LIVE: Updated Glory & Event Prizes


Please keep in mind that this is a proposal that I’m posting to discuss with players. These changes are now live (this post was originally just a proposal, but it has now been implemented).


  • Glory will be easier to earn going forward, in particular if you do well (attacking OR defending).
  • Future events will payout more prizes (combination of easier tiers and more prizes per player effort invested).


  • Maximum glory earnable per troop lost increased 277% (from 0.542 to 1.5)
    • Glory earned per own troop lost decreased from 0.148 to 0
    • Glory earned per enemy troop killed increased from 0.197 to 0.75
    • NOTE: Maximum glory is earned when you kill the enemy 2:1 or more (same as before). There’s no benefit for trying to pick on much weaker players in order to get bigger kill ratios like the 10:1 cap.
  • Progression prize materials and other item types increased ~13%
  • Timers in kill event progression prizes up ~67%
  • Minor Atlas event expected prize earnings increased ~56% (inclusive of the sub-bullets here)
    • Reduced progression point thresholds significantly (easier to achieve)
    • Reduced points per action in minor Atlas events (but significantly less than the point thresholds were adjusted)
    • Note: It probably seems weird that both point thresholds and points per action were modified. We could have achieved this with just one change … but currently we use the same point thresholds for all Atlas events, and the kill event point thresholds were modified (so we couldn’t just modify one).

These changes are NOT retroactive.

Beta Event Prizes
Version 3.90 Release Notes
HAT INCREASE - thank you!
Beta -> Atlas History + Expansions


Err that is supposed to be increased right?


Oops, copy/paste error. Decreased by a negative amount I guess :P. Fixed the text so it makes sense now, thanks @Shimo.


Still figuring things out, but does this only refer to troop size? Or do the players base levels come into play at all?

Glory nerfed way too much


Could you please elaborate with realistic battle scenarios?

Assuming I’m attacking a player of same level and clear with 5 flames using 1 dragon.

Current numbers:

Attack with 1000 troops, lose 500 troops and kill 3000 enemy troops, how much glory is earned?

Proposed changes:

Attack with 1000 troops, lose 500 troops and kill 3000 enemy troops, how much glory is earned?

Defending against same level player and they clear my base with 1 dragon getting 5 flames.

Current numbers:

I lose 1000 troops and kill 3000 troops, how much glory is earned?

Proposed changes:

I lose 1000 troops and kill 3000 troops, how much glory is earned?

Thank you


Lose 500, kill 3k … would’ve earned 271 but now earns 1k glory (3.69x).

Lose 1000, kill 3k … would’ve earned 542 but now earns 2k glory (also 3.69x).

It might seem odd that more glory is earned in the second battle, but you picked a fairer fight (the kill ratio was less extreme). As mentioned in the above post, glory earnings cap out at 2:1 kill ratios … so if you want glory, there’s no need to seek out much weaker teams. Just fight for the best territory you can against the best teams you can take … you’ll end up with better bonuses (from owning better territory) and not have lost out on any glory! Think about it like this – when you crush a weak opponent, most of your army is chilling on the sidelines … there’s no glory in that.


@PGDave, thanks again for elaborating. I agree that a 2:1 ratio for a glory cap should in theory limit the need to seek out weaker teams, but lets see what others think and how that plays out if it’s implemented.

In your calculations, the troops killed aren’t factored in at all in either scenarios, should it not look more like this:



Fairer fight? Or worse prime?

Same scenario

  1. Attack a level 500 player’s sieger with my sieger (level 320) - do brilliant 5 flame it, get less glory than using my rusher to attack another teams rusher ?

Sorry just need basic clarification, as it seems that basing it on the kill ratio isn’t great, since people already abuse the system. I see lots of players attacking with rushers - knowing full well they will be decimated.


Sorry for second post in a row but this is feedback, the previous was a question.

It seems like the changes might push things over to the other side? Aka too easy to go up?

Realistically you are looking at 370% increase in glory earned, and 55% increased earnings from events.

Look not trying to look a gift-horse in the mouth, but maybe tone the percentages back a little bit?

The old 1:1 system was fairly balanced (aka you lost say 20k you gained 20k glory?)
Is there a way of making the new system mimic that, yet holding the old formulas?

Reason I’m suggesting this, else you will soon have an armada of level 15 primes around, and this will lead to much higher griefing rates of lower teams. (aka 1 person with level 15 primes, will be much more effective at griefing) - he already isn’t doing it for the glory.


I agree I liked the old system much better, as far as glory earned goes. Earn what you lose. It will entice players to build more troops to earn the glory.


I think this new system will help new teams out a lot. I joined atlas late so it takes forever for me to grind for Gp in atlas


I don’t understand these calculations? In the new plan the “Glory earned per own troop lost decreased from 0.148 to 0” so the amount lost wouldn’t affect the glory points at all, right? Since the amount lost is the only thing that changed, it should be same same glory points both times, right?
Both should get 1k glory?
What am I missing…?


I really like this plan. I haven’t been playing long enough to know if will be enough of an adjustment, but glory points are definitely too hard to get now.
Thanks, Dave!!


Trying to make sure I understand all the parameters here.

  1. Let’s say I leave my sieger in NML with 10k troops and get hit and 5 flamed. Enemy loses 1k ships and I lose all 10K. I would get 1K glory? 0 for my losses and 1K for killing 1k enemy ships in defeat? Or is there some minimum floor that kicks in?

  2. From the other perspective, the enemy would get 2k glory? 1k ships lost, 10k glory earned but capped at 2:1 vs losses at 2k?

  3. Brand new scenario: I love rewards and leveling primarchs, am lazy and do not care that it’s a long term losing strategy for my team. I load my rusher up with 20k troops, find the nearest hostile, attack and immediately quit the attack at 0%. What sort of glory am I looking at?

Before 3.70 was it basically 1:1 glory to lost troops? That is what I recall but trying to determine how this proposal compares to that.


Hi Gox,

The argument plays out the other way long term.

Yes, the level 15 primarch will wipe out the troops for “newer” teams more easily, but the 2:1 glory allows the decimated teams to level their primarchs faster. This is especially important since the vast majority of the teams that own high primarchs have had atlas/beta forever…and the accelerated glory would allow the newer teams (D1/D2/Sapph1&2 and all the other future teams to be added) to catch up and have fairer fights eventually.

The slower the glory gain rate (which is what you propose in response to what @PGDave proposed), the more you put the newer teams at a disadvantage…on top of everything else in Atlas that already puts these new teams at a disadvantage.


I can understand both sides of this discussion, and in my opinion the correct actions lie in between. Res is absolutely right that a way to help the disadvantaged new atlas players is needed, but Gox is also correct that overdoing it on progression isn’t good either.
It’s like if it were breeding: the current atlas suggestion would be like taking the 220k tokens needed for AA and changing it to 50k. Gox is hypothetically suggesting perhaps we go with 120k (still an improvement, but not so extreme).

The other thing is I still strongly dislike the increased glory for losing more troops- completely counter to the idea of building as successful an attack as possible. Why can’t it work like matchmaking, where the amount of XP gained is based on their level relative to yours?
Remove the “troops you lose” factor, and apply an equation like the XP one to incentivize hitting higher opponents.


The way it SHOULD work is so obvious to me that I can’t understand why it isn’t already in place.

In the main game, you are penalized for attacking lower players by means of proportionally lower resources and XP, and attacking higher players grants more resources and XP. This is a basic system that promotes attacking up.

Since it is already clear that this works, why on earth is it not reflected in glory gains?
If I (244) attack one of Dread’s 400+, I should have a higher max glory possible than if I attacked a level 100. That could then be further affected by flames (5 or less) and of course the primarch modifiers, but all in all I will gain more for going for the “hard win” and being successful than I would for either 0% on a harder opponent (losing more troops) or attacking a weaker opponent.

Can anyone explain to me why this isn’t how it works, because I don’t get it.


The issue we had is gaming the system mostly.

I’ve suggested it elsewhere, and the issue that was raised is that the lvl100 can get a lvl 300 to wing him/her, thus exponentially gaining more than they should.

Its not like a 100 attacking a 200 with a 300 wing is exactly glorious.


Have a glory cap for having Wings :man_shrugging:

AKA cap it as you are hitting a player with an even level