Earlier my post was removed for the same content that I posted so I try again
My castle was doing cool down and suddenly we were attacked by a D1 player
He is one of those with the highest kill in the leaderboard so I’m quite sure he wanted to stay in the top spots so he killed over 100k troops using sieger against our bronze primach
We can’t counter because most of us there were level 200+ even I’m level 400+ I can’t win with enfeeble
I think PG should remove the leaderboard so that these players will not attack us in order to show off but really?
Otherwise what can we do? It take many of us a long time to build up troops and most of my team mates have started atlas much later
I think there are more than a few of us on the forums who know exactly who this is based on the info provided. Unfortunately there are those who’s egos can only be padded by the clubbing of baby seals. All I can say is try to keep your prim loads light and hope he doesn’t come back.
Removing leaderboards will give negative impacts to the spenders / whales.
Tweaking parameters so that leaderboard shows proper value (e.g. not counting troops killed at 0% glory, etc.) is another matter.
First off, there is no chance they will remove the leaderboards.
But also, taking the leaderboards away is likely to make your situation worse. Leaderboards are one of the few things bored teams and players do. What they need is actually to be kept occupied with more competitive battles so that they don’t have time to bother with you.
I also believe they need to tighten glory scaling (should have been done at the same time that barricade times were reduced) and they need to do something about people using the glory event’s cheaper training to bypass scaling and hit down even farther than they normally do.
But above all else, PG needs yo keep the top end of the game busy with some kind of competitive battle…
The leaderboard is fun for me, but tbh, I’d support this. The fact that there are d1 players from the supposed best teams in game farming small teams just to artificially inflate their kills is shameful.
I think a good solution would be to disincentivized hitting down by nerfing revive rates for players who hit down. So for example if you’re hitting for 0% glory you should be able to get at best a 70% revive rate even with 5 flames, maybe. Tightening glory bands does literally nothing because players like this are happy to attack for 0 glory, they just want to prey on weaker teams/primarchs to inflate their kills with little troop loss to themselves.
I also think that if players actually like the game, we should take it upon ourselves not to be jerks just for the sake of being jerks. Sure, the game allows you to attack teams hundreds of ranks down for no reason, but why? Why make the game less fun for smaller players just to artificially inflate a meaningless number? That message will be lost on this community however.
It’s not a bad idea. But then as I pointed out in LC last night what happens when the following situation happens.
We hit a D1 team on T4 land. Just our 4TA. They defended with 60 teams. A more vengeful/less lazy player might want to go and smack these teams for getting involved, but it’s already garbage glory to hit them. Now if you nerf the revive rates as well they can come it to assist the D1 team knowing there are limited consequences. Then we head back to to where we were 3 years ago where the defence “strategy” was to call in hundreds of small teams to defend you while under attack.
Which was the start of the mega alliances we all profess to hate so much.
I honestly don’t think these ppl do it for glory. You can give them 0% and they will still do it. A better solution would be to increase troop loss. The issue with this is, there’s a lot of buried teams and castles.
The only way to truly stop players hitting down is to (at the risk of sounding like Malik) increase competition at the top. Basically, force top teams to fight each other while moving smaller, less prepared teams to a different map, or regain the bigger teams can’t get to.
This idea would promote sandbagging. Large players joining smaller teams to hit lower lvl players. This is nothing new, and has been touched on a-lot previously. A system of rewards for players remaining in a higher weight class would help.
I think arguably the most frustrating thing about these posts is that they continue to pop up, with nothing being done. It is clearly an issue (given the amount of posts that pop up), but it just seems this is it? PG never really seems to comment on this stuff specifically. While they’ve mentioned they’re working on towers and base things-- which is awesome; not complaining there-- are they even looking into this an issue with atlas?
I just don’t think most people understand how hard it is to change Atlas from a developer perspective. I once thought about creating an open world pvp map and scrapped my idea because I had to keep adding so many rules.
To take for example D&D, which is arguably an open world gaming system (but usually not pvp though by a stretch you could consider it pvp since the dm is “playing” the majority of the players in the game.) There are whole books on rules for how to play the game. All subject to the dm overruling. All this to create a balanced world where it is challenging but still “fair”.
I tried to point out many of the idea and the results from them. I stopped before I went down the rabbit hole on rules needs to cover the exploit created, then another exploit found, another rule, etc.
Would you like to lay out all my thoughts on the subject? I can do so. Will anyone read it? I doubt it. No one wants to read a 10+ page long paper anymore, let alone a few paragraphs, no matter how relevant it is. Especially PG who has a lot more on their plate.