Atlas Raids (and how to limit mega alliance influence...)

A “Penalty Box” for all other teams that land on a castle after of the first enemy 5TA over X amount of troops with at least 50% representative Primarchs from each team in the alliance. This Penalty Box will apply to all other teams until the that enemy 5TA (Designated as the attacking 5TA) drops below Y troops and 25% representatives. At this point, a random 5TA escapes the penalty box and becomes the attacking 5TA.

For an example of representative Primarchs:

5TA, 50% = 3 teams ; 25% = 2 Teams
4TA, 50% = 2 teams ; 25% = 1 Team
3TA, 50% = 2 teams ; 25% = 1 Team
2TA, 50% = 1 team ; 25% -= 1 Team
1TA, 50% = 1 team ; 25% = 1 Team

To address a potential exploit of 1TA’s being used for defensive purposes, a single team alliance must have over 35 members.

I believe X troops should be equal to the default amount of troop kills required to bubble the selected castle.

Y troops should be 15% of X troops.

Additionally, all other castles owned by your team are temporarily bubbled to prevent immediate mass action on multiple castles against a single team. This temporary bubble status is active for 1 hour, and once activated will not be able to re-activate for another 3 hours. This is done so that a team can notify their 5TA and potentially their mega alliance that they are under attack and that within the next few hours they may or may not see an influx of teams hitting their castles.

While raid bubbles are on cooldown, Penalty Boxes on all other castles will also deactivate.

This will have 2 general outcomes. The first is when the attacking 5TA is defeated or retreats and the next 5TA selected to become the attacking 5TA is another true enemy. This is going to lead to a back to back assault and reset the 12hr raid timer. This will re-activate raid bubbles if this switch occurs after the raid bubble cooldown has been refreshed - but at least you only have to deal with them one at a time instead of all at once. This will allow mega alliances to remain intact but it becomes far less of an immediate swarm on all of a team’s holdings and more of a potential survivor series and an alert that a large raid against a team may be incoming.

Keep in mind, the entire time a 5TA is waiting in the penalty box, they are unable to attack or be attacked.

The 2nd scenario is when the next 5TA to become the attacking 5T is a member of your own mega alliance, or is a “friendly” alliance. In this case, your “friend” will be under the same rules to keep an active raid going, but will (hopefully) not attack you based on your relationship. So, waiting your turn is encouraged as it might be your team that saves your friend/ally team and gives them a bit of a break. This will allow your castle to potentially remain safe for 12 hours, so long as they do not fall beneath the requirements to keep a raid active on that castle. Again, if this switch occurs after the raid bubble cooldown is refreshed, it will also re-activate raid bubbles on all other castles owned by the defending 5TA.

You must meet the minimum troop threshold with over 50% Primarch representatives to inherit the “Attacking Team/5TA” position.

The attacking 5TA gets 12 consecutive hours to execute an assault/takeover on a castle so long as they have cleared the troop count requirement to activate the penalty box and are not cleared, do not leave, or drop below Y troops/25% representative Primarchs. If any of these occur, they are sent to the penalty box, and are unable to hit that team for another 1-7 days. They will automatically be placed into the penalty box on any castle owned by the defending team if they attempt to move onto a castle owned by the defending 5TA during this timeframe. We can debate the timeframe :man_shrugging: but I would think 24 hours is plenty.

Teams in the penalty box do not effect castle activities like troop reloading, etc.

If a team/5TA in the Penalty Box that has not yet been designated as an attacking 5TA leaves the castle from the penalty box or does not meet the requirements of an attacking 5TA to begin a raid before the first attacking 5TA is cleared, they do not incur the 1-7 day return penalty, nor are they selected in an ongoing raid to replace the attacking 5TA.

Ultimately, if you get a bunch of teams attacking you relentlessly at a castle back to back - you might stand a better chance to keep your castle, or you might not. If you end up with an ally that isn’t in your 5TA after you win your first round of defense, you catch a break. But after raid bubbles go down, the defending team is left wide open for the rest of Atlas to attack without any raid bubbles or penalty boxes for 2 hours.

A raid is successful when the attacking 5TA bubbles or conquers the castle.

**When a raid is successful by bubbling the castle, the Penalty Box and any active raid bubbles are disabled, but do not suffer a cooldown - only if there is not an active raid on another castle owned by the defending 5TA which has activated raid bubbles within the last hour. Additionally, the attacking 5TA does not suffer a return penalty.

When a raid is successful by conquer, the attacking 5TA is granted an hour long raid bubble on that castle, and the defending 5TA’s raid bubbles are disabled but suffer no cooldown - only if there is not an active raid on another castle owned by the defending 5TA which has activated raid bubbles within the last hour.**

Therefore, if a defending 5TA’s castle is bubbled or conquered in a raid during a period where raid bubbles are on cooldown, and at the same time there is an enemy 5TA on another castle owned by the defending that meets the requirements to begin a raid, then a new raid will begin with that 5TA designated as the attacking 5TA. and raid bubbles will re-activate. If there are multiple enemy 5TA’s that meet this requirement on any of the defending 5TA’s castles, one will be selected randomly to be granted raid/attacking 5TA status.

Not a bad effort, I’m impressed. You yourself said it doesn’t do anything to disincentivse Mega Alliance’s but we will let that slide for now.

What this will do is due to the nature of soft locking out additional 5TA’s is make castle battles impractical for many and more heavily affecting the attacker than the defender thanks to inherent castle buffs etc…

If your goal as stated is to get more teams fighting over castles and especially to fight teams “In their lane” this has a few potential problems and open for big teams to crush little ones free from interference.

Before you try and tell me that reading and comprehension are my friend in a very real example a sub 100 power rank team deciding to hit a team in the low 700’s literally talking a 554 player hitting players in double figures. Under your scenario there can be no defense they just have to be wiped out due to the rebuff on any other 5TA joining.

This fight wasn’t even on an access castle or strategically important to reach anywhere and neither had the small team directly hit the larger one.

So the softening of the first 5TA gets to fight instead of locking down the castle is a step in the direction for a terribly exploitable idea but it needs work.

3 Likes

If a top team wants to get zero glory and give these lower teams increased revive rates with the new revive bonus strictly for positioning, there’s likely nothing that team/5TA can do about it, but they don’t lose many permatroops and they don’t lose infrastructure.

What does happen is that an attacking 5TA opens themselves up for retaliation on their own castles. Mega Alliance Protection/Defense temporarily turns into counter attacks, because it would definitely still suck to have to fend off a 25TA at the same time without warning on separate castles. So, there needs to be some protection/alert for any 5TA locked into a raid situation. The solution is to bubble all castles for a defending team for an hour and prevent all attacks by the defending 5TA on enemy castles that are not ongoing raids themselves are prevented - this does not apply to the attacking 5TA’s castle, and counter-attacks/counter-raids against them are still able to be made, unless the attacking 5TA has raid bubbles activated. These temporary bubbles last for the first hour of a raid, and once activated will not be able to activate due to a raid for another 3 hours - leaving all castles not locked in a raid vulnerable to attacks of any size from any team.

This means a 5TA can potentially have multiple raids happening against multiple 5TA’s so long as they are not under attack by a 5TA that has met the minimum troop threshold/Primarch representative requirements, and the offensive raids began before a raid defense. It also forces allies to help one another (while raid bubbles are active) instead of leaving them hanging in the wind. Additionally, the defending 5TA can hit any of the attacking enemy 5TA’s castles during the raid, either by sniping or starting a counter-raid.

This will give mega alliances a way to help by counter-attacking teams that are attacking their extended allies, but not allowing things to immediately and completely get out of hand for any single 5TA. They may have to either split their army, let a castle bubble (or be conquered,) or retreat home to deal with the threat.

I can’t get behind complete protection for anyone. You have to deal with the fact that some teams will always bully no matter how disincentivized if they have a goal in mind. If they are willing to scrape a weak team out of a position they want for no glory then that’s what’s going the happen regardless. I think the glory changes, perimeter changes, and what I’m suggesting would go a long way to giving everyone a chance and a little more incentive to remain connected to their larger alliances and friends but limiting their effectiveness in dominating any other large groups.

Also, castle buffs are negated by Siegers. You should need enough of every type of primarch to win a raid.

Could your idea be used to get friendly teams in your extended alliance (not 5ta) to raid and bubble your castles routinely so they are unavailable for real enemies to hit?

No, because raid bubbles only activate for an hour at a time, and would leave you completely vulnerable for a 2 hour period after the raid bubbles went down.

Let’s say you have a friendly 5TA parked on your castle to lock out other raids.

What happens is:

  • The “allied” 5TA prevents your team/5TA from sniping/starting any new raids against any other 5TA while raid bubbles are up.

  • They have to load X troops to the reach the minimum troop threshold and 50% Primarch representatives to activate the penalty box and start the faux raid. At this point they need to keep Y troops on their primarchs, and maintain at least 25% Primarch representatives. Unless they are cleared, leave, or drop below troop/representative requirements - raid bubbles on your team would run for 1 hour, but then would be unable to reactivate for 2 hours.

  • After the first hour, raid bubbles on your team fall and you have to wait 2 hours to start this process over with another “allied” 5TA’s help to keep shields up another hour.

  • Once an “allied” 5TA is cleared from your castle, leaves (most likely outcome), falls below Y troops, falls below 25% Primarch representatives, or 12 hours has passed - that 5TA receives a return penalty and can no longer move onto any of your team’s castles for 1-7 days. Again, I personally think 24h is more than sufficient down time.

What I’m seeing is a solid way to reduce the number of teams involved an any single Atlas battle.

Discouraging or disbanding mega alliances not at all as in your answer to me w you give the perfect example of why these mechanics encourage the idea for easier more effective retaliation.

Keep the ideas rolling though.

1 Like

No it doesn’t technically discourage them from forming or remaining, but what it does to is limit their combat and defensive effectiveness to the point where there would have to be more strategic use of them and to accomplish their goals. Which I’m all for.

Amendments are now part of the OP and response to @Aracroft

@PGDave final edit for your consideration.

1 Like

I’m interested to see what kind of traction this can get. You’ve put a lot of thought into it and it is better than a lot of the ideas I’ve seen floating around.

1 Like

I came up with it on the fly because you challenged me :joy: thank you tho :call_me_hand: I’ve been trying to refine it since I posted.

It’s the refining part that shows how much thought you’ve put into it. :+1:

1 Like

Very interesting idea. Here’s my take on it:

Takeover

  • A Takeover begins when the castle owner’s guards or Primarchs are attacked.
  • During a Takeover, only the Aggressor 5TA may attack the Defender 5TA’s Primarchs or castle guards (edit: at the castle being contested).
  • The takeover attempt lasts until the Aggressor 5TA which started it:
    • is wiped out (<50k troops left at the castle), OR
    • conquers the castle

Thoughts?

1 Like

Have a strong friendly 5TA brings 60k troop.
Let the 5TA attack defender with 10 troops.

2 Likes

@OrcaFrost If you wan to conquer that castle, you could wipe out those 60k troops and then immediately start your own (serious) Takeover attempt.

If the playing field were level, sure. But teams often call in much larger help; a level 550 with 100k troops and a giant base can (and in the past, has) stop a conquer between two smaller teams. So now the aggressor must call in help too…ultimately this leads to 32 teams on the castle.

If there were a troop decay that prevented teams from just parking without increasing perma-loss though, maybe?

7 Likes

I think we can go a bit further to reduce the importance of mega-alliances on castle takeovers. It’s a bit more complicated than Takeovers, but I think it does a better job of limiting the scope of the conflict to two 5TAs, without rewarding collaboration between 5TAs where one owns the castle in question.

Takeover Line

Problem: Mega-alliances are overly influential in castle takeovers.

Proposal:

  • The Owner 5TA may attack anyone at their castle
  • Non-Owner 5TAs join the Line by attacking the 5TA at the end of the Line (this is the only 5TA they may attack)
  • Non-Owner 5TAs in Line may only attack the team immediately ahead or behind them in Line
  • The Line’s order is based on troops killed while in Line. The owner 5TA is always first, followed by the team with the most troops killed is first in line, and so on.
  • A team which is wiped out is removed from the Line (and has its troops killed count reset)
2 Likes

This means any time a single player with over 65k troops loaded attacks a Primarch or Guard, a takeover attempt is started and maintained because they will end up with 50k+ troops after the attack regardless of if the flight is a success. Which means any single primarch from any team can attack a Primarch/CG, immediately leave the attack, and then just sit there and defend a friendly 5TA since no one else would be able to attack them.

This is why I think it’s important not only to meet a certain amount of primarchs representing all teams in a 5TA as well as meeting and maintaining certain troop levels to begin as well as continue a raid/takeover. Additionally, a time limit placed on raids/takeover with a follow-up return cooldown for the attacking 5TA. This means mega alliances can’t exploit a raid/takeover mechanism in defense of a friendly 5TA.

This is why my proposal has limited raid/takeover timeframes as well as locking the battle between 2 teams at one castle so long as Raid requirements are met. The times where your concerns may still apply would be during the raid bubble cooldown period in which the rest of the castles owned by the defending 5TA are left vulnerable to bubble/conquer.

Honestly I don’t think there’s many ways to stop this without additional changes. Assuming you mean these high caliber players are coming from teams who are highly ranked in Atlas, this is why I like the ideas proposed about limiting hitting down (or up) based on the highest castle tier owned by a team, even though this doesn’t fully address the problem, it will definitely stop quite a bit of it.

Since any team can host any player, regardless of league or castle ownership. Any team with a player of this caliber can effectively make it a pain for lower level players to fight each other for castle ownership.

Can you expand on how you would impose a “troop decay” or increased troop “permaloss” and exactly how it would deter a higher level player from being able to do this on exposed castles while raid bubbles are on cooldown?

The line order is probably just going to irritate people to be honest, let me explain why I think so:

If this were implemented, first and foremost attacks should be able to be initiated and should count regardless of a team’s new place in line at the end of the attack.

If it doesn’t count based on position, not only will you have to contend with other players in your 5TA finishing their attacks before you on the same Primarch you chose to attack and killing off the troops, which is already a pressure point we deal with - you will then have to potentially deal with other 5TA’s having the same opportunity to kill your target based on quick line changes or that are bunnyhopped on the other side of that team in line - OR your attack simply not counting because your 5TA or the 5TA you’ve attacked has changed positions in line and are no longer next to each other.

The other problem with the line is that any 5TA friendly to the defender that becomes the first team in line can then work with the defending 5TA essentially as a halfway invincible 10TA to lay the heat on the next team in line OR at least provide a shield while the defending 5TA works with any additional friendly 5TA’s (again, essentially creating half-impervious defensive 10TA’s) to kill off other teams in line. This is dangerous because it doesn’t address teams that are calling only very high level support from coming in and taking first place in line. What are most teams going to be able to do if your support (either defender or aggressor) is high caliber with millions of troops to dispose? You end up fighting or being protected by the highest level 5TA that joins the fray in most cases.

This is why I proposed that the next team in line be randomized so that if you would like to continue a chain attack as an attacking mega-alliance, your best bet is to bring along many 5TA’s from your mega alliance to increase your odds. Same thing applies to a defending mega-alliance.

Mind you, all of these teams (regardless of them being enemy or friendly) are diverting manpower away from their own team/5TA’s defensive capability and a counter-attack via Mega-alliance assistance against them while they are sitting in penalty boxes (or raiding) may draw them away for their own defense so long as raid bubbles are down or on cooldown.

Giving the defending 5TA the ability to attack the Penalty Box with impunity isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but i do think it skews the battlefield defensively. Which really might not be a bad thing since this change is intended to accompany the new perimeter changes and with those changes comes many defensive pitfalls and headaches. Still, I think a 5TA v 5TA battle will have the majority of their attention in most cases. I’m not entirely against it, but I am against it in conjunction with being able to sandwich an enemy attacking 5TA.

I think “takeovers“ are a little to easy to be accomplished by a single team to be able to lockout other teams, and that a line based on troops killed presents it’s own problems without addressing high level backup from mega alliances on either offense or defense. A Penalty Box where teams must wait to attack and be randomly selected to continue a failed raid in addition to the defending 5TA being able to snipe targets inside the penalty box, is probably about as much deterrent as you need in most cases.

@PGDave

But isn’t that the opposite of what Atlas is suppose to be?

PG 2 years ago: we made this amazing open concept world map where everyone can fight it out. But be warned that means everyone. So to survive you will need to work together and form alliances!

PG now: the world map is acting exactly how we figured it would except it’s still not making us enough money… so the whole big free for all, fend for yourself and make alliances idea isn’t what we want anymore as you guys worked too well and formed too good of an alliance.

Me: :man_facepalming:

2 Likes