# Atlas shuffle Proposal

Thinking about the Land Shuffle, I’ve come up with a simple diagram which I think can serve as a recursive template to create an atlas map that would be more enjoyable. I decided to create a separate thread so that ideas don’t get too mixed up and lost in the pre-existing Official Discussion thread.

My intent is to go over the majority of the complaints and provide what I found to be a solution to them.

Diagram Explanation

The diagram shows one 5TA as well as the area for another cluster. I stuck with hexagons because apparently those are easier for PG to work with. Each circle represents one castle, 5 colors to represent the 5 teams of a 5TA with white circles as additional “wildcard” castles which would be distributed somewhat evenly throughout the 5TA. Because each team in any given 5TA doesn’t necessarily have the same amount of castles, I decided to leave these white. The design doesn’t matter who from the 5TA owns them as they’re already 2 bubbles in.

Multiple Clusters for Simplicity

Problem: Creating an algorithm for castles to be randomly organized is difficult to ensure fairness and makes it so regions aren’t divided by castle levels, nor shard type.

Solution: Clustering in smaller groups allow an entire region (one cluster) contain one element and possibly even one castle level throughout.

Clusters Provide a way to Strategically Retreat

Problem: If a team realizes they can’t hold onto all of their castles anymore, giving up some castles in the current set up (post-shuffle) can really mess up a 5TA.

Solution: Smaller clusters allow a 5TA strategically decide to abandon defense on portion of land, without negatively affecting their other castles. While no one likes the idea of losing castles, it’s a reality that should be considered.

Design is Ugly

Problem: War Dragons in most aspects has great quality of graphics. Atlas however doesn’t continue with this tradition, and post-shuffle it got even worse.

Solution: As stated previously, I would suggest making each cluster one element type. This allows the ability to design more creatively. I’d suggest something similar to the 5 elements of temple raid. The mountains clearly show the element with great design. Obviously it can’t become too complicated as that could create lag in loading.

Fairness in Access Castles and accessibility in general

Problem: Complete randomness gives some teams an un-lucky disadvantage, and other teams a lucky advantage.

Solution: Don’t be completely random. The posted diagram shows a 5TA with 5 teams color-coded. Each team has an equal portion of access castles defending the overall cluster. Each cluster would be similarly organized (although some clusters smaller than others depending on 5TA sizes). This repeatable organization should provide equality to all teams.

Stagnation 1

Problem: No player will be motivated to try conquering after they’ve collected all prizes for the season. This results in fewer moves to conquer later in the season as the more active players no longer need glory.

Solution: Make it impossible to “complete” the atlas season. After the mythic lines are completed, instead of offering 2 atlas chests (which seems useless to me personally), allow the player to restart the line. Players would be able to get multiple sets of mythic gear each season, which would be more motivating as well as help newer players catch up faster if they put in the work as far as activity goes.

Stagnation 2

Problem: There is little motivation to take over a difficult to conquer castle. It takes tons of troops and yields very little return.

Solution: I think the best way to improve this is to provide additional benefits (outside of egg tokens for infrastructure) for a 5TA controlling an entire cluster (like in the board game RISK). If the benefit gives a 5TA an advantage, then an enemy 5TA would be able to eliminate that advantage by taking only 1 castle in a cluster. Clusters that have more access points and therefore more difficult to hold should provide better benefits. Think of RISK, if someone holds all of Asia, other players will try to take at least one territory to prevent that player from getting the additional 7 troops each turn. If daily each cluster gave 500-1000 free troops to each member in a 5TA, I imagine 5TA’s would try venturing into enemy land to prevent that.

Pirates

Problem: Although not illegal play, pirating can be annoying because they can attack, but never have to defend. In addition, pirate teams tend to be lower in rank allowing them to attack weaker teams that can do next to nothing to deter them.

Solution: Obviously teams can dis-encourage pirate visits by not sticking 30k troops on a prim, but sometimes you get those teams that really have some beef with you for an unknown reason. I’d suggest (without bumping up their actual rank) making it so when attacking it was as if they had a higher rank than they actually have, forcing them to not pick on as small of teams to get easy glory. Speaking from experience, when my team became pirate we went from a 300-400 ranked team to somewhere in the 700’s. This made it a ton easier to get glory because I can attack teams that can do little to nothing to me. Being at an advantage due to never needing to defend, if I had to still attack 450-500 ranked teams to get 100% glory I feel like this would still be fair, while deterring a certain amount of pirating, especially against weaker teams.

I think that’s most everything, please let me know if I missed anything or if you have ideas that could be better!

13 Likes

That’s the whole point.

3 Likes

Love the pirates … they are future

I dont want to give a commend till monday yeeeet cant miss it
Hope Monday we are wakeup with good news eh PG ? PG ???

3 Likes

Your diagram looks great and is actually what I expected the new map to look like based on their early descriptions.

There would need to be multiple clusters like that adjacent to each other as many teams have 20+ castles so a 5TA might need 4-5 clusters, but not every castle that is adjacent to NML needs a path so they could keep a 4:1 ratio. (I know they kept saying 4:1:1 but now they’re saying none adjacent to SZ will be accessible).

Maybe the safe zones could surround each 5TA’s clusters.

This way they could have the map look more the old map too with different sections designated for teams of like APR. Then we wouldn’t have some of the lower ranked teams next to higher ranked ones.

6 Likes

In the end this was the solution that I thought should be adopted for the new shuffle, based on what had been communicated by pg in the previous threads … it would be an excellent arrangement

1 Like

Personally I’d much rather defend this style map than the one we were given, but it seems more fun to attack than the atlas we’re all used to

That’s pretty much how I was expecting it to be…

And by the way… in order to reduce the temptation of being pirates… and make it less rewarding… and far more costly to play a different game every one else plays…
it would be awesome to not allow SZ connected castles… and have a SZ on the total exterior of the map… and some few SZ spots inside, like every apr 150 for exemple and these safe zones would be surrounded by nml area.

Defending 24/7 our castles is nowhere near a problem… but holding safe zone castles… no one should endure the constant harassment at no cost it is…

@PGGalileo maybe that view of shuffle should be taken in consideration it actually permits real fast action and coverage… and more equity

2 Likes

This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.