Feedback Wanted: Conflict/Protection cycle timing

[Luka Patajac]

Care to explain?

He refers to early access fame update is coming i believe.

 

[Highway]

what does ccu mean ?

concurrent users = User online at the same time

 

[istencsaszar]

not as simple as that can also easily explotited so that you will never get the attacker buff

Ok back to the topic. (Create another thread if you want to talk about other things. Thx.)

Here you can see the change of the cycle timings from the previous cycle times (5 spread around the day)
The vertical dotted lines are where engame updates where deployed. Facts are better than rumors circling around here.

CCU vs available sites (last 30 days)

Europe 1
View attachment 48395
Europe 2
View attachment 48401
Europe 3
View attachment 48402
Europe 4
View attachment 48403

America 1
View attachment 48394

America 2
View attachment 48397
America 3
View attachment 48398
America 4
View attachment 48399
America 5
View attachment 48400

Asia 1
View attachment 48396


From the data you can see that with the conflict phases closer together around peak time, the building count (blue lines) rarely go over the ccu count on the server. This ensures enough players are available for the site conflitcs. The ccu overall remained smilar even with changed conflict times to the peaks. So its not as everyone states that the server are dead now etc.

What could be an option is to include a conflict phase around 17:00 server time (one before the current 3 ones) as the ccu locks good there on almost all servers.

Draining all towers to 49% and keeping them red for hours sounds a bit tedious to be exploitable, but yeah with enough people it's doable I guess.

Higher CCU means the side that's more numerous gets a bigger advantage. I never stated that the servers are dead, I said these timings are one sided to help the side who has more players (and thus paying for more gc I guess...)

 

[Alewx]

I whould like to see 24h server active not only 3h all log online then offline

the graphs of all the servers show clearly the opposite is the case there are always still players around.

 

[Domino]

Draining all towers to 49% and keeping them red for hours sounds a bit tedious to be exploitable, but yeah with enough people it's doable I guess.

You mean I start 5 seconds earlier with draining then you are? Doesn't have to be 49%

 

[Domino]

He refers to early access fame update is coming i believe.

Still... how does this equal the cost? Attackers don't update gates at all so they are 10 steps behind if you start talking dds.

 

[Domino]

America 2
View attachment 48397

concurrent users = User online at the same time

Is this the overall player base or only the attackers/defenders of a gate? Because there are also a lot of people just minding their own business and never attacking gates.

 

[OrionZG]

not as simple as that can also easily explotited so that you will never get the attacker buff

Ok back to the topic. (Create another thread if you want to talk about other things. Thx.)

Here you can see the change of the cycle timings from the previous cycle times (5 spread around the day)
The vertical dotted lines are where engame updates where deployed. Facts are better than rumors circling around here.

CCU vs available sites (last 30 days)

Europe 1
View attachment 48395
Europe 2
View attachment 48401
Europe 3
View attachment 48402
Europe 4
View attachment 48403

America 1
View attachment 48394

America 2
View attachment 48397
America 3
View attachment 48398
America 4
View attachment 48399
America 5
View attachment 48400

Asia 1
View attachment 48396


From the data you can see that with the conflict phases closer together around peak time, the building count (blue lines) rarely go over the ccu count on the server. This ensures enough players are available for the site conflitcs. The ccu overall remained smilar even with changed conflict times to the peaks. So its not as everyone states that the server are dead now etc.

What could be an option is to include a conflict phase around 17:00 server time (one before the current 3 ones) as the ccu locks good there on almost all servers.

Adding a little more of what I have seen on my server:

Yes there have been a lot of active people, and it has its merit, at least every day you see more people than in the previous system because there were times of 0 attacks for weeks or even months. But the thing is that, although players connect in times of conflict, in many cases, these players leave because there is not much activity of clan against clan (pvp), I even slept through 2 phases because there were like 2-4 attackers in the whole server vs +10 allies.

And at least for me that's my only problem with endgame 3, I need more chaos/clan pvp fun.

At least for now because the last update greatly weakened the attackers, but idk, with the following changes, it could be different

 

[SPA]

not as simple as that can also easily explotited so that you will never get the attacker buff

Ok back to the topic. (Create another thread if you want to talk about other things. Thx.)

Here you can see the change of the cycle timings from the previous cycle times (5 spread around the day)
The vertical dotted lines are where engame updates where deployed. Facts are better than rumors circling around here.

CCU vs available sites (last 30 days)

Europe 1
View attachment 48395
Europe 2
View attachment 48401
Europe 3
View attachment 48402
Europe 4
View attachment 48403

America 1
View attachment 48394

America 2
View attachment 48397
America 3
View attachment 48398
America 4
View attachment 48399
America 5
View attachment 48400

Asia 1
View attachment 48396


From the data you can see that with the conflict phases closer together around peak time, the building count (blue lines) rarely go over the ccu count on the server. This ensures enough players are available for the site conflitcs. The ccu overall remained smilar even with changed conflict times to the peaks. So its not as everyone states that the server are dead now etc.

What could be an option is to include a conflict phase around 17:00 server time (one before the current 3 ones) as the ccu locks good there on almost all servers.

you can see that when there were more phases, there was more online throughout the day, on some servers online fell noticeably more out of phases, which suggests that people are interested in the war, but some players lost access to the attack due to such phases

 

[DarkMyth.]

Adding a little more of what I have seen on my server:

Yes there have been a lot of active people, and it has its merit, at least every day you see more people than in the previous system because there were times of 0 attacks for weeks or even months. But the thing is that, although players connect in times of conflict, in many cases, these players leave because there is not much activity of clan against clan (pvp), I even slept through 2 phases because there were like 2-4 attackers in the whole server vs +10 allies.

At least for now because the last update greatly weakened the attackers, but idk, with the following changes, it could be different

Assuming that’s related to the fact that small clans cannot defend against bigger & old clans and demotivated them since they can’t do the effort to earn the fame, which they were doing easily, which is possible to change with the fact that they will be able to collect the fame

 

[Domino]

which is possible to change with the fact that they will be able to collect the fame

They said it here already; they prefer to destroy your gates over getting fame. With that mindset, every upcoming update will be disagreed with.

 

[Sunshine..]

not as simple as that can also easily explotited so that you will never get the attacker buff

Ok back to the topic. (Create another thread if you want to talk about other things. Thx.)

Here you can see the change of the cycle timings from the previous cycle times (5 spread around the day)
The vertical dotted lines are where engame updates where deployed. Facts are better than rumors circling around here.

CCU vs available sites (last 30 days)

Europe 1
View attachment 48395
Europe 2
View attachment 48401
Europe 3
View attachment 48402
Europe 4
View attachment 48403

America 1
View attachment 48394

America 2
View attachment 48397
America 3
View attachment 48398
America 4
View attachment 48399
America 5
View attachment 48400

Asia 1
View attachment 48396


From the data you can see that with the conflict phases closer together around peak time, the building count (blue lines) rarely go over the ccu count on the server. This ensures enough players are available for the site conflitcs. The ccu overall remained smilar even with changed conflict times to the peaks. So its not as everyone states that the server are dead now etc.

What could be an option is to include a conflict phase around 17:00 server time (one before the current 3 ones) as the ccu locks good there on almost all servers.

Does this graph differ the attacker/defender from those who just connected to do an event?

or those who just logged in out of curiosity after hearing that the game had updated?

A graph of player satisfaction/dissatisfaction with the update would tell you more

 

[Alewx]

Does this graph differ the attacker/defender from those who just connected to do an event?

or those who just logged in out of curiosity after hearing that the game had updated?

A graph of player satisfaction/dissatisfaction with the update would tell you more

concurrent users = User online at the same time

No differing of anything, just the total amount of players online at that time.

 

[soulagarto]

You speak about the 'old' system, that will never be returned so I spoke about the new system.




Gates only produce fame AFTER the phase, so what I said is not incorrect. Why would you defend a gate for 12 hours straight? I understand what you are trying to say, but that would mean the devs need to change the fame production back to a medal every x minutes.



Again, back to the fact that the devs need to change the fame production from after the phase to a medal every few minutes. If only the end of the phase matters, I'm 1000% sure everyone will wait until the last 30 minutes to take all the gates. There would be no need to capture and lose gates in a 12-hour timeframe.



Again, and I'm starting to repeat myself, your change doesn't solve anything with the current phases. A 12-hour attack phase will result in the two points above. Instead of saying I'm incorrect and keep talking about the past (which will never return), you might want to suggest changes that might help with the issues you mentioned. Just saying that I'm wrong isn't going to solve anything for you.

1. yes, the developers would need to change the production of fame.

2. so that wars do not happen within 30 minutes, a solution for this could be discussed.

3. these are changes to improve the game, I'm not talking about going back to the old system, this idea was just a sketch for the developers to work on, let's be honest, the developers don't care about new ideas, they just want to impose their own anyway.

 

[DarkMyth.]

They said it here already; they prefer to destroy your gates over getting fame. With that mindset, every upcoming update will be disagreed with.

Problem is, they don’t take our gates, they rarely even attempt to attack our gates since few days ago we started to upgrade them to level 4 and actually started to defend instead of swapping, but they go to drain basic yielded maps because they don’t care about fame, they want to take as many gates as possible that’s true. That’s why what I wrote wasn’t connected to my main server eu1 I was talking about all servers in general.

But since you mentioned it, I’ll show you a couple screenshots about it here below

Now tell me, do you think these players who don’t care about obtaining fame would even bother defending since they never tried anyways

 

[soulagarto]

[/CITAR]

not as simple as that can also easily explotited so that you will never get the attacker buff

Ok back to the topic. (Create another thread if you want to talk about other things. Thx.)

Here you can see the change of the cycle timings from the previous cycle times (5 spread around the day)
The vertical dotted lines are where engame updates where deployed. Facts are better than rumors circling around here.

CCU vs available sites (last 30 days)

Europe 1
View attachment 48395
Europe 2
View attachment 48401
Europe 3
View attachment 48402
Europe 4
View attachment 48403

America 1
View attachment 48394

America 2
View attachment 48397
America 3
View attachment 48398
America 4
View attachment 48399
America 5
View attachment 48400

Asia 1
View attachment 48396


From the data you can see that with the conflict phases closer together around peak time, the building count (blue lines) rarely go over the ccu count on the server. This ensures enough players are available for the site conflitcs. The ccu overall remained smilar even with changed conflict times to the peaks. So its not as everyone states that the server are dead now etc.

What could be an option is to include a conflict phase around 17:00 server time (one before the current 3 ones) as the ccu locks good there on almost all servers.

not as simple as that can also easily explotited so that you will never get the attacker buff

Ok back to the topic. (Create another thread if you want to talk about other things. Thx.)

Here you can see the change of the cycle timings from the previous cycle times (5 spread around the day)
The vertical dotted lines are where engame updates where deployed. Facts are better than rumors circling around here.

CCU vs available sites (last 30 days)

Europe 1
View attachment 48395
Europe 2
View attachment 48401
Europe 3
View attachment 48402
Europe 4
View attachment 48403

America 1
View attachment 48394

America 2
View attachment 48397
America 3
View attachment 48398
America 4
View attachment 48399
America 5
View attachment 48400

Asia 1
View attachment 48396


From the data you can see that with the conflict phases closer together around peak time, the building count (blue lines) rarely go over the ccu count on the server. This ensures enough players are available for the site conflitcs. The ccu overall remained smilar even with changed conflict times to the peaks. So its not as everyone states that the server are dead now etc.

What could be an option is to include a conflict phase around 17:00 server time (one before the current 3 ones) as the ccu locks good there on almost all servers.

Note that these players shown in the graphs are dissatisfied, and that this will lead to a loss of activity, as the only thing they do in this conflict phase is stand around waiting for it to end, which is extremely boring.

 

[istencsaszar]

Problem is, they don’t take our gates, they rarely even attempt to attack our gates since few days ago we started to upgrade them to level 4 and actually started to defend instead of swapping, but they go to drain basic yielded maps because they don’t care about fame, they want to take as many gates as possible that’s true. That’s why what I wrote wasn’t connected to my main server eu1 I was talking about all servers in general.

But since you mentioned it, I’ll show you a couple screenshots about it here below

Now tell me, do you think these players who don’t care about obtaining fame would even bother defending since they never tried anyways

Right now there is almost no point in trying to take max hp towers. The reward(which is rarely ever successfully taken) doesn't match the effort.

 

[yewhuiyuan]

As you can see some eu1 people cry so hard and hate the attacker patch update they sent spy into clan chat to make them look bad.... Eu1 is the only server that go to such seriousness to hold maps and win at all cost using any means... I feel that as devs you should take into consideration people who stand on neutral ground that wants fun and fair war like how @OrionZG wants. Though he is a mapholder he still wants a stable and fair war. And his feedback will definitely not be bias.

 

[DarkMyth.]

As you can see some eu1 people cry so hard and hate the attacker patch update they sent spy into clan chat to make them look bad.... Eu1 is the only server that go to such seriousness to hold maps and win at all cost using any means... I feel that as devs you should take into consideration people who stand on neutral ground that wants fun and fair war like how @OrionZG wants. Though he is a mapholder he still wants a stable and fair war. And his feedback will definitely not be bias.

Nah I never sent a spy anywhere, another attacker clan which was merged in their clan left them and is now on our side due to problems between them, never bothered myself sending spies anywhere. (yes they're doing a 2 clans vs 10 clans now on eu1)

Right now there is almost no point in trying to take max hp towers. The reward(which is rarely ever successfully taken) doesn't match the effort.

I hope you'll be attacking starting tomorrow then? Dunno it's a little boring. It's been 2 days since your clan attacked, rather online on forum than during phases

 

[xx-predator-xx]

@Narokath @Highway . this update (removing 7am and 1am attch phases, 5 different dinos to drain 1 building, allowing fame to be taken from the buildings, decreasing the draining speed-see the 5 dinos thing) it is only in favor of the big alliances. which split in smaller clans but still allied. not only that it take 1 year to drain as 1 player. not only that the big alliances will take the fame out of the buildings therefore there is no reward for the attackers. congrats on bringing the game down. trust me when i'm saying this. the amounts of money i'm spending with your game is way bigger than 5-6 players combined(yeah i spend more than them) and with all of this? u lost me as a customer. you can ban me on forum i dont care anymore. this is the reality. RIP DS

 

[poppin]

@Narokath @Highway . this update (removing 7am and 1am attch phases, 5 different dinos to drain 1 building, allowing fame to be taken from the buildings, decreasing the draining speed-see the 5 dinos thing) it is only in favor of the big alliances. which split in smaller clans but still allied. not only that it take 1 year to drain as 1 player. not only that the big alliances will take the fame out of the buildings therefore there is no reward for the attackers. congrats on bringing the game down. trust me when i'm saying this. the amounts of money i'm spending with your game is way bigger than 5-6 players combined(yeah i spend more than them) and with all of this? u lost me as a customer. you can ban me on forum i dont care anymore. this is the reality. RIP DS

"Instead of providing reasonable feedback to the dev's so they can address the problem, I will brag about how much money I've spent on the game itself and just say it is dead."

 

[soulagarto]

an update that was intended to make the game more balanced, ended up turning into a crude update that benefits only one side (defending side) for numerous reasons, you developers ask for feedback but discard it if it is not compatible with your ideas, it would be It's easier for you to delete all other servers and leave only europa1 online, since only the feedback from that server really matters to you.

 

[xx-predator-xx]

an update that was intended to make the game more balanced, ended up turning into a crude update that benefits only one side (defending side) for numerous reasons, you developers ask for feedback but discard it if it is not compatible with your ideas, it would be It's easier for you to delete all other servers and leave only europa1 online, since only the feedback from that server really matters to you.

you're wrong. not even feedback from eu1(the attackers) matters.

 

[xx-predator-xx]

@Highway @Narokath instead of fixing the neverending selling/buying/trading accounts issue. Instead of solving the huge lags problems caused by too many mobs in smal places. instead of resolving the real abuse, toxicity and actually providing a fair play balanced game (as you promised) you're making this game more complicated, more unfair, more as advantage to some clans which its obvious you're "protecting" .

 

[aiolia]

Highway, the only thing that kept the game alive were the wars, whether you liked it or not, the alliance system that you fought so hard to overthrow kept the game alive, one would spy on the other and find out when an alliance was going to attack, so everyone was online at that moment to fight for hours for the right to the server and the right to have portals. You tried to change this at all costs and look what happened, visit the servers in America, no one drains it anymore, all the clans have joined together in a single alliance and rotate positions, your idea is so great that you don't realize that the system that trying to destroy will always last, the old way of the game was much better, players were always online for fear of being attacked and losing portals and fame, they were always replenishing dd and farming more and more, now go in yourself and check how many players there is online during attack times, no one is online anymore because there is nothing else to do, YOU DESTROYED THE BEST PART OF THE GAME, THE WARS.

 

[OrionZG]

Highway, the only thing that kept the game alive were the wars, whether you liked it or not, the alliance system that you fought so hard to overthrow kept the game alive, one would spy on the other and find out when an alliance was going to attack, so everyone was online at that moment to fight for hours for the right to the server and the right to have portals. You tried to change this at all costs and look what happened, visit the servers in America, no one drains it anymore, all the clans have joined together in a single alliance and rotate positions, your idea is so great that you don't realize that the system that trying to destroy will always last, the old way of the game was much better, players were always online for fear of being attacked and losing portals and fame, they were always replenishing dd and farming more and more, now go in yourself and check how many players there is online during attack times, no one is online anymore because there is nothing else to do, YOU DESTROYED THE BEST PART OF THE GAME, THE WARS.

All clans in an alliance? Man, that's on your server, on mine there are still several attacking clans, and there is 0% probability that they will join our side, besides lately they have connected a lot, just to tell you that there was a 15 vs 12 combat recently

 

[ThiagoXDestruidor]

All clans in an alliance? Man, that's on your server, on mine there are still several attacking clans, and there is 0% probability that they will join our side, besides lately they have connected a lot, just to tell you that there was a 15 vs 12 combat recently

Depressing, you know that in am2 there were at least 40 players on each map per war...

 

[OrionZG]

Depressing, you know that in am2 there were at least 40 players on each map per war...

Look, most of the attacking clans or commonly known as kos, have always been accs borrowed or bought by other players from different srvs, for that reason the average number of active players in wars decreased.

In the previous system, wars had a relative separation time, so if today there was a war in ame5, in one or two weeks there would be another one in another server, which meant that people who had access in other servers with other accounts could enter without problems, that's why there was a lot of activity.

However, the update caused all those people to be distributed to their corresponding servers, since for America, Europe and Asia they have the same corresponding schedule: either you play on your server or you play on another one. So on that side, it was effective.

Basically the current servers are demonstrating their real activity.

And speaking of numbers, I have visited all the servers, and according to the town hall, there is an average of 30-60 active players per month, however, this doubles on the main SVs such as Ame 1, Eu 1 and Asia. 1, but those are my calculations, in theory there are 800-1000 active players on average playing DS every month, but as far as I am concerned, although it is true that each year it has decreased, the reality is that the average has not been very different from 4 years ago.

But you have to keep in mind that there is a certain percentage that belongs to the same or different player.

Anyway, that is why the game has not been closed and I doubt it will be closed in the short or medium term, many factors come into play, both playable and social.

The update is debatable in certain points, it has its positive sides and of course it left holes in other places, and one of them is the activity of the players per server. But is there a solution? Of course. It has long been said that we need to promote the game, whether through Steam or a YouTuber, or bring in a new dinosaur. But it's a matter of waiting to see what DS's next plan will be to solve this.