Atlas Glory Scaling Suggestion

So I hear a lot of complaining about people losing troops when the big bad level 500 wolf comes knocking on their level 300 castle. Then you find out this person is on a highly rated atlas team and the castle in question is level 4 or 5, which begs the question, why do they have that land in the first place when it is so scarce?

So I’d like to propose a new system of scaling.

Group … Atlas Level

A …1-20
B … 21-50
C … 51-100
D … 101-150
E … 151-200
F … 201-300
G … 301-400
H … 401+

Castle Level … Glory Scaling

5 … None
4 … 5% less for every Group Level Difference
3 … 10% less for every Group Level Difference
2 … 25% less for every Group Level Difference

So some examples…

  1. on a level 4 castle… if an A-rated Atlas team member attacks a C-rated Atlas team, they would get max 90% glory.
  2. on a level 2 castle… if a B-rated Atlas team member attacks a E-rated Atlas team, they would get max 25% glory.

This would make it more advantageous for highly rated teams to attack eachother, and also adjust glory scaling based on the type of castle. The highest atlas teams should have the right to take over a L5 or L4 castle from a lower rated team while still getting full or near full glory if you ask me. Just because you sat your butt on the land first doesn’t mean its yours for all of eternity, especially if it’s very valuable land. You have to earn it.


What level atlas team would you be on?

I like this idea, but I’m sure someone will come along and tell you why it won’t work. :frowning:


My team is S2. My base is level 362. Our atlas rank is 151-200 so we would be E.

The problem is you have level 300 players on highly rated teams with level 400-500 players and then they complain about being slapped around. They should be on a weaker team, or hold weaker land, or just take the beatings. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.

If you’re level 300 and never want to be attacked, surround yourself with level 200-300 players and a much lower atlas ranking and you should be relatively fine. But you get less rewards. But if you want max rewards be prepared for max punishment. This is how the game should be played. I for one as a level 362 player don’t ever want to be on a max team because I don’t have the time or patience for it and I’m fine getting less daily rewards to offset this.


Ah ok, was just confirming you came up with this with yourself in mind :+1:

This needs to incorporate the attacker and defender player levels. Realistically, team ranking is much less a factor than base strength vs dragon strength.

Practical example - You and I would both be on E teams, but you’re 107 levels and 2 leagues above me - I should not give you even close to full glory.


I disagree the glory scaling should have no bearing on your base level. This is the trade-off. You either get easy Glory attacking and fewer daily rewards and Atlas benefits or the reverse. But you can’t have both.

The daily eggs we claim by logging into atlas daily? Which is probably the same amount as yours?

There are lots of benefits in Atlas besides daily eggs. If you’re level 500 on a weak team you forfeit these bebfits to be on a more laid back team and get easier glory. Or if you’re level 200 on a very strong team you get all the benefits of the much stronger team but it has to come with some drawbacks.

In the end it should be for everyone and every team how competitive they want to be and what they are willing to sacrifice.

Isn’t being on a more laid back team a benefit since that’s your choice? Is it impossible for a lvl 200 to contribute on a higher ranked team than yours? I just think it’s funny you make this proposal intending it to be perfect for you and masking it as some altruistic suggestion done out of the goodness of your heart for the sake of game balance.

Just be honest and say what you mean. You want to poach and hit and run for max glory while your team can’t be hit without teams facing glory penalties.


Easy to say when you’re already pretty much to a point where you can attack anyone in the game.


Influence scaling needs a rehaul. It seems designed for diamond vs. sapphire interactions; it completely hamstrings platinum teams and makes castle conquest even less appealing than it already was. The main problem is that it’s based on Atlas performance vs. strength, when performance does not dictate what makes an attractive target and has a low correlation outside of the top 100.

1 Like

Well yes of course I am being honest. I’ve been offered spots on D1 teams top 20 Atlas but I’ve declined. I would get a lot more eggs, shards, faster troop revive and all the other benefits… But it would be harder to get glory so that’s the trade off. Some people would choose the other way around and some not. In the end it’s up to everyone to decide how much gain they want to get from their team. If they expect a lot and are one of the weakest players on the team they should expect regular beatings in Atlas. You can’t just sit back and let all your bigs do your dirty work and reap the rewards … then complain when other bigs come and smash your weak defense.

I see the intent here. However i don’t think that the divisions are broken up correctly, i think that max level of a tier may be more applicable rather than just hard set divisions of 100.

1 Like

You can spend $5-10k to get to the same point too and go up 107 levels, nothing is stopping you. But don’t think you’re entitled to the same benefits as me in Atlas with the same effort because that’s just not how the real world works so not sure why people think the online world should work that way. This game is built on capitalism to generate profit where the big fish eat the smaller ones. It is not based on communism where everyone gets the same resources, base, and opportunity to succeed without spending a penny. That might be the case in a game like super Mario brothers where you can’t spend money to inprove your chances of winning and it is 100% based on your skill level, but that is not how this game was designed.

I never said I was entitled to anything - not sure where that came from.

My perspective may not properly align to what this game has become, but I’ll give you a bit of it anyway.

I grew up playing team sports. When I was out of college and objectively wasn’t good enough to become a pro at any team sport I played, I got involved in individual sports: boxing and muy thai. Literally my whole life was based around competition in some shape or form. Every sport, from football to boxing, grouped the participants to form some semblance of fairness and competition. In school, they divided the leagues by school size and age group. In boxing and muy thai, they group participants by weight class.

When I (and most of us) started War Dragons, there was no Atlas. There were leagues, which did a so-so job of separating people into groups to keep it fair and competitive. I played THAT game for about a year and a half or so… That also aligned similarly to what I had come to know as competition for the previous 34 years of my life.

You spent enough to buy a used car on a mobile game - your choice, and good for you for having the disposable income to do so. I’m not taking anything away from that. You have stronger dragons, and you have a stronger base. Congrats. I’m not saying I should have any of that - I absolutely should have to earn or buy it, just like you did. What I AM saying is that really doesn’t mean you should be able to come take my shit and ruin my fun. That’s like if I went around beating the shit out of guys who are smaller than me, or that have never boxed. My size, training, and (modest) skill set, I feel, should be used against people of AT LEAST a similar size, training, and skill set. I would honestly feel like less of a man if I used any potential advantages I have against someone much weaker. Not saying that’s what you do, but that’s what the majority of Atlas is for people sub 300ish.

But now Atlas is a lawless wilderness, this is no longer the game I used to love, and there is an ever dwindling number of people I respect as humans that still play.

1 Like

Awesome!!! We are getting somewhere because I pretty much agree with everything you said… infact I was just about to make a football analogy but you beat me to it.

This game should be fun for everyone regardless of how much you spend and how much you grind, timewise.

The only part I disagree with you is here:

I disagree. See you and I are on more or less equally rated Atlas teams. So whether I am attacking your L5 or L2 castle, if I want it I should be able to get it at max glory and vica versa. And if you or I have L5 and L4 castles it should come as no surprise when a much stronger team tries to take it… and they should get full glory too. But if we have L2 castles, they should get next to nothing for hitting us, and if they are hitting our L3 castles still should get much less glory. That’s what I’m saying.

Your individual base level should play no role in glory calculations. That’s the problem in the game right now and why everyone is crying when they lose troops… because they choose to be on a strong team then complain when they get hit. Should things be re-scaled? Of course. But the basic premise of bigger stronger teams taking the best land at full glory should be in place regardless of what level the individual base they are hitting is, if you ask me.

mech, how would you do it?

You and I will never agree. Team ‘influence’ BARELY relates to glory. I get as many daily egg tokens as you…
Woo hoo! Big deal.

Attacking and taking castles from weaker teams makes perfect sense. The castle has value, so that is why you are attacking. Glory is a secondary bi product of the goal of taking a valuable resource. However, with glory as the goal, it’s completely unreasonable to hit a significantly weaker opponent and earn glory. That battle has jack and shit to do with how many castles each team has, what level the infra is, etc. That’s one attacker + joiners vs up to 3 defenders.

Strong VS weak should not result in glory. Period. That is, in fact, inglorious.


And why is that? For some the glory is even more valuable then the castle. Why should I get less glory just because you choose to be on stronger team then you should be?

Here’s the bottom line, it can be argued I’m on a weaker team that I could be on, and you are on a stronger team that you should be on. But it should be our choice to what team strength we want to be on. The incentives should make us decide to move up or down within teams / leagues, etc.

It’s like a football player, I’m going to use the analogy. Let’s say you’re borderline NFL / minor league. You could try and bust your ass to get in the NFL and get more rewards, or drop down in minor and get paid a lot less. You might have fun in one or the other, who’s to say? That’s a personal preference. Some want the challenge and the high pay, and other’s want to take it easy and get less rewards.

Let’s pretend you want to apply to be on Dreadnought. According to you logic, your message to them could go something like this:

Hello, my name is Superman. I’m level 250 but with the glory scaling I am confident no one will bother me and I will be a nuissance to all your competitors sine they will only be penalized if they hit me. So please let me be part of your team, even though there are 100,000 equally qualified people, thank you.

Now let’s rephrase that for the NFL:

Hello, my name is Superman. I’m only 120lb, 5’2" and played quarterback in highschool but with the tackle scaling I am confident no one will bother me and I will be a nuissance to all your competitors since they will only be penalized if they hit me. So please let me be part of your team, even though there are 100,000 equally qualified people, thank you.

What do you think the response should be? Should the NFL let you in? Don’t you think scaling down and penalizing other opponents based on your strength is pretty absurd???