Diamond 4* - 5*
Sapphire 3* - 5*
Gold & Plat 2* - 5*
Diamond 4* - 5*
Sapphire 3* - 5*
Gold & Plat 2* - 5*
I was thinking more like actual territories of the map - each territory having castles L2-5 but limited as to who can access that territory.
However, your proposal would be even easier to code on PG’s part as it just requires limiting which leagues can access which castles.
Coupled with everyone have a “home” castle that cannot be conquered, Atlas would be a much more enjoyable place and you would likely see a lot more action in terms of castle sieges.
See I think the issue is everyone wants all these extra things and wants to set aside specific leagues vs just simple what my post says and adding the platinum teams without atlas to atlas first.
This post had no talk about adding gold teams to atlas in fact I proposed we remove the gold teams that currently have atlas access as it was never intended for gold leagues.
This post had nothing to do with adding land. I don’t care about extra land as I plan to take land via force.
All I want is for them to bring balance back to the game and give the plat teams atlas that currently don’t have it. That’s all I just want access to the same thing that the most of my league has so my team can stay competitive with them. Every week we wait for something that could take PG a few hours to do the rest of the teams in our league get to gap us more by defense and offensive power purely because they have access to something we do not.
I think once they add the teams that should atlas already then talks of the other stuff can be discussed,
So again I ask, what exactly are you looking for in general? Get to the root of the request by asking “why”.
A way to stay competitive? That’s what I get from this. And what do you need to stay competitive? Gear and XP bases right?
For me, it is the gear, and a few more egg tokens and timers.
I would use the Invader bases but: with ‘real’ XP bases you choose the base which suits your dragon, in contrast Invader bases are long and mind numbingly boring with zero choice or skill.
I feel for you. I really do, and I don’t mean that sarcastically. Many on the forums have long complained about the impossibility of a non-Atlas team competing against an Atlas team. For the main reasons provided by Mech - XP and gear - but also the ability to bank rss and send them in larger chunks, and the multitude of clocks gained through Atlas events. I didn’t truly appreciate the benefits of Atlas until my team got it. Now, I don’t know how I’d play without it.
I’d even go so far as to say that every player should have Atlas as soon as they load up the game (or maybe get to a predetermined level) because Atlas is no longer an add-on, but a necessity. BUT, unfortunately that cannot happen at the moment, for it will spell the end of the game as we know it. I log into the game about 15 times a day, sometimes for a few minutes, sometimes for an hour or more. Atlas fails to load or crashes me out around 25-50 times a day. I have a new phone, I have super fast internet, I don’t even go to Aligane. The issue is the financial investment for the infrastructure required to get everyone in Atlas. We in the forums know it’s not fair. PG knows it’s not fair. But until the infra is upgraded, I don’t think anyone should be added.
One other thing: When your team finally does get Atlas, this ain’t gonna get you anywhere, unless you’ve already played politics and gotten into an alliance that will assist you in taking a castle. Any team with a castle will likely have a minimum of 4M troops and 2M castle guards, with more in reserve, not to mention alliances of their own. I like the attitude though!!
Yep. Just wait till you get involved in politics. Taking castles isn’t easy. It’s easier said then done.
It is. It’s a lot easier to defend 5 castles as opposed to 50. I guess it’s based on what your team can handle. If ur team is extremely active and you have the fire power and defense strats why not own what u think you can defend If ur team is inactive and can’t coordinate with each other then it’s probably best you only own a small number. There are many strategies offensively that can be used against teams owning a shit ton of castles… the question is if people are smart enough to realize the many options they have to approach that situation
In creating a world where travel is so fast, PG has made it almost irrelevant how many castles a team owns, as they can move from one to the other quickly (or instantly if they are smart about it). Any physical limitations that make it uneconomic or poor strategy to spread out is non-existent.
And pretty cheap cost too…
While this is true, it by no means says that any team can’t defend 20+ castles effectively.
Since there is no limit on outside help, movement is quick, and interior castles are often not worth digging into. I’d argue the benefits of having more than than a team can defend with their 5ta is more successful than ones who are entrenched due to the increased benefits.
Basically social aspects can scale indefinitely
As far as taking castles by force yes we have set up a alliance and yes the castles are already in the works just gotta get atlas so my team can build troops etc etc. you don’t really have to partake in politics I’m the leader and I don’t play and won’t play any politics I do however have someone that does and is real good at it.
All I’m hearing is excuses as to why the cannot from player base, quite funny how you guys are speculating rather then bringing facts. To the point PG has yet to come out and say anything about why they haven’t added these teams, and as I’ve stated before if it is room then the teams in gold should be removed and the plat teams added. Problem solved no more teams then what are there now.
Also this is a one reply all so as far as what I need to be competitive with my league would be egg tokens, timers, gear, riders,xp. Which would literally help in every event.
But wait wait wait let me address the removing the gold teams would be unfair before someone says it. It’s not fair to the rest of gold that has to compete with teams that get something they cannot as far as what I just described above. So if it’s unfair to the 20 gold teams that have atlas, then it’s real unfair to the rest of gold that has to play against them.
This might be okay in the small leagues… good luck owning a lot of good tier castles in the future/bigger leagues without being involved in politics lol. almost impossible to avoid. Last team I knew that stayed neutral got anally destroyed wouldn’t recommend it.
You’re doing the same damn thing. Only difference is most of the people responding have actual experience to back up their claims. I do completely get your frustration in trying to run a competitive team without Atlas though; it’s not really possible anymore due to gear and bank storage.
Edits in italics.
I think I’d argue that there is a lack of level 2 land. Having more would not be harmful and would allow all teams to get a foothold of some kind. Now whether that means lowering the influence of owning level 2 land… Introducing level 1 land, with nz being level 0, changing the limites on the number of level 2 castles teams can own or something else I don’t know.
I understand that having less or a shortage creates the battlefield for war, but with the huge disparity between top teams and lower influence teams and, as you said that, there is a reason for top teams and middle teams to gobble up as much of the level 2 land as they can, if for no other reason than increasing bank size, it affects the economy on the lower end.
Castle turnover on the lower end is as important as that on the upper end, but to do that these teams must actually own castles first. Having more eliminates the fear of losing the only land you have, because there is more to be had. If strongholds were weaker because teams extended further this alone would create a situation for turnover. The current economy is not working for the lowest influenced teams… players need a reason to keep at it and with atlas resources now being a requirement for gameplay imo and the fun factor needing to be brought back into the game overall, I personally feel an increase on available land for the lower influence teams is necessary and will in no way impact the top.
I absolutely hate that banks, HQ and towers can be upgrade to L12 infrastructure no matter their land level.
AKA a team can take 20x T2 lands and be 95% as well off as some team working their asses off for T4/5 lands.
This is why I’m against adding more T2 lands and letting it be in abundance
Like I said, I’m up for variations… level 1 and level 0 work, with limits on upgrading. But I firmly believe something has to be done. And soon.
This simply isn’t true.
There are thousands upon thousands of level 2 lands, and the number was doubled or tripled or more on the last land releases.
In fact the last stat I heard was that even factoring in new platinum teams, something like 95% of teams had at least 1 land. (And there are a lot of platinum teams)
I don’t want to detract this thread further, but I don’t feel there is any data to support the lack of land. There is a lot of data suggesting there is too much land, and that there are issues with how teams have distributed land.
If you want to talk about this more maybe a new thread. This thread is about teams wanting atlas and some have even stated they want it even if they don’t get land.
On topic of adding more teams, I think it’s possible that the last batch of teams may have caused pg to reevaluate their game plan moving forward. I’m sure we will eventually hear more about what they are thinking once they have something to share.
From a triage standpoint, somewhere in the high 90%+ of teams platinum and higher have atlas right now. I know that does nothing to make the teams who are struggling without atlas feel better about their situation, but from a high level state of atlas perspective it’s pretty darn good and is probably an appropriate place for pg to pause and decide what is best to do next.
I do support the idea of letting newly promoted teams be auto promoted. I think there is reason to allow teams (or players) an opt out. As atlas has destroyed as many teams as it has helped.
I don’t think adding more teams even falls into the top 25 critical issues with atlas right now when you consider the game as a whole. But perhaps it falls within the low hanging fruit category.