This wasn’t even close to what I said
Sorry noble colleague. But the misunderstanding is not my fault. See that others were also confused by your proposal.
So let me get this straight, your noble intentions are to help teams without castles. If this was true, why bother sharing the fact that an alliance is farming pirates? Something smells…
It was a very brief mention to explain why we will have castles to give away, avoids the confusion of people checking scripts and wondering how we could be giving away castles. More to the point, why not mention it? No one was named and its within context, I only slightly elaborated when responses to the post picked up on it, but it wasnt meant to be the focus of the post
If that alliance happens to see it though, then great, perhaps theyll stop bringing us free glory, although I highly doubt it will change anything realistically
What on odd thread. Due to the recent changes in atlas there are plenty of castles available for new teams.
This original post seems to suggest there isn’t and seems to have the undertone of a threat.
I’m a little confused by this discussion. Someone has sniped teams so often in atlas that they’ve retaliated and that first team is upset?
It seems there is a simple solution to this …
That means they got sick of pirates sniping them to help ‘the other side’ I guess. I haven’t read all the posts yet, but what determines a ‘large alliance’? And what ‘large alliance’ would care about pirates?
And isn’t Libertas a collection of high teams? Is so, what would they want with the sloppy second castles?
You can pm me the answers
How noble! MTP, self proclaimed pirates, giving away castles that they steal from the rich!
I do see a couple of issues with this, which really should be addressed though.
I have always believed in getting both sides of the story, and having been on MTPs hit list, I do have a few doubts about the veracity of your statements. Pirate teams and alliances rarely butt heads. Most pirates know that a quick glory hit and moving along doesn’t really raise an eyebrow with most castle owners. Successful pirates, like SplatsWolfPack have been around for ages, and while owing allegiance to no alliance, do pretty well collecting glory 1 or 2 hits at a time, then move on to the next target. This is the price of owning an access castle, and it’s pretty well accepted.
Your claim seems to be that you’re being unfairly targeted. Have you reached out to the person or persons involved to resolve the issue? Were you targeting specific castles and bit off more than you could chew? What caused this incident, did they draw your name out of a hat or was there a different reason? The problem with thinking that you’re a big fish is that there are always bigger fish. A hard learned lesson from my early Atlas days.
To be honest, this smells of a desperation Hail Mary play. You want to paint yourself as the good guys, but all of your team’s past actions seem to paint a different picture. The argument made about defending these “free castles” is valid. Without a doubt the new team taking possession will find themselves evicted by the former tenants, which would be fairly traumatic for a new atlas team.
A lot of alliances offer castles (yes, even free ones) to new members or existing members, and they then offer to teach them castle management and help defend them. The alliance structure, be it Dread, DOA, or Arachnid is quite literally there for just that. You’ve been in Atlas long enough to know this, so the offer you’re making is, at best, worthless, if not downright damaging to the teams that you’d hand castles off to.
Let’s paint this as it really is, your team targeted an alliance (a mutual defense group if you will), and (unsurprisingly) they responded. Now your team is in desperate need of help so you post in here pretending to be some Robinhood group offering “free castles”, which we all know will go badly for the new owners. I’ve seen young Atlas teams fall apart after losing a castle. It absolutely sucks.
Perhaps the best solution here is to contact someone from said alliance and de-escalate the situation and come to a mutual understanding, rather than misrepresent yourself in this chat, and misrepresent what you’re really offering. After all, alliances look out for one another, and don’t take well to losing their castles or being harassed. Even among the major alliances there is a degree of civility and communication.
Just my thoughts.
Hi Raven! #waves
Interesting points and fortunately, more relevant than some whiney pirate having a sook.
I agree Atlas needs fixing but i’m not sure that the alliances are the issue. The only reason i’m still playing this game is because of the friends / loyalties i’ve formed within the game. PG seems arrogant and from my place in the game appear to pander to a select few. The game is repetitive and far to time consuming and every time many of us raise potential improvements or point out irritations to investigate PG does nothing. They seem to be focused only on bringing the $$$ in.
So I think that what needs to be fixed in Atlas is not the alliances, but rather the lag. The lack of balance. The flawed reward levels that see Sapphire 1/Diamond teams hitting platinum IV teams rather than battling at their own skill levels. Removing the pirates which as an aside would resolve whatever the action issue is that led to this thread. Tying glory to the size of the team you are hitting and the APR/number of castles/etc of each team might add a bit of incentive there as well. I think too that the glory/gain from hits should decrease over time as it does in the normal part of the game to discourage hitting the same person over and over again. My ideas might be rubbish but how nice would it be if PG actually dropped in and chatted with us about it from time to time.
hahaha … one of my guys grabbed one of them the other day … we made him give it back.
Alliances should be there, it’s fun when you organize and play with other teams.
But it shouldn’t be having such a huge influence on the map
So have you claimed any castles yet ? I can’t help but feel this whole thread is just a bit of chest beating as they stole your sammie or something ???
Why do you feel we need to know that you plan to conquer castles in Atlas ? I see that happen every day and the teams involved don’t come running in here to tell us afterwards, let alone before. I have to say, with all due respect, that you seem to be just carrying out some sort of interpersonal dispute here, and this thread has no real value and is antagonistic at best. I’m happy to be corrected here, but that’s what it seems to me given you are talking about castles you haven’t even conquered yet and are not even sure you can conquer them.
It also seems a bit disingenuous to offer to help new teams when it’s clear that you are more likely a serial pest in the game than an ally or friend. I can help new teams get castles too, many of us can but don’t feel the need to come in here and start an antagonistic discussion about it.
Perhaps you should remove this thread and just do what you want to do in Atlas without trying to turn it into a forum spat ?
I’m a plat team and I don’t even know who you are, let alone be focused on you. Are you sure they are focused on you? If so, why ? Because my experience in this game (and i’m a 2015’er) is that they only focus on teams when there is a reason. I feel that maybe you left out a large part of this story, the part that would give it context as I have a lot of “enemies” in this game as well as friends and I can’t think of any that target another team just 'bekuz".
But you don’t have these castles right now, do you ? I don’t think you are being genuine here, I think there is a bit of bravado and a threat in this thread. Obviously, said alliance will protect themselves, won’t they ? I think at this point, there is evidence that PG needs to assess with regards their allowing teams without castles to roam free on the Atlas board with no intention of being anything but a serial pest in Atlas.
Do you think that this thread would stop that occurring ? Don’t you think that they may at this point think that they’re making a point and continue their behaviour. The only real fight back from pirates is to war with them or to hit them in Fort/Breeding to stop them getting rss and improving in the game.
Maybe i’m missing something ?
There are 2 goals to this game. To win castles and to keep castles. Alliances help that occur and they will always exist. Until PG fixes this habit of Diamond/Sapphire teams stealing castles from Plat / Gold teams (and I think we all know what teams do that), then the alliances are far from the biggest problem in the game. I think much of the drama in atlas would shift if PG rejigged the glory/rewards for hitting low or not holding castles. Incentive to hold, keep castles and hit at your own level or higher is what Atlas needs IMO.
Exactly , losing or gaining castles shouldn’t be such a big deal.
Castles should be removed. Or defending castles shouldnt be such a burden
Yes, 4 currently, but as pirates any castle we hold is viewed as disposable and replaceable.
You dont, it was simply an (originally) brief explanation of why we might be in a position to offer castles, that others picked up on
Actually the whole thing started because yes, 1 person on my team, a level 166 attacked a poorly defended castle, in response, 5 teams attacked us for a couple of days, multiple failed attacks, eventually more teams joined in, which is still ongoing in the normal game during this pvp event. We decided not to bother attacking back as close as it was to the end of the season, but we will be, although none of this has any relevance to the original post and only a response to points you and others have made.
It’s not protecting themselves when they have been the only side attacking, thinking that our current patience means no repercussions.
No, as I stated in your quote, “I highly doubt it will change anything realistically” but that’s irrelevant, the purpose of the post was to offer something that would potentially be gained because of a bad situation.
I would like to discuss this with you actually, not in a public forum as I stated many times I was attempting to avoid calling anyone out
I thought you didnt have any castles ? What do you determine to be “failed attacks” ? (sorry, genuinely curious)
But you made it relevant when you introduced it. It still looks to me like it’s an interpersonal dispute. I am really not a fan of people who become obsessed with attacking a team ‘bekuz’ of some perceived slight which might be as horrendous as defending an attack or dropping a shield. What’s a poorly defended castle exactly ?
I can’t reconcile this comment with any alliance i know, on mine or the other side.
I don’t see that in your original post or any other. As has been pointed out before, giving these castles to weaker teams (new into Atlas means they are weak as they are low on troops etc) only to have them become a target of the original castle owner doesn’t seem like a good thing, particularly when you clearly state you will not help them defend the castles. Again, i can’t reconcile your actions and your statements. They just don’t gel.
Atlas is a game of war, but war based on petty spite over perceived slights does not seem like a positive for anyone. Certainly not the poor hapless new teams who might inadvertently end up in the middle of what is little more than an ego driven spat of some sort.
My advice to them is to not take on any castle that might come with baggage … white zone castles are hard enough to defend without a whole alliance (as you say) focused on “getting it back”.
I’d love to know who lost those castles and whether they were lost or given up. If I had a white zone access at this point i’d just abandon it. They’re too much work.
I dont think I ever mentioned not having castles, but we do see all our castles as disposable, a failed attack is either countersniped before they can clear or less than 70% due to active defenders (example, killing 1k and losing 10k when on the offense)
Maybe so but this was always intended as nothing more than, we dont have the castles yet but this is why we will have (perhaps where you got the impression that we dont personally own any castles in retrospect)
again, really not trying to get into reasons, but 23 teams farming 1 team for a little over a week because 1 of their castles were bubbled seems like a valid reason to me.
In this instance, just very cheap castle guards, meaning available glory for the level 166 that originally bubbled the castle.
Perhaps this is down to my naivety, but in my experience access castles are rarely attacked without sufficient provocation, our 4 castles are access and werent hit until recently, we only hold them because no one really wants them and they’re free daily bonuses that we dont have to worry about. It was my thought that these teams issue was with us and that other teams would be, for the most part, left alone. At the end of the day what we intended to offer were free castles knowing how difficult it is to gain one and that some pirate teams are only pirates because they dont have the luxury of being able to take a castle. There are no strings attacked, and I’ve specifically stated to people that inquired that we dont want help or any form of alliance, therefore as a pirate team we cant offer protection, what we can offer is a chance to have a castle to defend which might not have been possible without the offer.
Lol why is this an issue?
We have this almost every other day. We enjoy the free glory they give us . We hit back all the 20 teams , eventually during the weekend even harder so they know , better.
We go alone almost always on the offensive, not even with a 5ta just for the flex of it and bubble atleast one castle of all these 20 teams who keep going from here and there for defense. Fun to watch em run. And they never come again.
All this trying to act tough will only get them into more trouble