#14 Endgame Part 3 (Sites Gameplay)

[yewhuiyuan]

For MMO war it's seldom that the player-base can choose who to be enemy and who to be ally because of the 1 sided war..

Most devs will implement system like faction war where clan represent a certain nation or territory to fight another nation it's story driven not player-base driven so it will be fair.... Another mmo I remembered created server war..... 2 different server will meet up to fight during a certain phase at a unique server.

 

[yewhuiyuan]

For the hard camping and spawn killing at Dv gates...

Could we have a de-buff when there are more than 5 player of the same clan grouped together ... -50% of gun and dino damage when 6 or more are grouped together....

 

[Suguygyu]

For the hard camping and spawn killing at Dv gates...

Could we have a de-buff when there are more than 5 player of the same clan grouped together ... -50% of gun and dino damage when 6 or more are grouped together....

I think they should have made enemies to be able to rescue and travel to the gates big clan is holding.

Correct me if i am wrong but owner clan that has big numbers can use their own gates to travel and rescue which means they can gather easily in the gate that 1-2 attacker trying to drain but i think reverse situation should have been done.

Defenders has big numbers so there will be always waiting at least 1-2 clan member that ready to defend and besides that defenders just need to kill attackers once, rest is getting spawn-killed in dv gates.

So thats why i think attackers should be able to use defender's gates and defender clan shouldnt. Besides even if they will fix situation this way, other alliances of defender clan still will be able to use gates like attackers so overall, at least it would be more fair this way i believe.

 

[yewhuiyuan]

I think they should have made enemies to be able to rescue and travel to the gates big clan is holding.

Correct me if i am wrong but owner clan that has big numbers can use their own gates to travel and rescue which means they can gather easily in the gate that 1-2 attacker trying to drain but i think reverse situation should have been done.

Defenders has big numbers so there will be always waiting at least 1-2 clan member that ready to defend and besides that defenders just need to kill attackers once, rest is getting spawn-killed in dv gates.

So thats why i think attackers should be able to use defender's gates and defender clan shouldnt. Besides even if they will fix situation this way, other alliances of defender clan still will be able to use gates like attackers so overall, at least it would be more fair this way i believe.

I feel that's too punishing on the alliance xD man those people stay awake for 247 can't even get to use their own gate kind sad

 

[SPA]

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

Dude, this means that not only the alliance has the right to own the gate, why should the developers do everything just for you?

 

[- Cause -]

Just mix the two. Give the casuals a chance but make it that the active ppl get also rewarded for their activity. The problem isnt the ones doing tha work. The problem is the server somehow creating an inpenetrable wall. Sure im bad but i cant expect to go against a fully organised government. The thing is, no one wants to PLAY ds. why play when u can buy a lv50 acc, farm some dds and get rex ez. A strong CLAN should get rewarded not the whole alliance. Eu1 is dying coz of that. Too many that just sit around and inflate the alliance even more. Enough rantin abt my skill issue but you get my point. Incentivise Clans not allies

 

[diondre246]

What was that last second surprise of -50 with the portals? Why didn't you guys inform of us of the new change to the draining % when it's closer to the end? @Highway

 

[yewhuiyuan]

Yee don't scare those try hard mapholders man 1 gate gone a part of them dies.....

 

[Pleiadian]

@Highway The Basic sites have a lot of HP and they takes too long to drain.

 

[Highway]

What was that last second surprise of -50 with the portals? Why didn't you guys inform of us of the new change to the draining % when it's closer to the end? @Highway

That was something out of the ordinary to see how the overwhelming defence ally would handle this. And also to see if such element of surpise adds a fun element. Did it?

Btw great defence coordination and smart tricks you pulled of. Still sad to see that the attackers where not able to drain due to the to high HP level on basic.

@Highway The Basic sites have a lot of HP and they takes too long to drain.

I agree. Usually all gates are on good but they did not upgrade the buildings on purpuse to make it hard to overtake them in 1 hour conflict phases.

We might generally speed up overtakes rate from 10 to 20 and repair from 5 to 10. Could also be more fun this way.

 

[- Cause -]

That was something out of the ordinary to see how the overwhelming defence ally would handle this. And also to see if such element of surpise adds a fun element. Did it?

Btw great defence coordination and smart tricks you pulled of. Still sad to see that the attackers where not able to drain due to the to high HP level on basic.



I agree. Usually all gates are on good but they did not upgrade the buildings on purpuse to make it hard to overtake them in 1 hour conflict phases.

We might generally speed up overtakes rate from 10 to 20 and repair from 5 to 10. Could also be more fun this way.

we could try

 

[Pleiadian]

Btw great defence coordination and smart tricks you pulled of. Still sad to see that the attackers where not able to drain due to the to high HP level on basic.

I think you should give attackers the ability to teleport in any site while having duelists.

Attackers are severely still limited in terms of movement.

Once they get killed, they have nowhere to respawn except for some selected site that DV holds.

 

[yewhuiyuan]

That was something out of the ordinary to see how the overwhelming defence ally would handle this. And also to see if such element of surpise adds a fun element. Did it?

Btw great defence coordination and smart tricks you pulled of. Still sad to see that the attackers where not able to drain due to the to high HP level on basic.



I agree. Usually all gates are on good but they did not upgrade the buildings on purpuse to make it hard to overtake them in 1 hour conflict phases.

We might generally speed up overtakes rate from 10 to 20 and repair from 5 to 10. Could also

That was something out of the ordinary to see how the overwhelming defence ally would handle this. And also to see if such element of surpise adds a fun element. Did it?

Btw great defence coordination and smart tricks you pulled of. Still sad to see that the attackers where not able to drain due to the to high HP level on basic.



I agree. Usually all gates are on good but they did not upgrade the buildings on purpuse to make it hard to overtake them in 1 hour conflict phases.

We might generally speed up overtakes rate from 10 to 20 and repair from 5 to 10. Could also be more fun this way.

Huh ? Really something out of the ordinary? Seeing such overwhelming ally defence? Which Ds have u been watching for past 4 years

 

[Suguygyu]

I think you should give attackers the ability to teleport in any site while having duelists.

Attackers are severely still limited in terms of movement.

Once they get killed, they have nowhere to respawn except for some selected site that DV holds.

I agree on that as i mentioned before

 

[Suguygyu]

I think they should have made enemies to be able to rescue and travel to the gates big clan is holding.

Correct me if i am wrong but owner clan that has big numbers can use their own gates to travel and rescue which means they can gather easily in the gate that 1-2 attacker trying to drain but i think reverse situation should have been done.

Defenders has big numbers so there will be always waiting at least 1-2 clan member that ready to defend and besides that defenders just need to kill attackers once, rest is getting spawn-killed in dv gates.

So thats why i think attackers should be able to use defender's gates and defender clan shouldnt. Besides even if they will fix situation this way, other alliances of defender clan still will be able to use gates like attackers so overall, at least it would be more fair this way i believe.

.

 

[Pleiadian]

I think you should give attackers the ability to teleport in any site while having duelists.

Attackers are severely still limited in terms of movement.

Once they get killed, they have nowhere to respawn except for some selected site that DV holds.

More on that.

Defenders should have their movement limited since they are holding towers.

Wouldn't it be logical for Defenders to have an extended Duelist phase? In that way, they would be prevented from teleporting to other allies' Sites to help defend them.

In a way, you put more restrictions on clans to help other clans. Limiting the growth of alliance.

 

[S4TW]

That was something out of the ordinary to see how the overwhelming defence ally would handle this. And also to see if such element of surpise adds a fun element. Did it?

Btw great defence coordination and smart tricks you pulled of. Still sad to see that the attackers where not able to drain due to the to high HP level on basic.



I agree. Usually all gates are on good but they did not upgrade the buildings on purpuse to make it hard to overtake them in 1 hour conflict phases.

We might generally speed up overtakes rate from 10 to 20 and repair from 5 to 10. Could also be more fun this way.

Yall are just trying to ruin the point of even owning gates in the first place.

When there's a server with both attackers and defenders - you barely considered the fact that once attackers might happen to be defenders. So basically the update changes nothing for the attackers and doesn't profit them as much as it could - if you tried to read all the feedbacks.

-Sure the attackers will profit on taking over someone else's gates, but then on the next attack phase they should turn into defenders - and they might not happen to have as much luck to take any gates as they did the phase before/neither might they have the luck to keep the gates that they had previously. So the profit goes back to ''original'' defenders.

I said it once and I'll say it again. This update is attacker-based - Not player based.

As the parts with decreasing the hp the higher the yield gets, putting golden rocks around claims were actually good ideas - and profiting for both attackers and defenders - The ''dv takes the gates based on TH activity'' , attack phases were bad - mostly for the attackers.

The less gates avaiable - the less advantage for the attackers / the more advantage for the defenders.

The attack phases that were earlier on announced are taking all the advantage from the attackers (''surprise effect'' is going to be a history)


As for your dilemma about the yields and what-not.

There are 2 examples as for why this all is happening:

1.There are servers that are at war. - That being said the gates will most likely change their owners every attack phase (which leads clans to be unable to upgrade the yield of their gates).

2.There are servers that are called ''dead/peacefull/almost enemyLESS''. - With that to avoid dv taking over the entire server they switch gates every attack phase (which also leads them to be unable to upgrade the yield, which I may just add - is your fault)



The other case : Servers so peacefull that people decided to keep the yield at very good-excellent due to no danger - which will also end up changing due to your *weekend test* on live servers.

My personal advice would be to focus, think, read the feedbacks of BOTH (attackers, defenders) and offer a compromise. Therefore you should also do all that I said above before you come up with such things as updates - why? - Because I lack fingers to count how many times you fixed fame values, how many times you fixed gates %/hp, or how many other general fixes/updates that were completely unnecessary and preventable (if only you listened) you added since 2024 even started.


By the way, our lovely DS GPS is bugged since years - fix that too please.

 

[Mania]

More on that.

Defenders should have their movement limited since they are holding towers.

Wouldn't it be logical for Defenders to have an extended Duelist phase? In that way, they would be prevented from teleporting to other allies' Sites to help defend them.

In a way, you put more restrictions on clans to help other clans. Limiting the growth of alliance.

is this not what i said?

 

[yewhuiyuan]

I think during ptr, there like 15 clans put into a server and only 7-9 came online to try out the test.

It was much better war experience as people were not to identified to their alliance. Even wars back in 2014 there was no alliance and it was rather small bands of people or organization (I think clan size was just max slot 40) just fighting for themselves... That was the peak of Ds.. there were only 3 maps few gates so the competition to fight was tight and not all will have a space in being a mapholder.

Around 2017 - current, CCV and mm were added in this ,so it open up 2 more choice for map holder to come in. And clan size got increased to 80. That's where alliance started to be a thing majority is always right, minority is always seen as trouble maker. To the point we need a long goal update to help the attackers lmao . And people are so identified in their own DS alliance xD.

Playing ptr have that 2014-2016 feeling again when people were not so identified to some alliance thingy.

So PTR had about only 9-11 ppl per clan , so down sizing the clan to 20 clan slot can be good start. This create more clan numbers in saloon. Meaning tighter competition to be a map holder... Naturally alliance will still be there but.... It's more of an organization now... And not some 60 clan alliance hard camping all maps.

 

[Czarna]

Even wars back in 2014 there was no alliance and it was rather small bands of people or organization (I think clan size was just max slot 40) just fighting for themselves... That was the peak of Ds.. there were only 3 maps few gates so the competition to fight was tight and not all will have a space in being a mapholder.

Around 2017 - current, CCV and mm were added in this ,so it open up 2 more choice for map holder to come in. And clan size got increased to 80. That's where alliance started to be a thing majority is always right, minority is always seen as trouble maker. To the point we need a long goal update to help the attackers lmao . And people are so identified in their own DS alliance xD.

Sorry but you got that backwards. Before you could upgrade the maximum clan size with gold coins instead of dino dollars. There were many clans that exceeded the size of 100 members, especially on the larger servers. But then the Dev Shack #5 came around (~2016) and clan size was limited to 80 members. Clans that were bigger than that couldn't hold any sites after that change, so those large clans had to split into smaller ones - which was partly the reason for clan alliances.

You can still see many people complaining about that change in replies to the thread: https://forum.dinostorm.com/threads/updated-the-dev-shack-05-a-long-long-list-of-changes.12057/

 

[yewhuiyuan]

well they should know the player base isnt that high so they should down size clan slot again ;v

 

[Rockspider19]

The good updates keep coming; the latest addition of conflict phases has awakened the sleeping player base. Players who were 0/0/0 now have a few points, and many are planning on coming back.

With that said, there is a problem with the upgrade mechanic of the game. Right now, there is no reason to upgrade basic gates. Conflict phases are 1 hr long, and basic gates take 30 mins to drain. Combined with healing being nicer now, it's pretty hard to take a gate when it's basic. Attacking and defending basic gates at the same time is nearly impossible... nearly.

The upgrade mechanic has weird logic behind it. Upgrade a gate so it will have less HP? Makes no sense. There is zero reason to upgrade a gate other than to trade it to an ally. Even if we could upgrade a gate to excellent by the rare chance, what would we gain? We'd have to defend a weak gate for 1 hr against a lot of angry players that are fame hungry, and if we lose that gate, the benefit of the upgrade goes to the enemy. The risk is absolutely not worth the reward.

The upgrades should be reversed; basic gates should take 3 mins to drain, and excellent gates should take 30 mins to drain. Since claims are now reduced to normal gates, there is nothing to prioritize anymore. But if excellent gates were viable to upgrade to even at a 30 min drain time, it would be something to prioritize for many clans. Bringing back the Dino Dollar cost to upgrade would be a nice way to balance this change, but it might not be necessary.

This change would mean EU1 would become an even stronger fortress, but trying to balance the game around an unbalanced server is illogical.

 

[Pleiadian]

We'd have to defend a weak gate for 1 hr against a lot of angry players that are fame hungry, and if we lose that gate, the benefit of the upgrade goes to the enemy. The risk is absolutely not worth the reward.

This makes sense from the Defender's perspective.

But not fair for attackers.

If you are the attackers, you are most likely in a situation where the alliance is your enemy.

Will you be able to reap the rewards of the "excellent" Sites if the drain time would be 30 minutes?

However, I do think that the HP on the Basic sites need to be reduced.

 

[Highway]

What if the drain rate and repair rate depends on how many buildings a clan currently has ?

No Buildings -> Many buildings
Fast Drain/Repair -> Slow Drain/Repair

This might result that clans split more up their buildings into sub clans, on the other hand it makes coordination more difficult and still gives clans without buildings an edge.

 

[xx-predator-xx]

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

lemme ask you something. who are you on asia1? you seem pretty involved in it mate

 

[yewhuiyuan]

What if the drain rate and repair rate depends on how many buildings a clan currently has ?

No Buildings -> Many buildings
Fast Drain/Repair -> Slow Drain/Repair

This might result that clans split more up their buildings into sub clans, on the other hand it makes coordination more difficult and still gives clans without buildings an edge.

Yes ok can carry on

 

[xx-predator-xx]

@Highway some questions for you if you don't mind to answer this time. I get it you guys want the game mechanics to be changed. Ok. 1. When will you guys(devs) will rework the dinos appearance? Dinostorm Carno looking like a barrell with teeth cmon. 2. when will you add NEW things(dinos, weapons, stuff to lily emporium-sheriff clothing set is nothing without a designated sheriff saddle). New stuff-instead of 1x drop to be 2xdrop in 55 lvl areas. 3. You can expand a lil bit the 55 hunting area - too many ppl hunting in the same place=LAG. For comparison DS carno vs a real looking carno

 

[yewhuiyuan]

What if the drain rate and repair rate depends on how many buildings a clan currently has ?

No Buildings -> Many buildings
Fast Drain/Repair -> Slow Drain/Repair

This might result that clans split more up their buildings into sub clans, on the other hand it makes coordination more difficult and still gives clans without buildings an edge.

I agree with this new thing,
the thing with alliance is most people just wanna find fault with 2-3 people or 1 single clan but they end up vsing that particular clan and it's partnering clan (they have no issues with)

With sub clan coming the focus will be easier on that single particular clan and make things more personal and make other clan "mind their own business".

Alliance will also be harder to control with more split among themselves as they lose their sense of identity with alliance.

 

[Pleiadian]

What if the drain rate and repair rate depends on how many buildings a clan currently has ?

Adding a direct nerf to clans that possess a lot of Sites?

Things might get very chaotic very fast, most likely in a good way that the update intended to be.

No Buildings -> Many buildings
Fast Drain/Repair -> Slow Drain/Repair

Didn't understand that part.

 

[Suguygyu]

Adding a direct nerf to clans that possess a lot of Sites?

Things might get very chaotic very fast, most likely in a good way that the update intended to be.



Didn't understand that part.

I think it means that if clan has no or less buildings then that clan have faster drain and repair speed. If one clan has many gates like big alliances, then they have slower drain and repair speed. Seems pretty ok for me