Feedback Wanted: Site Conflict Adjustments (3.2)

[Mania]

Its there call and hopefully there will be clans that try to hold 1 building, upgrade it to excellent and protect it until DV takes it. This will give them a lot of fame compared to the map traders

i think you greatly underestimate how much holding alliances want complete and total map control. it's a nice idea in theory but they're going to look at it as map trading = guaranteed fame held = guaranteed elections vs upgrading buildings = potentially losing buildings/maps = potentially lost elections. a smaller amount of fame received will probably be more worthwhile if there's no chance to lose any of it if they don't upgrade.

 

[Highway]

Well as they only hold a marginal amount of fame if they stay at basic yield. Elections will not be in their full control anymore as combat fame and gold mining can give a single user more fame than they need to split clan fame to their members.

 

[Hardwell]

Will this be last EG 3.2 update if both kos and allies feel it's acceptable. Will there be new PVE mechanics coming?

 

[Andersonoliveira]

Well as they only hold a marginal amount of fame if they stay at basic yield. Elections will not be in their full control anymore as combat fame and gold mining can give a single user more fame than they need to split clan fame to their members.

Achei completamente justo, você está dando oportunidades para demais pessoas conseguirem o rex.

 

[SPA]

Will this be last EG 3.2 update if both kos and allies feel it's acceptable. Will there be new PVE mechanics coming?

it would be better to have a new graphics xd

 

[Kaisen]

Usually trading buildings has the following downsides:
- Dont get the Item Production boost when DV takes the site when holding the site as long as possible. On an excellent site this is a huge fame boost that is lost.
- Invested clan dollars for the yield upgrades are not used at its full potential
- lame gameplay for every clan

still gon do it, as its better that the maps are with allies than kos

 

[Kaisen]

also, election can be easily taken by farming on claims daily, so people will not bother upg buildings to get higher yield and risk enemies taking them

 

[Alewx]

also, election can be easily taken by farming on claims daily, so people will not bother upg buildings to get higher yield and risk enemies taking them

Then that could get dialed down a bit to find a sweet spot. But that is just something as a follow up.

 

[Hardwell]

Then that could get dialed down a bit to find a sweet spot. But that is just something as a follow up.

Then mining near claim will not be as impactful as before and lesser people would use it

 

[istencsaszar]

This long af travelsick time is for what exactly? Toilet break or something? Feels like an eternity and makes the game stale and boring.

 

[Andersonoliveira]

Yes site owners/defenders can not get an ally clan to join in to get the "site defence adrenaline". Only the owner can get it. They an only support in direct combat to other attackers but will do 4x less damage and have a lesser impact by this.

On the other hand mutliple attacking clans can get their "site attacker adrnaline" as it is valid mechanic that more clans fight to overtake a single building. Surely they can team up but if they fight each other both sides get 4x less damage.

I think it gets clearer on the PTR how it works

Teria previsão para iniciar o PTR? Estamos ansiosos com essas novas mudanças.

 

[xx-predator-xx]

@Highway how about increasing the travel sick status from 1 minute to at least 30 minutes? In the end why wouldnt you guys help the defenders even more(and by that the big alliances for which this update really is)? "We will create a new setup so the big alliances will disappear" - successfully failed. "We will input a new game mechanics that will make using alt accounts/multiple accounts impossible" - successfully failed. "We will create new game mechanics to give the small clans or solo players the chance to hold buildings" - successfully failed. From the attackers point of view(small clans, solo players and so on) all that this update should be is in fact the opposite. It looks like the devs are trying hard and harder to keep big alliances and people using multiple accounts in the game.

 

[DarkMyth.]

Site Yield HP increase and dollar upgrade prices

• Increase base HP of site to 38400
• Change that yields upgrades increase HP instead of decreasing it by up to 200% HP on max yield
  • Good => 48000 HP
  • Great => 60000 HP
  • Excellent => 76800 HP
• Introduce static dollar site yield upgrade prices (clan dollars)
  • Good => 10000
  • Great => 28000
  • Excellent => 45000

Will it be made so only Right Hands / Leader can upgrade the yields, or even Officers?

 

[xx-predator-xx]

You know the defenders have the same travelsickness and can't heal the gates for the same time right? Also just teleport with another dino then you fight with. No sickness (for now).

but they can come 20 vs 2 and kill the 2 attackers so who has the advantage?

 

[..Arcadius..]

• ncrease base HP of site to 38400
• Change that yields upgrades increase HP instead of decreasing it by up to 200% HP on max yield
  • Good => 48000 HP
  • Great => 60000 HP
  • Excellent => 76800 HP
• Introduce static dollar site yield upgrade prices (clan dollars)
  • Good => 10000
  • Great => 28000
  • Excellent => 45000

Will there still be a cool-down timer for yield upgrades? If so, wouldn't that be counterproductive for both sides? Especially attackers that take a gate and cannot defend it because it has a fast drain time. It would be better for both sides to instantly upgrade gates to excellent to enable better defense.

 

[Alewx]

Will there still be a cool-down timer for yield upgrades? If so, wouldn't that be counterproductive for both sides? Especially attackers that take a gate and cannot defend it because it has a fast drain time. It would be better for both sides to instantly upgrade gates to excellent to enable better defense.

the cooldown is surviving a conflict phase.

 

[Santi Venegas]

Hey everyone,

we think it's a good idea to give this adjustment idea an extra post so that we can have a focused discussion on it. Please let us know what you think of this concept and feel free to drop your constructive feedback below!

Site Conflict Adjustments (3.2)

Site Yield Changes

• Remove Yield-based HP for sites and have a fixed 19200 HP value instead.
• Yield upgrades cost Elite medals which are taken from the holding clan's inventory.
  • Cost could be about ¼ of the Elite medals produced at current Yield level.
    • Claims have a ~33% greater Fame output compated to Travel Gates, so Yield upgrade costs are proportionally higher as well.
  • Upgrade can only be performed by players with the rank that allows managing the clan inventory.

Clan-Based Drain & Repair Speeds
Introduce a variable drain and repair speed for sites depending on how many sites a clan currently holds. Differences in the number of sites held by the clans involved can therefore favor the takeover or defense of a given site.

Goals:

• Make defending and attacking sites harder for clans that already hold many sites.
• Make defending and attacking sites easier for clans that do not yet hold any or only a few sites.

Changes:

• Clan drain & repair speed depend on the number of sites that a clan is holding.
  • The more sites a clan is holding, the slower their drain speed and repair speed.
  • The less sites a clan is holding, the faster their drain speed and repair speed.
• When there are attackers from different clans in the perimeter of an attacked site, the highest drain rate of the clans involved is applied.
• Repair and drain speeds can also change mid-conflict when the number of sites that are held by the involved clans changes.
• Current drain and repair rates will be displayed in the game's UI so that both attackers and defenders always know "where they're at".

Note: Any values seen here are still subject to change.

I have to congratulate your efforts, you have reignited the war on all servers and have revived the interest of many new players. Naturally the development does not feel complete, this solution that you propose seems correct to me but it presents some problems, it is not going to change things since the large clans will only have to be divided between two at most. What do I mean, my alliance had control of America 4 and we lost it to another alliance, the number of buildings that a clan has on average is 13 buildings now. If you divide a two, the problem is already solved. With 7 or 6 buildings there is practically no problem to continue maintaining the entire server. I don't deny that it could be better for small clans or my alliance that has lost many players and strength. Even so, the real problem remains the indiscriminate purchase of accounts, shared accounts and the use of multiple accounts by a single player. In America 4 we had confirmation that we fought alone against people from 6 servers. Am1, Am3, Am5, Eu1, Asia1 and Asia2. The players of the enemy alliance share their accounts so some enter the accounts at one time and others enter at a different time, so there are accounts that are active for practically 24 hours. In addition to the increase in account purchases, we saw the increase in enemies that we had never seen on the server, because they buy the account and change the name. Now easily in the peak hour of the conflict phase they have between 50 and 80 active players while we in my alliance do not reach 20, we had a little more before but never the numbers that the rival alliance has, maximum about 30 players in the best day. That's the real problem. The clan alliance is not limited to a server, the alliances go between servers, in this case I know that the players of the Black clan of America 1 enter the Infernal Legion accounts, while Imperio Royal and the smaller clans of its alliance are full of players who have several accounts (who are completely static, you attack them and they react after a while, and the entire conflict phase their behavior is the same, because there is a player who is behind who takes time to react because he is aware of other accounts) and from players who are not on this server but who bought accounts to help their allies. So they are the ones who ruin all the efforts that you and your team are making, they will always find a way to get away with doing things that are clearly cheating in the game against players who do not have those practices and who respect the code of game conduct.

 

[Hardwell]

Yeee I still don't get why 2 DS launcher is needed and how the parallel login thingy works

 

[Alewx]

I have to congratulate your efforts, you have reignited the war on all servers and have revived the interest of many new players.......

That quote of Highways planned changes is a bit outdated, the plan for the comming update is different:

Ok we have the alternative idea ready for the dynamic drain and other elements as a planned update package.
We hope it can improve certain aspects and make it more fair for all clans to claim/defend sites.

We plan to have a public PTR for this as well to test if the machanics work as they should and you will be able to get your hands on it early before it hits the live servers by the end of the month.

Here is a little overview what it will be in the box:

Site Owner based dynamic drain speed
Introduce a variable drain speed for sites depending on how many sites the clan currently owns vs the opponent owned sites. It should make takeovers and defending easier if the owned buildings diverge greatly between involved clans.

• Drain rate will dynamically change during conflict as site are getting reclaimed
  • Drain rate will increase for the attacker if the clan has less sites than the site owner clan.
  • Drain rate will decrease for the attacker if the clan has more sites than the site owner clan.
• Repair rate remain at a fixed time of 32 minutes
  • The repairrate will change with upgrading the yield of a building
• Only the highest drain rate is activly shown when multiple clans are attacking a site at the same time
  • Clan/player effort is based on the their own drain rate though

Initial value table for the drain based in the site count difference (Times are without defenders present). It also shows the ratio between drain and repair speed on the right side. (eg. 100% = same duration, 50% = duration doubled)

Site Yield HP increase and dollar upgrade prices

• Increase base HP of site to 38400
• Change that yields upgrades increase HP instead of decreasing it by up to 200% HP on max yield
  • Good => 48000 HP
  • Great => 60000 HP
  • Excellent => 76800 HP
• Introduce static dollar site yield upgrade prices (clan dollars)
  • Good => 10000
  • Great => 28000
  • Excellent => 45000

Adrenaline Buffed

• Getting Attacker or Defender of a site grants an “Adrenaline” buff to the player, that will run for 10 seconds and gets re-applied before it expires automatically as long as the player is an active defender/attacker in the building radius
• “Adrenaline” Buff gives:
  • “Defender Adrenaline” for defenders
    • 4x incoming damage reduction from all PVP players that don't have the
      “Attacker Adrenaline” buff
  • “Attacker Adrenaline” for attackers
    • 4x incoming damage reduction from all PVP players that don't have the
      “Defender Adrenaline” buff
  • When attacker and defender fighting against each other should be able to play as usual, but side clans will have a debuff with it.

View attachment 47717
Take your time to thing to read the aspects here carefully and try to think how it will affect your server/clan etc.
Again it would be great to get your feedback, questions here so this final draft can be fine tuned before it goes live.

 

[Santi Venegas]

That quote of Highways planned changes is a bit outdated, the plan for the comming update is different:

What I want to say is that basically, none of the changes they make are going to solve the problem, the large clans, in addition to finding a way to circumvent the changes, are going to maintain themselves thanks to the purchase of accounts, the sharing of accounts, and players who use multiple accounts at once. All this thanks to the alliances between servers.

 

[SPA]

What I want to say is that basically, none of the changes they make are going to solve the problem, the large clans, in addition to finding a way to circumvent the changes, are going to maintain themselves thanks to the purchase of accounts, the sharing of accounts, and players who use multiple accounts at once. All this thanks to the alliances between servers.

x4 will be impossible to get around, because the adrenaline is divided into an attacker and a defender, maybe you'll figure it out later, but I know for sure that with x4 less dmg, defending for will be very tedious for alliances

 

[Santi Venegas]

x4 will be impossible to get around, because the adrenaline is divided into an attacker and a defender, maybe you'll figure it out later, but I know for sure that with x4 less dmg, defending for will be very tedious for alliances

Do you know why they are implementing that? It is because the alliances are totally unbalanced, on one side there are a huge number of players and on the other very few, as in my case, in am4, we are normally 10 or less, 20 in the best of cases against an average of 50, and on high days like weekends they easily reach 80 or more. We simply have no chance.
In any case they only have to put one player to defend and the rest without being affected by the adrenaline.

 

[SPA]

Do you know why they are implementing that? It is because the alliances are totally unbalanced, on one side there are a huge number of players and on the other very few, as in my case, in am4, we are normally 10 or less, 20 in the best of cases against an average of 50, and on high days like weekends they easily reach 80 or more. We simply have no chance.
In any case they only have to put one player to defend and the rest without being affected by the adrenaline.

look, if there are 10-20 of you, then you can take gates from clan whonhave online 5 for example (there is usually no constantly active one of the clans in the alliance), because with x4 less dmf from ally players, you will be able to defeat 20 players against 40-60 maybe ally players (perhaps this will make all the alliance clans tired of this system, which may contribute to the emergence of one active clan out of several, but here the system does not allow this 1 clan to have so many gates for profit, so there will be a lot of small clans independent of each other more) on gate, simply because they have low damage by to you, only if the owner of the gate online and defebnd, you will receive full damage by that owner, but if there are few of them? this may change the situation, however, you are right, it can be circumvented as you wrote above, but I don't think it will be right absolutely everywhere

 

[Alewx]

So the PTR went public again, and will stay public until sunday.

Pls post your feedback here, and keep it related to the changes on the ptr.

Here you can find the current changes relative to the Live version.

 

[Something-Named]

on ptr my game is always stuck on the ds loading screen it doesnt even load till the login screen

 

[xx-predator-xx]

This is a MASSIVE disadvantage to the attackers. If the attackers die and respawn they have 1 min of travel sickness therefore they will not be able to drain and also their dealt damage will be decreased 4 times meanwhile the defenders(big alliances) will have 4xdamage dealt increased. Suicide mission for the attackers. Great job @Narokath

 

[Alewx]

View attachment 47769

This is a MASSIVE disadvantage to the attackers. If the attackers die and respawn they have 1 min of travel sickness therefore they will not be able to drain and also their dealt damage will be decreased 4 times meanwhile the defenders(big alliances) will have 4xdamage dealt increased. Suicide mission for the attackers. Great job @Narokath

Didn't know you already tested it while the first conflict phase is still 20 minutes away....

 

[Luka Patajac]

Why cant you open ptr when conflict phase starts instead of making it open during protect phase?

 

[Alewx]

Why cant you open ptr when conflict phase starts instead of making it open during protect phase?

Because then everyone has a bit of time to assemble and get things going properly instead of the ones that rush just do it.

 

[Isabella16]

Won't increasing a tower from 50% to 400% depend on each conflict phase? @Alewx