I miss dragon combat roles

In many of these types of games classes offer different combat roles.

The classic role playing example is a tank ( warrior + shield ) who will protect the group, a hunter (bow) will offer ranged damage, a mage will crowd control the enemy, a healer will debuff ailments and keep everyone healed and then a Paladin might fight melee with the warrior and offer some utility while a rogue might disable traps and offer some burst damage.

We used to have this many years ago. Hunter would be a glass cannon - setup a base. ( drop problem towers, disable other towers and leave buffs behind like healing marks for followers ) so a warrior could clean up defence heavy base or a sorc could clean up a base without mage towers.

Now when I look at my roster - I have 10 dragons all designed for exactly the same job. Destroy the base solo and inflct 100% damage. It doesnt matter if they are a sorc or a warrior or a hunter the role is exactly the same - blow everything up as quickly as possible!

Now I am not suggesting we go back to the old days where we NEED to have a setup dragon for every hit and where classes meant something different but I think there is a case where dragons could offer different combat roles instead of everyone being the same.

There are lots of different ways this can be achieved. I think linaage dragons could be the pathway to get these types of dragons with seasonal dragons the classic 1 shot dragons.

The Follower #2 dragon

Calivore was a good example he had a specific role as a follow up dragon because he started with a full rage bar. If you screwed up the attack and your first dragon died and was rage drained then Cal could come in as dragon #2 full rage and setup or complete the base.

A full rage bar was a bit OP but I think if “follower” dragons had 2 rage that would be reasonable.

He was also solid if your team mate died and you were #2 - Cal was a safe bet if you didnt know how much rage your team mate left you with

So thats one combat role - the follower, backup dragon. But in a roster of 10 you probably only need 1-2 dragons in this combat role. ( lets face it the new lineage dragon setup has been underwhelming )

The Lead Buffer

In this case we are going to hit a base thats tougher than what we can normally handle and we expect that a team mate will back us up to finish the job.

Examples of where this might be used - in a war or atlas.

This dragon would be like old school hunters. A cloak, a buff spell that can be used my other dragons and then a disable spell or a burst dps spell.

This dragon isn’t going to be a full clear dragon. He isn’t going to be used if you need speed. But if you are hitting something hard and need someone to prep the base then he is your goto.

Other variants might instead offer a specific buff that gets applied to dragon #2 onwards. Perhaps hp, dps, healing etc. The buff can become active when this dragon dies.

You could probably have 1-2 of these dragons.

The Punisher

This dragon is designed as a #3 dragon. This type of dragon could be used if your first 2 dragons were a train wreck.

I imagine this guy would be angry that all his friends died so he is suicidal hes churning HP into damage and self destructs into a group of 5 towers.

He might only fly for 45 seconds max. He might also only be able to fly from #3 slot onwards.

Some fun stuff you could do with this guy some real hail mary plays that will have defenders shaking their heads.


In summary I think it would be cool if our roster of 10 dragons had different combat roles. Instead of 10 dragons that are designed to one shot a base people will build their rosters to handle different situations.

Pethaps 5 dragons that can one shot a base. 1-2 that can setup a very hard base, 1-2 lead buffers and 1-2 punishers.

I think this will had some more optionality to the way we play. We will have a team of dragons that offer somwthing to our roster and give the roster some depth.



I understand what you mean with this topic and agree with some points. Biggest thing to me that stands out is how so many different things factor into defense and attack.

1 Like

The game used to require skill (pre-Atlas).

Now all it requires is a sizable wallet.

And not even that if you plan properly.

But having a sizable wallet definitely helps. Sadly our overlords are only in it for the money, so I wouldn’t expect much to change. The game has been so perverted from what it once was to where it isn’t really recognizable anymore. Ok, maybe that’s not true, there’s still dragons. And bases. But that’s about it….


Sounds interesting but as long as speed meta exists, all other concepts than 100% with 1 dragons aren‘t viable. So before we can get any new dragon playstyles, speed meta needs to die


It is exactly this that made me leave, alongside the chore list.

You used to have to plan big attacks. Review the base, and lower levels could be relevant and powerful with setup dragons.

Now you just have to plow through it fast. If it ain’t fast it don’t count. It’s so boring and means bases can’t be too hard.

1 Like


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

Has that happened? As far as I have seen things have been pretty agreeable with that sentiment

Yes you can rant about it as a issue…… but you can’t actually address “speed is king” and offer a solid solution or point out what mechanics and objectives create the speed meta and what has allowed for its continued escalation to this point.

Those topics will be censored as they are not popular because what’s required to remove it from this meta is scary to any player who has learned to navigate this slowly degrading mechanic set.

So actually addressing things such as how meta escalation and our short term unviable defensive objective is the problem and how you can add or change anything you like to almost any degree within the core game and the map and nothing will change here until that defense objective is changed and the mechanics used to support this meta.

So yes your free to rant how speed is king sucks but don’t even think about posting the actual solution or the cause of it …… lol

Escalation of the meta and escalating content and short term mechanics and features piled on top of each other has ruined the skill based moment of engagement.

Where we used to see dynamic interactive teamwork and tactical play to make a successful attack they have reduced it to speed is king and yes I’ve been censored when I point out how every single issue that lead us here is created and allowed to persist because of the core objective of defense and continuous pointless growth.

As I’m fairly sure this will be too….:man_shrugging:

1 Like

I miss the old sanding and cleanup days. Though I don’t miss the 24hr guard dog job for war defending.

This was one of the reasons I kept saying the beta should’ve been a separate standalone game.

1 Like

They should have removed old core war along with the ranking system and the repetitive event cycle and reworked all conflict and engagement completely and incorporated them into a completely different map that actually supplies a true viable replacement for old core war and long failed ranking system……:man_shrugging:

1 Like

That is the weirdest part of the game. It feels like 2 different games.

Main game events people are separated by leagues yet in atlas its all vs all.

Outcomes in atlas have no impact on main game and vice versa.

They should really try to bridge the two games together and make it seamless.

At the very least give one of the two a actual long term offensive objective :man_shrugging:Lol
Yes they do feel disjointed and un-connected because they are and in fact they are starting to actually conflict and work against each other as the meta escalates.

1 Like

Additional timers and egg tokens from atlas do help the base game progression though…

1 Like

Yep there is a sort of casual link since we also use main game dragons in atlas.

But still it doesn’t feel as immersive as it could. (Just my opinion)

To me it feels like 2 separate games with a semi casual link.

Main game events don’t have any impact on atlas

Taking castles in atlas or killing stuff in atlas doesn’t do anything to main game.

It has casual connections but it could be more intertwined.

It could. It would also be the fastest way for PG to finally push the players that hate Atlas away from WDs once and for all.

I think, at this point, years into the Atlas experiment, PG has done the cost/benefit analysis of making Atlas have more impact on the “main game” and decided to leave it “as is” in order not to lose that revenue stream from the Atlas haters.

Or I’m just spouting nonsense and they’re making shit up as they go (much more likely).

Either way, if they do indeed ever change the game so as to where Atlas directly affects the main game, minus the riders and gear, which is already a pretty significant impact, I’d be gone pretty damn quick…

1 Like

Atlas should have been it’s own game. Right now they have smashed two different games into one. Made them have some impact on the other, and made both unsatisfying grinds.

Both need reworking and frankly disentangling. New events need to be done. Speed meta needs to die. Atlas needs … oh god that list is long. But it needs to stop being this 24/7 perma grind in case someone and their mums decides to snipe. And it also needs to not be stagnant. Have ups and downs, or choose when to get involved and be at risk.

Pg has promised improvements. Over. And. Over. They have broken promises and have refused to address speed meta for years. It’s beyond frustrating. Plus their improvements don’t solve the true problem. They have shown their colours over and over.


They have the two games running in parallel while competing for engagement activity and participation……
The two features utilize unviable independently running defensive objectives.
So we have the objective of endless growth in the core game and the acquisition of multiple disjointed defense positions on that broken map.
These two games have never been integrated to any real degree hence the dual running event cycles that compete against each other……
We could disentangle them but the core game would still be without a viable theater of engagement which is why the map was added originally but they failed to build and integrate
a map that was capable of supporting conflict.
We might actually try integration before we jump to disentanglement :crazy_face:
I agree the map needs a complete rework and it needs to support and integrate the core game while providing long term engagement and a viable objective with balanced engagement!

1 Like