Atlas Proposal: Seasonal Land Shuffle Discussion Thread

Please Discuss the Atlas Proposal: Seasonal Land Shuffle here.


Good, no more super buried castles. What about nml or is nml going away?

What if a team has more than one tier of castle or more than one land type? How is that going to be affected?

So I’m kind of lost here. Are the 5TA castles going to be clustered together or just the top teams? Will it be the top two teams on the “inside” surrounded by the others? Please elaborate.


There will still be NMLs. The current rough sketch is that there will be ~1 NML per 24 castles, with each castle close to an NML (just like they’re all close to a safe zone).

Teams will keep the exact same tiers of castles on the exact same land types. Just in new locations.

All castles belonging to a 5TA will be clustered together. It will be shaped roughly like a circle (not a donut; you won’t have other enemy teams “inside” your cluster).


Better than before, so thank you for that. I’m glad you’re not planning on reducing Atlas to an event map any longer.


  • Depth changes mean that truly inaccessible castles will mostly be a thing of the past
  • Stagnation is lessened by shuffling the map every season
  • Reduces the value of mega-alliances, since it will be harder to block enemy teams with castles that aren’t part of your 5TA
  • Situated near teams of “similar strength” - though this is a very iffy term


  • Decreased strategic value of castles, since location will change every season, and territory depth is decreased
  • Decreased strategic value of locations, since every team will have its castles grouped together with those of its 5TA every season
  • Decreased incentive to strike out at distant castles, since they’re not near your 5TA, and they’re right next to all the enemy’s castles and their 5TA’s castles
  • Decreased incentive to conquer castles period, since attacking adjacent castles means making furious enemies who have easy access to your castles
  • Does not eliminate mega-alliances, particularly when it comes to their role in conquering and defending castles

My Conclusions:

  • Definitely an improvement over your last idea
  • Seems like it would increase stagnation rather than decrease it - there’s a strong disincentive to conquer castles that aren’t immediately adjacent to your own, unless you’re an exceptionally powerful team, and there’s a strong incentive not to piss off your neighbors due to the massive expenses involved, so sniping distant castles becomes the focus of Atlas

My Suggestions:

  • Limit the ability of castles/primarchs to block movement. This could be done by introducing new primes, new pathways between territories, new NMLs to break up blocks of inaccessible territories, reworking portals, any number of things.
  • Don’t reset the Atlas map on a seasonal basis - do it once a year at most, preferably not at all - to give teams time to take advantage of their new location, build new alliances, etc.
  • Add stronger incentives for hitting teams near your strength, since you think you have a good idea of reliable metrics of strength, and stronger disincentives for hitting teams further from there

So what happens to teams that dont have castles and others that had been harassed by mega-alliance?

Lol. No this is just something for next season potentially. Supremacy is still on the table.

Oh. Lovely. Well then. I need a drink. Possibly two. You know what, just leave the whole bottle.

1 Like

I could see this reshuffle being a once-only thing. (It needs to happen at least once in order to achieve the new castle depth goal).

Agreed. Needs more thought.

No change. Those teams still won’t have castles.

1 Like

Would you need to reset everything, or could you simply lay paths of NML through the most inaccessible areas to achieve that goal, and leave the rest unchanged?


Unfortunately, this is not possible due to technical limitations. Otherwise I’d be in favor of it too.

Mm, fair. I do think you’re on the wrong path with regular resets, though - castles are far too valuable for that, and far too tied up in strategic concerns - and forcing teams to group up their castles with those of their 5TAs seems like a strong disincentive to conquest.


@PGDave can we see an actual map of how this will look like.

1 Like

@PGDave This is a good start a small change (so to speak) but a step in the right direction, this has potential to grow with other small changes one at a time after a fair time play to see if and when issues will be there. I can also see a once a year reset after winter season as it give everyone all seasons before the next reset. One other suggestion would be on the upper left of the map where it is mostly all NML add a few more safe zones so when flying over to attack a castle there is a closer place to resummon verses 5 to 10 minutes travel time .


So since PG give in to mega alliance wishes. Can you do side by side testing. One for the “reshuffling” and another one for “supremacy”?
Reshuffling for those who have castles, while supremacy for those who have no castle plus those who likes to join in?

How do you handle shard types?

Moving castles all next to each other makes wiping out a team potentially easier. You don’t have to look hard to find all their castles.

Shuffling castles destroys the strategic value of any given position.

I do not like green eggs and ham, I do not like this shuffling of land.


I was kinda thinking the opposite, since you have all of your 5ta castles all there too able to defend any major attack.


MUCH better than the proposal of making Shrines into the full extent of Atlas. Thank you for that.
Now, I’m actually all for the seasonal shuffles, I think that would be interesting, but I’m curious about what the thought process was behind clustering all the 5TA & team castles together.
It would be more fun, in my opinion, to shuffle them randomly. Sure, sometimes you’d end up in a disadvantageous zone, and sometimes in an advantageous one. Part of the game. It would be interesting to then try to go for positions you believe are more advantegous for the season or battle it out where you landed.
All in all, not the worst proposal. I think this is the right path, even if not a perfect solution yet.


There were 62 teams on one castle tonight. Imagine the server lag when the entire 5TA is just a hop away. More than 2 attacking prims land and over 600 defending prims will show up in seconds. It will take longer for the game to load than to move, assuming the prims actually move.

1 Like

Much better potential with this one.


Loads better than the last one. A sigh of relief comes to me knowing this proposal isn’t compatible with the last one.

Could each castle be no more than say 5 or so layers deep? 2 seems kind of shallow. What are everyone’s thoughts on how deep the deepest castle(s) should be?

  • 1 layer
  • 2 layers
  • 3 layers
  • 4 layers
  • 5 layers
  • 6 layers
  • 7 layers
  • 8 layers
  • 9 layers
  • 10 layers
  • 11 layers
  • 12 layers
  • 13 layers
  • 14 layers
  • 15 layers
  • 15+ layers

0 voters