[yewhuiyuan]

Huh ermm that's what difference between white and maintenance box

 

[yewhuiyuan]

Maintainence is DV will hold all the gate?