Glory Scaling discussion

Glory Scaling discussion.

Hello everyone, (this… is a long read… sorry, I type fast)

For me, this is honestly the first time using the forums, previously to this I have just seen what teammates show me, and didn’t even know where to find the forums. I fly dragons and try to enjoy the game, so please forgive me and excuse any ignorance I may have regarding the discussion to follow.

In my opinion,

Glory scaling as it currently works and previously has worked is wrong, its a broken system.

Basically it WAS mainly castles owned, now its mainly team AP… both of these alone can be manipulated, and it promotes a poor and unfair gaming environment, which only seems to encourage a bullying greedy monopolization of atlas type of environment.

Glory scaling shouldn’t measure just one main aspect of the game, (yes i understand the basics of player lvl etc… exists too) but, it should take into account any and all significant and pertinent aspect of the game.

Please read and let me know if you have any ideas as to pertinent parts left out or not being factored in which you feel should be. So if you know more on this then I do, and know the down and dirty number crunching parts please enlighten me.

Glory scaling should be a certain calculated % based off the following set standards:
1- player level
2- team AP
3- team rank based off castles owned
And 4- (explaining this because it involves a few parts and adjusts for a few reasons).

A - Castle lvl:
Only lvl 5’s should be 100% glory (as they are the ONLY castle with max infrastructure so therefore should be the only 100% glory option for ALL teams in atlas regardless of all other glory scaling factors. Currently teams with lvl 5’s don’t even man these castles because they don’t get attacked, there is no incentive. Instead of earning these castle like in any other game, they are allowed to sit fat dumb and happy. This is a poor gaming environment.
Currently lvl 4’s are 100%, and shouldn’t be. They aren’t max infrastructure, so in no world should they be 100% glory. Why are they categorized as equal glory as a lvl 5 castle that gives more bonuses? and no one even wants a lvl 4 castle because top 10 teams gang bang farm these for “easy” glory instead of attacking teams their own size, hordes are being used to farm a few because they are allowed to, encouraged to take advantage of a broken system).
lvl 2, 3, and 4’s should have a certain % of glory scaling either added positively or subtracted negatively to them.
Example: A lvl 4 gives say… 80-90% … a lvl 3 - 60-70% and a lvl 2 - 30-50%. Based on the first set 3 glory scaling factors listed above, and 4th glory scaling factor further explained below.

  • So if a team is same glory scale (based off the set 3 listed above) nothing is really added it’s all 100% and defaults back to player level… regardless of castle lvl, because its a fair fight. Team A should be attacking team B.
  • Now, If a team is significantly bigger/stronger then another they choose to attack, then negative glory scaling % is adjusted based off how much bigger they are and the castle size they are attacking. Team A is encouraged to probably not attack Team B fo this reason.
  • If they are smaller/weaker then the team they choose to attack, then positive glory scaling % is adjusted for per the same standards. Team A can attack Team B as they will get good glory, but they will be challenged and there would be consequence (further explained in part E of this).

B - Team size:
How do we measure a teams size? Simple:
Ranks 1-10 (these are the true D1 teams, and they each basically have 40+ castles… so they have 400+ castles to choose from PLUS any lvl 5 for 100% glory… plus NML)
Ranks 11-25 (these could be clumped into D1 but are probably closer to ranks 26-50 and only have 20-30 castles so could go either way, but they are closer in strength to D2 teams)
Ranks 26-50 (26-100 are all basically similar in strength)
Ranks 51-100 (could scale up in glory as stated above)
Ranks 101-200
Ranks 201-400
Ranks 401-800
Ranks 801-1600

If you attack any team that ranks the same as you it’s most equal glory… so 100% give or take player lvl and castle lvl…
Simply put - if you attack up a certain % is added! If you attack down a certain % is taken away.
This encourages larger teams to not bully smaller teams.
This encourages smaller/weaker teams to hit equal and higher teams.
This encourages same size teams to fight a fair fight…
but it’s not unfairly balanced because not everyone can attack teams ranked 1-10…

D - choosing your fight:
To eliminate meat shields… a % of glory could be added to a lower ranked team if they decide to choose and move to a bigger teams castle and trap a larger player/team. The larger player/team came to fight the team holding the castle not 50 other lower ranked smaller players/teams trapping them, so they should not be penalized for a horde of trappers 400 lvl’s lower then them. Instead they would fall under the same glory scaling ratio as the team defending the castle and yes maybe their player lvl plays into part of this so though its not 100% they are still worth decent glory for the player they are trapping as they should be because that’s a fight they are choosing to fight, and I feel that’s a fair compromise.
On the reverse of that, to eliminate bullying… if a larger player/team comes to a smaller fight to help, well they again are choosing to fight that fight and would fall into receiving less glory for anyone they trap/attack/taunt… and the smaller team receives an added boost to power to attack that player team that is unfairly matched on their castle, unless of course its the same size player/team fighting eachother on that smaller teams castle.

E - revenge:
As a safety net there could be also added in a “revenge glory % scaling” which would allow a team a certain % to be added to a another team that hit them if the fight is outside of their equal team rank… make sense?
If team rank 150 is constantly farming team rank 15… just to bleed their troops for another allied team that wants to attack them and is of the same size… well they are choosing to do that and there should be consequences that allows the team ranked 15 who’s being farmed by the team ranked 150 to revenge hit them back at their castles for say a certain time frame or amount of damage… instead of receive horrible glory from them. so a certain “revenge glory %” is allowed. Also promoting a fair fight environment.
I feel this takes into account all pertinent aspects of the game plus encourages a fair fight and a healthy gaming environment in atlas.
It accounts for revenge hits.
It accounts for bullying.
It accounts for sandbagging.
It accounts for Meat-shields.

Thoughts? I know this was long, I’m just tired of seeing one system update failure after another because glory scaling is factoring only one main part of atlas instead of all pertinent parts of atlas. If a team/player can manipulate the system they will, factoring in all parts, they can’t manipulate the system. It provides a circle of life balance to the game. If one team gets too strong, they should struggle to find more glory and seek it elsewhere. If one team gets too weak from being ganged up on they should be able to find glory easier! Its all a scale and i feel best balanced by taking into account all pertinent aspects of the game.

The current system CAN’T be fun for the teams running around in hordes using the steamroll tactic to monopolize all of atlas. That HAS to be boring to constantly not challenge yourself.
It also CAN’T be fun for the teams on the other end of this broken system constantly finding themselves in an unfair fight looking at teams less then half their strength owning more lvl 4’s for example then they have, not because they aren’t big/strong enough to hold them but because the system has always been broken and encourages the wrong aspects of what I feel the games gold of atlas is.
Yes, someone is always going to win more and someone loose more, that is part of a war game, but to promote a fair fight, player friendly gaming environment that can be enjoyed by all, i feel that all the above aspects of both the set standards of glory scaling AND the adjusting standards I’ve mentioned should be taken into consideration for how we all get glory.

Thoughts? Comments? Suggestions? Criticisms?
Thanks for your time.



This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

1 Like

The percentage of T5 castles is too low to be the only 100% glory in the game outside of “equal strength teams.”

For the most part, the teams in the rankings you listed do stick to attacking similar strength teams. Well, with the exception of a top team hitting platinum teams for T3’s so they can hide…

But anyway, the glory scaling doesn’t need to become worse, it’s already hard enough to find 100% glory with the enemy running and hiding behind XPfarms teams and such…

1 Like

You are never going to have a system that’s perfect and someone is always going to cry and moan about something. With that being said, simple is good, adding more complexity to anything in war dragons is never good and WILL always lead to bugs, more bugs… oh did i say bugs yet?

Anyways, find a way to game the glory system like you did before and you’ll be fine.


Im not sure I agree with many of the specific solutions, although I think we may agree on the problems.

As far as team scaling goes, Lutrus just said this in another thread, and on first thought I can’t see a reason why this doesn’t elegantly fix our issues

Yeah okay that makes sense and thanks for explaining. It just seems like when there is only one main thing that its wagged off of it can be manipulated. Example. A team could be weak attack power but have twice as many castles? Shouldn’t the castles owned for those hoarding… as they are benefiting from having them… be counted for something?

Well you say that there would be too small a pool for options of XP… but is it? I mean there is one alliance that has probably 85% of all lvl 4’s and 100% of the 5’s… if those teams would actually play the game as i feel its intended to be played, and attack eachother instead of horde and bulldoze a few teams the amount of glory spots would entirely not be limited. I mean what would happen if suddenly 100% of the 4’s and 5’s were owned by this alliance. Would they continue to attack those same teams on any lvl 2’s and 3’s they own? And if so how are any of us supporting that kind of environment?

I would be willing to bet that if you took the remaining 4’s that are left outside that alliance, and put them up against what the pool would be like for 5’s if teams owning them actually attacked eachother there would probably be more glory spots from those alone then the remaining what? 30 lvl 4’s that alliance doesn’t control?
Add the lvl 4’s that are being held by those same teams… and BAM! Glory for days! No? if this game was played as i feel its intended to be played… fair gaming environment and all, there would be no issue with finding glory spots would there?

So true about the bugs… i just wish… it was more well balanced. I’m not a computer programmer or anything but i’m Sure like anything as you said… the more you add the more complicated it becomes and the more speed bumps you get. Lol

Hey thanks for the reference on the other thread i just read through it. Do you know why glory scaling is strictly based off Team AP? And not also Castles owned too? I didn’t realize teams dropped castles so they could receive better glory, like… that just seems like sandbagging to me. So I get why why the team ap change but Maybe they dropped them cause they were getting bullied?

I know i was tired of constantly having 2/3 of diamond hit my team on a few castles so we simply walked away, being on all day defending every 3-5 minutes is SUPER fun let me tell you :joy:. In all seriousness though, who wants to fight that fight? I’m all for the up hill battle but at some point it crosses the line of not fun and you get good players, good people leaving the game simply because the existing nasty lopsided environment which is encouraged.

Unfortunately it seems that the “easy button” push will always be more important for the masses then seeking a challenge. Maybe if there was more of an incentive for players they might look for that so called challenging and more fair / equal fight?
Ex: “hey, if you attack this player who’s on a team of equal or higher rank and player lvl then hey, here’s your prize” and even for trying its better then attacking down?” If somehow that could be a thing maybe it would help create a healthier gaming environment?

Eh just rambling… :joy:

1 Like

My understanding of the idea is to have a measure of strength which as closely as possible represents strength, and is resistant to manipulation.

As it would be extremely disadvantageous to have weaker dragons, it seems much less likely people would hold off developing their dragons to manipulate their glory band.

As for why it doesn’t factor other things in, my guess would be is that it needs to stay simple to avoid some of the issues of the past. I can’t think of any reason why pg wouldn’t be open to appropriate adjustments. Personally I think it needs to be tried out for a while.

While I agree it can help teams to keep lots of castles they potentially could never take or hold otherwise, in theory any team in their range should be a fair fight by aggregate attack power. I see a potential flaw with troop quantity not being factored in, but it remains to be seen if it’s really a problem.

It’s actually pretty prevalent.

I agree it qualifies as sandbagging. I believe one of the goals of this change was to reduce sandbagging.

Anyone can read between the lines on bullying. It’s certainly in the eye of the beholder. In a perfect world it would be clearly not a thing. As for this change, any game requires competition, and if the strongest teams can’t deal with the other strongest teams, our strength measurement is either wrong or there are no better teams to match up against said teams, and until competition can be fixed, the best thing for the health of the game as a whole is to make that match. It’s a little more complicate than that, but I think it’s the root principal here.

This all makes sense and thanks for the Insight. I guess from what I’ve seen, if I may, and what youve explained the competition will be there until it’s not… meaning I don’t see any team that’s throttled constantly fighting an unwinable fight that can’t be won based off sheer numbers staying around to play the game… which would put all 4+5’s that are 100% glory to be horded by a few teams which will… what? Actually Attack each other? Just do CG swaps and be bored owning all the hotels on every land in monopoly? Or attack the level 2’s and 3’s of those teams too? That game doesn’t sound fun for either side… who would continue to play that? :thinking:

already happened

Oh :joy: well so what do those teams even hope to accomplish without 100% glory hold options? I’m not on a big team but I would think that the game simply would t be fun to play anymore. Those teams obviously made too many allies and now they are about out of enemies. Doesn’t seem to smart of an end game plan…

They need to make level 3 lands 100% GP to give everyone more targets.

1 Like




So says a level 474 (max dragons)
Officer of a D1 Team
In the top 5ta

Why do you feel the need to go seal clubbing?


This seems like a terrible idea. The experiment on T4/5 has been a failure in my eyes. Not sure if you were serious or sarcastic, but why would this be a good idea?

1 Like

My dragons aren’t maxed, I don’t have meglok yet.
Don’t stalk please its unbecoming. I have a point of view I want more glory options you disagree. Lets keep it at that shall we.

I wasn’t being serious, Just showing another point of view. Personally I would love 100% glory everywhere but its not feasible anymore, the smaller teams would get butchered. I was merely pointing out to the OP that only 100% on level 5 is a terrible idea in a jovial manner.