Feedback Wanted: Site Conflict Adjustments (3.2)

[Hardwell]

So.... The drain power could change mid-way through conflict phase right when the previous map holder start losing....they could obtain the high drain power values ?....I would see a normal server either betraying their ally and being greedy for themselves to drain their gate as they have more drain power / repair power than their ally or they would just retreat and take the L...

To add on... with this implementation.... I could see that it will no longer be 1 alliance vs another alliance... I think future wars people will start pathing their own ways to lead a clan, maybe 6-10 ppl holding only 3-4 gates, with this tactic they retain their high drain/ high healing tactic so they kind off profit more from not being part of big alliance and staying solo-clan... So in future wars across 5 maps will be more dynamic and not 1 huge alliance vs another huge alliance but instead batches of small wars here n there fighting among themselves for different reasons

 

[S4TW]

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.

Can't you guys just simply bring back dds yield upgrade but with REASONABLE amounts this time? To make everyone happy you could also add x4 drop rate for dd items for everyone between 1-55lvl so that nobody complains it's too much and what-not.
The Fame amounts earned now even with excellent yield are simply too small. You made gold items be almost of no value unless someone stands and mines for the entire day just to get about 50-100k fame. So with that we mostly rely on Elite, Advanced, Standard medalls and you plan/offer to lower our possibilities yet again and this goes for both, the minority and the majority, so unless you fix the productivity of the gates this part of the idea is pretty bad.

 

[Hardwell]

Ouhh i didn't see the upgrade yield through medals portion.... Nice great idea now people will really cherish their building through damn elite medal investment.. now people will fr feel the value of building after they invested and committed their medal and hard work to this tower

 

[Alekusama]

Me gusta esta idea, quizás en el futuro podremos tener combates más diversos y dinámicos haciendo que las grandes alianzas se terminen y/o dividan. lo cual hará un combate más agresivo entre todos los jugadores de un servidor luchando por sus propios intereses y no los de un conjunto

 

[Kaisen]

well, it is better that there are more clans, isn't it? I mean, even if all of them could form a "super alliance"; in reality, this is completely impossible because you are not taking into account that a clan requires a great effort of resources, sooner or later the leaders of that clan will have their own ideas and objectives, which will force them to create other alliances, or to be independent clans...

They don't all agree with each other. For that very reason, if DS got more players at some point most would create their own clan due to the different mentality of each person/player.

hear me out, alliance of server will do whtever thy can do to minimize the gates kos can take.
the best strategy would be to make small clans and hold 3-4 gates max( in asia total open gates are 30-33)
and the people who are going for elections can circulate in clans to get fame (inventories dont get full easily anyway, so fame wont be wasted)

But ofc to pull this off u will need to coordinate so much better than before

 

[AngelG13]

a mi parecer tener -160 de drenare a los clanes sin puertas tomada mientra que clanes dominantes tiene tomados 1 mapa sera des-balanceado ya q curar 10+ una puerta de viaje no daria el % para curar como es favorecido,a mi parecer debe ser un % balanceado tanto de curacion como de drenaje

 

[ThiagoXDestruidor]

No one will want to split into smaller clans, the management is horrible. Why can't you just accept having few portals? And I'll tell you something else, EU1 is not standard for anything on the DS, that server is literally the most monotonous in the game, the last big war was years ago

 

[Suguygyu]

To add on... with this implementation.... I could see that it will no longer be 1 alliance vs another alliance... I think future wars people will start pathing their own ways to lead a clan, maybe 6-10 ppl holding only 3-4 gates, with this tactic they retain their high drain/ high healing tactic so they kind off profit more from not being part of big alliance and staying solo-clan... So in future wars across 5 maps will be more dynamic and not 1 huge alliance vs another huge alliance but instead batches of small wars here n there fighting among themselves for different reasons

I hope this update also will fix the issue that big alliances just retaking gates that dinoville released, i believe smaller clans will have much more chance about competing for gates that dv released.

I am also curious if still most draining time will get the gate or the one who drains it most.

Cause when alliance and small clans competing for dv gate, gate will be drained 160 for every second when both players in the circle so its important know who will get the gate in that situation.

 

[Hardwell]

I hope this update also will fix the issue that big alliances just retaking gates that dinoville released, i believe smaller clans will have much more chance about competing for gates that dv released.

I am also curious if still most draining time will get the gate or the one who drains it most.

Cause when alliance and small clans competing for dv gate, gate will be drained 160 for every second when both players in the circle so its important know who will get the gate in that situation.

Hmm about this.... Im guessing alliance could still claim it... .However most active server only opens up 1 gate near market and 1 DV owned. So most drainer will be hard camped. But with 0 gates owned and 160 drain rate it will be easy for KOS to be the first to get a "recently claimed" gate... From there they could snowball as they now got 3 gates to tp to within a map.

Depending on where dv spawn their building they could go for a hard offense on upper part of map, or a hard offense on lower part of map or distributed attack on upper and lower part of map.

 

[Pleiadian]

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

Upon taking a closer look at this, those values definitely needs to change.

I, of course, cannot suggest without experiencing it.

 

[- Cause -]

Upon taking a closer look at this, those values definitely needs to change.

I, of course, cannot suggest without experiencing it.

Exactly. Lets let it for a week or so. Let it bake. Then we can know with accuracy what needs change and what doesent

 

[Hardwell]

The values are alright I feel. 1-3 gate holder needs to open a portal for them to tp to. To avoid being hard camp by defenders so a fast drain is need to capture a portal is vital for their attacks to be more impactful.

 

[Pleiadian]

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!

When can we expect these changes to happen?

 

[- Leyenda -]

This update idea is too easy for large alliances and many gaps, reading several Ally chats many plan to divide into secondary clans, in order to make faster rotations given that the secondary clan has 0 towers draining at the same time with 0 Towers they would win faster, then these drain the entire map at the same time while the main clan defeats the invaders then vice versa would kill the idea of this update instantly and many more ideas were given to kill that update because they are still the majority


My opinion: I have seen a lot of updating and very few balances for small clans, the best way to end that is by overloading the alliance instead of taking more work away from them.

How it would happen:
1- Remove the 1h conflict times, Add 3 Conflict times of 2 H Each
8AM-10AM
12pm-2PM
8PM-10PM
This is because? = the Attackers do not give them a chance in 1 H times to be able to do something well and take something, at least 2 towers, giving more time, it would add possibilities of taking towers more often, the alliance always has to be alert if they want to keep them.


2- Remove the Basic Mode from the towers, Make the towers Good, Very Good and Excellent and increase their HP, make these towers improve every 12 Hrs Automatically, They can also be improved every 4H Manually.
Is this because?: Attackers will find it more attractive to take towers with large amounts of fame and easier to drain, currently alliances do not improve anything and leave everything on basic to make everything difficult and attackers are not motivated because there is very little fame for many loss of Dds, this forces everyone to pay attention to towers no matter what and there will be more frequent attacks and the players will see more fun


This is a very basic idea from what I have seen.

 

[Highway]

I am also curious if still most draining time will get the gate or the one who drains it most.

Cause when alliance and small clans competing for dv gate, gate will be drained 160 for every second when both players in the circle so its important know who will get the gate in that situation.

Its based on drain amount and not the time. So a clan that has a higher drain rate will get more effort on the overtake vs a clan with lower drain.

When can we expect these changes to happen?

As soon as possible. Would be great to get it ready this week, but as it requires more testing the next week is more realistic.

Edit: I wish there was more feedback from the ones that disagreed/disliked with the concept. Without it we can't refine the concept.

 

[Hardwell]

: I wish there was more feedback from the one that disagreed/disliked with the concept. Without it we can't refine the concept.

If you see carefully its those that are current map holder that are not supporting these changes as they don't want the KOS to get a single gate.

 

[xx-predator-xx]

@Highway as you specified this update goal(one of them) is to destroy big alliances(which seems is not happening). Can you please be more specific on how those big alliances will be destroyed and what will the game devs do regarding this issue?

 

[S4TW]

Its based on drain amount and not the time. So a clan that has a higher drain rate will get more effort on the overtake vs a clan with lower drain.



As soon as possible. Would be great to get it ready this week, but as it requires more testing the next week is more realistic.

Edit: I wish there was more feedback from the ones that disagreed/disliked with the concept. Without it we can't refine the concept.

These who disagreed gave their feedback to you already, the problem isn't them but you who's blind on people's opinions.

 

[- Leyenda -]

I'm afraid they don't care about your opinion XDDDDDD

It's just a point of view, because for me it will still be easy to maintain a full map by simply dividing my clan in half, which makes it boring because my enemies became unmotivated xD

 

[Pleiadian]

These who disagreed gave their feedback to you already, the problem isn't them but you who's blind on people's opinions.

The people who disagreed with the clan-based drain and repair speed didn't give their reason as to why they disliked this idea.

There is also a lot of feedback supporting this idea. But no counterargument from those disliking it.

 

[Hardwell]

It's just a point of view, because for me it will still be easy to maintain a full map by simply dividing my clan in half, which makes it boring because my enemies became unmotivated xD

If you wanna do that in a medium-activity server go ahead . But this update 3.2 mainly is created to tackle populated server. Most of the KOS logs in but never had the chance to seize a tower or 2 because they either need to wait for ally KOS to be online or wait for defenders to be less on that day. With this new update they can be more independent and hopefully their log in to DS won't be meaningless.

 

[Highway]

Dear Rangers,

recently we suggested that we would be able to bring the presented changes on tje introduction post live as early as next week.
But we have taken another close look at both your feedback and our idea, and we believe we've found a better bundle of changes:

PTR 1264 Changelog

PTR 1264 Changelog Site Clan Based HP Set the base time to take over a site to 50 minutes With every site a clan owns the hp of a all owned sites decreases by 20% Set drain and repair to -20 and +5 default for all servers (1:4) Set site Base HP to 60,000 in order to provide solid round numbers...

forum.dinostorm.com

PTR will open soon so you can testdrive them. It would be great to get your feedback on it.

 

[- Cause -]

the reactions are crazy...

 

[istencsaszar]

The new proposed update is ridiculously easy to exploit by defenders.

 

[Pleiadian]

The new proposed update is ridiculously easy to exploit by defenders.

Go test it before writing nonsense.

 

[Highway]

The new proposed update is ridiculously easy to exploit by defenders.

Care to explain the exploit?

 

[Pleiadian]

"Vulnerable gates to be used by anyone regardless of the PVP state"

This single change will provide an unfair advantage to the attackers and shift the gameplay in their favor.

Because now they have considerably more movement.

 

[NazzaFire]

Gold ores are almost as if they don't exist in PTR because they spawn so few times

 

[Pleiadian]

Clans holding Sites in the PTR are not upgrading past the Basic (50%) Yield.

• Because they know they would lose it next phase, they rather not upgrade it and leave it like that. At best, they are only trying to get the fame from it.
• Keeping Sites at Basic could also be a way of holding the Sites during the next phase because it takes 10+ Minutes to drain.

There needs to be an incentive to not keep the Sites at Basic. because this puts the attackers at a disadvantage to drain.

 

[Galaxy]

Clans holding Sites in the PTR are not upgrading past the Basic (50%) Yield.

• Because they know they would lose it next phase, they rather not upgrade it and leave it like that. At best, they are only trying to get the fame from it.
• Keeping Sites at Basic could also be a way of holding the Sites during the next phase because it takes 10+ Minutes to drain.

There needs to be an incentive to not keep the Sites at Basic. because this puts the attackers at a disadvantage to drain.

You're wasting the devs' time, people didn't like the new way wars work.
Regardless of whether it's balanced or not, it's boring.