Atlas suggestions

My first suggestion is to give every team a home castle that can’t be conquered. Teams that desire conquest and world domination can add castles of various level but the home castle can’t be conquered… everyone should have a true home in atlas.

Second… tear down the mega alliances… put controls in the game that won’t allow alliances beyond the 5ta . I actually would like to see the 5ta alliances removed but that is probably asking too much.

I could make more suggestions but I think I’ll stop here.



Be honest with yourself, if there’s no risk of losing it, no one would protect theirs, building guards and stationing primarchs on it would just incentivise people to hit you whereas you would pose no such downside if you didn’t. Effectively that means you’re just asking for free infrastructure something doesn’t seem to be necessary in the current state of the game. The abnormal way one would treat such a castle I believe would lead to confusion rather than any real gain.

And how would you propose to do this? There have been many threads calling for the end of both this and pirates without any real solution found, both of these provide benefits to those involved (more aid in defence of castles and to attack castles as well and invulnerability to retaliation respectively). And there are also very shaky boundaries that make them difficult to define eg is defending a castle if you own the castle behind deemed as a mega alliance given you’ll face negative consequences if they bubble. Or for pirating there’s a valid argument that it’s not by choice and you’re unable to get a castle. Therefore with no real solution and shaky boundaries this isn’t really as simple as you suggest to solve.


I think you miss the point … it would allow teams that aren’t in an alliance to own and develop an infrastructure in atlas. We had 2 castles for quite a while in atlas as a platinum team… then the craziness started and 9 platinum teams attacked us all together at once and we lost both castles.

To end mega alliances … do away with allowing passage make teams stand on their own in atlas instead of depending on other teams.

What could be done is to give each team a home castle and do away with neutral safe castles.

Castle bonus can be based on the amount of CG. Zero CG means no delay and no daily bonus.


Will this reduce stagnation? Or increase it :thinking:hmmmm
What are your thoughts on that and how would this impact needed activity?

I guess that’d work, still seems a bit counterintuitive though and fixes none of the issues facing atlas

1 Like

Do you really think removing passage will remove mega alliances :rofl:mega alliances are a lot larger than 10 teams (ie 5ta+passage), unless there is some sort of incentive mega alliances will stay for good. If you limit it to one 5ta other than the owners at a time on a castle for example that’ll just make the situation worse, say a sapphire team wanted a poor plat teams tier 3, what is the plat team going to do in that scenario? Without mega alliances there’s no chance they’ll hold onto it. Obviously this is highly flawed and thus wouldn’t be added to the game but at least it’d have an effect. Passage is really just a nice time saver in most scenarios, all it does is mean you don’t have to sit on a castle after you’ve done your job.

Also as I said above, there are passage agreements outside of mega alliances, access castles especially often have the teams behind them on passage as these teams don’t want the gate to open allowing them to be sniped.

i think mega alliances are the real atlas stagnation problem. If you are a platinum or low sapphire team, and you want to conquer a castle of a team of your equal level with your own strength or at the most with the help of its 5TA, you will never be able to do so, as if that team is in a mega alliance in aid of that team there will be many teams bigger and bigger than yours. So this definitely makes Atlas stagnant, because the only teams that have the strength to move and conquer are the diamond leagues teams, in fact they are the only teams that can do it with their 5ta. If there were no mega alliances, there would be much more movement among the teams even in lower leagues than diamond and this would make the game more dynamic.


Plus the excessive “no hit/conquer” lists arising from them

Mega alliances don’t make Atlas stagnant, what makes Atlas stagnant is the monotony of events etc.
I don’t doubt that mega alliances are a crux of Atlas, but every game has this feature - or at least most games - but the same reasoning could be done for pvp events, there are alliances there too and no one has ever complained about this.

As for the free castle, I disagree. Castles must be deserved and then they must be maintained. Bonuses should not be deserved without committing.

1 Like

Yep same events over and over, a prim event where people cant get rewards for 1 year+, i game that most of times is unplayable…just to name a few, and mega alliances aint one of it.
And lets face it, 90% of castles change hands for gold etc allready, like a mafia down to Platinium leagues.

It’s almost like the real problem is the castles themselves lol :crazy_face:
Oh wait they are! Lol
Yep they are what causes mega alliances and stagnation :man_shrugging:

They represent tactical acquisition and that allows for what’s called
tactical degradation and as long as they remain on the map in favor of our individual bases you will not see a map based on tactical escalation!

We don’t need tactical acquisition and degradation they don’t support long term play and games using degradation almost always end in a draw or what we call stagnation!
And by adding more complexity to the map It will only speed up the degradation resulting in even faster stagnation!
So we need Tactical escalation and that requires the use of tactical positioning not tactical acquisition :man_shrugging:

Remove the castles and remove the antiquated rank system and make league rank based on your position on the map and suddenly the map will support escalation and that supports long term play!

It’s literally the difference between chess and pente two basic strategy games based on different designs chess uses degradation and is designed for short term play using multiple shuffles I mean matches lol same thing lol

Pente uses escalation by making tactical position the goal and this drives combat and as the game is played the available tactics do not degrade into stagnation allowing for long term play! :man_shrugging:

Sorry guys this map needs to scrapped and reworked using a true open map with everyone’s base represented or we will simply be right back here in a few months starting another game of fancy chess that we are paying top dollar for :man_facepalming:

Yep this old ranking system that rewards for castles owned, even 90% of them never conquered them- payed to buy them is a joke in generell. It got suggested several times, make ranking based on Troops killed/glory gained per Team( minus guard glory, so Guard swappers get penalties). There are basically 30 teams in top 50 that shouldnt be there.

1 Like

Try using tactical positioning where map position determines league placement
on a open map where teams are clustered fighting for position instead of fighting over stagnating castles :man_shrugging:
Tactical escalation requires the use of positional dominance not acquisition of tactically degrading castles were not wanting a short term game!
Do we ?

Right now and for ages there aint tactics anymore. Its more like a…competion. guard swaps and gifting castle for gold etc, thats Atlas nowdays. What tactics? Its a bout who su…best to gain freebies.

Exactly obiwanmoo! exactly! :rofl:
That is why we need tactical positioning and some means to drive escalation
If we make position on the map more valuable as we move towards center then suddenly we would need tactics :scream: shocking concept! Lol

Or dont give glory for guard kills anymore, only kills to toplist but no glory. That would fix several problems Atlas has right now and make people play Atlas finally again instead of wait 2 weeks over and over for the Guard Swaps.

When a game is based on tactical degradation adding mechanics will increase stagnation removing mechanics will only result in less escalation it will not stop or slow degradation :man_shrugging: It will just make glory harder to get and lower activity which doesn’t promote escalation at all.
Yep it will simply slows degradation and is a bandaid for the real problem :man_shrugging:
Which is the castles themselves!

Please, please just create a new thread for your “Tactical Escalation Atlas” proposal. I think you’ve campaigned enough in various threads to have gained some buy-in and considerations from the community but for it to be an actual suggestion and for the community to really grasp about what the implications are and really flesh out its details, it needs its own thread.

At best it could be a Plan C because Shuffle is Plan A and we may likely get ‘Sieges’ as Plan B. Of course, assuming the game is still alive.