Large Atlas alliances are affecting War Dragons

#1

I know there was a large discussion about how large alliances were affecting Atlas game play, and there was some discussion on how to limit their impact. For the first time, I also see how large Atlas alliances are impacting War Dragons events. The league we are in for the Fight Pits event has established a 12 team alliance all part of a major Atlas alliance. We know this because they all have the same character on their shields and we have checked what alliance they are in. They are dominating the event, and in almost all pits there are 3 or more of those teams. We also have an alliance of 4 teams but our teams are often scattered in several pits. We have been in some pits where 5 of those teams are facing 3 teams, and those 3 teams are not allied with each other.

Without the Atlas alliance, there is no way you could gather 12 teams to form a single alliance, in my opinion. Our team always works to get as many teams in an alliance as possible but it’s not easy.

I was just wondering if we have an unusual experience in this event or if other teams have experienced this as well. It definitely takes the enjoyment out of playing these events.

1 Like
#2

I am not sure, how long you are playing this game, but this has been thing even prior to Atlas. You had teams working together PvP events to get the best outcome for their group. Nothing new here.

18 Likes
#3

Welcome to the party, I’m surprised you hadn’t seen this before in KW and Fight Pits.

The way PG encourages sandbagging also affects events because better rewards are offered for being less competitive. I’m on a team where we chill lower than we could be and we’ve won the coliseum by a landslide each round without no hit agreements which takes away opportunity from other teams.

The question is how would you suggest stopping this? Even if Atlas politics weren’t in play, teams would still have an advantage by making allies, so unless the events themselves are changed you’ll still see alliances.

9 Likes
#4

Yes we have always had alliances “form” in these events.

And since the addition of the map these alliances are now established long before the event begins and they only require a short time to organize and dominate these events effectively nailing down the event before it has even started !

Here’s a example of how mega alliance corruption is spreading from the map into core events!

Remove the castles which will kill team based attacking and move rank to the map positionally and you won’t have these problems!

I have given a solution to mega alliances sandbagging stagnation and lag
And when you can point at one thing that causes almost every issue we have i would have to think it’s the cause of them all :man_shrugging:
Yep if one change addresses every single major issue I’d say that’s the disease causing the corruption.
We might want to consider treating the disease instead of the symptoms🤷‍♂️

#5

How to stop these large alliances is an excellent question, one that I have no answers. I have been playing this event since it started and this is the first time I have experience such a large alliance. I understand that alliances are important but, I believe that the intent of the game was never to have these HUGE alliance that dominate everything. When alliances I just wanted to raise this issue as a red flag that will kill the enjoyment of this game.

1 Like
#6

Hi Dwarf, I understand that creating alliances is not new to this game. We establish alliances in almost every PvP event. I have been playing this game for 5 years now. That said, this is the first time I have encountered a HUGE alliance that dominates the game. If this is the future of War Dragons PvP events, why play? You go into the event knowing that you will be killed, unless you have BIG spenders that can counter the unrelenting attacks by these large alliance teams. The other option is to creat you own BIG alliance, but as I have stated that is not easy to get 10 teams to agree not to hit each other, and managing it is very difficult.

#7

Remove the castles on that map and you will get rid of mega alliances and many other issues!

#8

Hi Gage, been thinking about your question of how to change the large alliance issue. A big help would be to remove shield identifiers. That is how these large alliances can easily identify who is in the alliance and who is not. Without any way to easily identify who is in the alliance, it makes it a lot more difficult for teams to remember who is in and who is out. Friendly fire hits would be a regular occurrence, and players will get frustrated with friendly fire. In our alliances we contact each other to handle friendly fire, with a 12 team alliance, managing friendly fire would be a nightmare, if there was no easy way to know who was in the alliance.

Just a thought.

1 Like
#9

Team gauntlet is the only PVP event in rotation that doesn’t suffer from alliance issues. Any PVP event where more than just two teams compete will have issues with teams joining forces to make it easier for their teams to come out on top.

As for how to stop mega alliances within Atlas itself? No clue there, as it is human nature to band together in groups. Even though PG’s mechanics in Atlas make creating and managing mega alliances more difficult, the players have nonetheless created mega alliances.

6 Likes
#10

Liz if you have some time please peek at my thread
“a closer look at map design and stagnation “

It clearly points out how and what causes mega alliances and how to get rid of them! :sunglasses:

1 Like
#11

I’m fairly certain I’ve read it before, as I’ve read most things on the forums…

The problem is memory retention :sweat_smile:

1 Like
#12

This is why I follow Chunk.
I never have memory problems anymore.

2 Likes
#13

:eyes: If you have Chunk, why need anything else, eh?

:rofl:

3 Likes
#14

I don’t think removing shields would work very well. Having been an officer in a 13 team alliance (I was personally very against that and it was a nightmare with friendly fire), we put the teams to hit in our war chat at the beginning of each round. The friendly fire sucked for sure, but the rounds where there were only one or two enemy teams it was impossible for them to keep up.

While alliances did exist without atlas, the problem now is officers are afraid of offending other teams and affecting atlas politics while in the event, that’s one of the main reasons I’ve seen alliances this large being made, so I agree atlas has made things worse (at least at the levels I’ve played at).

@Malik has presented a good map idea that wouldn’t have as much place for mega alliances, but it’d be such a large rework I don’t think pg would ever consider it seriously from a business standpoint. We’ll probably just have to deal with the whole alliance BS as long as we continue to play this particular game. :man_shrugging:

2 Likes
#15

Sadly if they don’t we won’t be playing it much longer anyway as it’s slowly degrading the game wether pg wants to rework the map or not in the end either they will or the map will become so unbalanced the game will become unplayable!
The burden of play their defensive map produces is not viable long term :man_shrugging:
Edit: made a attempt to soften this post to see if it remains

#16

Sure but that’s not exactly the point of a business. If it costs 100k to create a new map and completely scrap the old one, pg has to gamble on whether that investment will drive old customers away (because money they had paid is now wasted) or if it’ll actually make more money.

Not only that, but will it make enough to make up for the investment plus the other changes they could have made instead. Perhaps WD is slowly dying but from a business perspective that’s completely acceptable and even expected.

I agree it’s a good idea but I think small changes are the way to go since they’re not such a gamble. Blockade adjustments, new events, glory adjustments, etc. would be more likely to actually be heard and implemented by pg decision makers (in my opinion).

1 Like
#17

Name one change that can be implemented without increasing lag stagnation or burden of play.
Sorry brother what pg wants is bedsides the point if they don’t address that map in a big way they will kill this game with it.
And I’m not so sure they won’t rework it because that’s exactly what the shuffle was!
Yep they spent time and money developing the tech to shuffle this map and basically reworked the whole map by doing so.
And it won’t solve a dam thing as long as defense positions and acquisition of those positions remain on the map :man_shrugging:

#18

Every tactical game has a goal and ours is to acquire stagnate defense positions and unless that core goal of the map is changed to positional dominance this map will end in stagnation lag and mega alliances as long as we fight for multiple defense positions.
The map needs a SINGULAR goal for all teams and no amount of adjusting balance will ever change that need !
We’re not suddenly going to solve a 6 thousand year old problem of defense positions supporting stagnation on a tactical map :man_shrugging:
They better start gambling because we’re running out of time.

#19

Temple raid is another pvp not affected by the team pvp alliances, at least not that I’ve seen.

1 Like
#20

Yes Temple Raid and Gauntlet are the only events not affected. Kingdom Wars is particularly affected depending on placement on map and who surrounds you. If you get a 12 team alliance in Kingdom Wars many teams are dead before the event starts in my opinion.

1 Like