So before this gets filled with comments like, “you should be keeping an eye on your players” or rude comments. Please hear me out.
I cant be the only one in a leadership position of a team that gets frustrated when they get an email saying “X(the player that took the castle) has conquered X castle(castle name) for X team” when we(leadership) werent looking for a new castle.
So please hear me out with this proposal/suggestion and id love to hear THOUGHTFUL insight that ISNT rude or will turn this thread into flag center.
@DragonPunch@PGTimber and im tagging the two of you because i have no clue who to tag. So apologies if tagging the two of you isnt the right way to go.
Would it be possible to make it so the only people on a team that can conquer a castle is a member of leadership, aka officer or leader, or maybe a general of a castle the team already owns?
There are teams out there that might not be ready for a second castle or more due to them just starting out in atlas. But some player comes along, see a castle thats an easy target and boom a new to atlas team now has 2 castles when they cant fully handle 1 yet. There are also teams that love setting up a gold trap to try and take gold from other teams through methods of conquering. And im not gonna go to much into that one because honestly i dont know much about it, i just know ive seen it done a few times.
Again…id love to hear the community’s thoughts on this. Just for the love of all things… KEEP THE RUDE COMMENTS TO YOURSELF! If your opinion on the matter is different then mine, then sure youre free to post it just make sure your wording isnt coming off as rude or belittling.
Edit:
Or instead have a toggle button that the leader of the team can decide if conquering a castle can be done by leadership, leadership+govnor(s) of team’s current castle(s), or everyone.
I think this is a great idea. There have been several of us talking about wanting the same feature. It’s been recently brought up again because there has been a rash of gold stealing incidents from small, lower league teams as you mentioned. A player will join said team, conquer a pirate castle with little to no guards, then let it be conquered back from the original team. This conquering back and forth happens multiple times until all the gold is stolen from the small team.
This is a dirty trick that in my opinion needs to be looked at. A loss like this can be pretty devastating to small starter team in atlas.
This is another reason it makes the auto-accept feature impossible for teams to use, thus discourages small teams to grow.
Solutions:
*Only allow Leaders/Officers OR leader-designated members conquering abilities AND the ability to set infra.
*Limit the number of times a castle can be conquered in a certain time period. Though I could see this option causing more issues in real atlas battles and ultimately become more of a problem, and encourage stagnation.
At the very least, I would like to see the conquering ability option be designated to the leader, so they could decide if any member can conquer or not.
I realize that some players and some teams may be ok with anyone having the ability to conquer - and that’s ok. To each their own. But it would be nice for leaders to be able to decide.
While i agree it is annoying when people just conquer castles at times, it would put so much more pressure on officers. Whenever you will do a organized raid and no officer is online, and you would have the castle down to 0 guards, there will be no way to take the castle then since leadership MUST join all raids then.
Putting on so much more work and pressure for them.
Which was also way I offered maybe allowing generals of other team owned castles having that option as well…aka
That way it lessens the pressure you mentioned that would be on the officers or leader.
So if the team does a raid then either the leader, officer, or general can join the raid in order to take the castle.
Conquering castles is one of the few remaining parts of the game which is still enjoyable, so shouldn’t be limited to only leadership.
Imagine your team have been trying to conquer a castle for ages, and when you finally make a breakthrough none of your leadership are on line, so you miss the opportunity.
Managing your team, and making sure they don’t do anything stupid is part of the challenge of the game.
Players (and teams) have been banned for this in the past. But sadly it is still an issue.
Adding any restrictions just makes the game less enjoyable. Next you will be asking for a way to limit which castles your players can attack.
(btw only leadership/governor can set infra)
Where else am I going to get the gold to level up my prims? It’s particularly enjoyable when it’s rich S1 or diamond teams . Sadly a lot of teams seem to have less gold than they used to.
I think this bring many limitations , I would not want to be an officer but I still engage in raids and if there was a strategical position to conquer , which is always a matter of speed as a member I would rush in and do it if no officer is online . I am sorry but I am so very against it, controlling your team is better than limiting others to conquer .
I understand the “gold hunt” is a big problem but that’s pure bad team management from leadership. Sorry but this is true .
To be fair. Flumpie never said anything in their original post about using this method. I think he took me saying.
Differently as in a “you take my castle bet your ass im taking it back and i dont care if you loose gold.” Not a “oh im gonna conquer a castle, leave it empty, have someone take it, just for me to take it back and rob them of gold.”
This would be fine as long as there was no limit on number of officers you can promote. I would argue there are too many castles out there that one player could casually conquer. The complete failure of this game to update and progress atlas is disheartening. There really needs to be a large update to fix most of atlas issues.
I remember once up on a time when I was in a gold team and nobody was able to conquer castles alone, my team leader rotated in 10-20 players every week kicking the inactive ones, I wonder how that could be possible now when you have to interrogate every player to detect if he is a spy/thief/axxxxxe/generally willing to hurt your team… I would rather grant leaders possibility to ban each of their player from going into non-5ta castles
As Officer I refuse everything which puts more work on us. Everyone who is or was an Officer will most likely agree. It’s already kind of a full time job so no way!
Again…Im an officer and again said Generals, which i really meant Governors but at the time my mind blanked on the name, also be able to conquer the castles. So the pressure you guy keep talking about its falling onto the shoulders of other members that arent leadership.
The higher teams honestly probably dont care if a teammate conquers a new castle, but idk. But struggling teams in atlas that CAN NOT afford another castle suffer when a player goes rogue and does whatever they want. Because nothing screams, happy day like waking up to a system message saying you gained a new castle while you were sleeping because of people all being in differnet time zones.
I get my suggestion isnt for everyone and im fine with that. Conquering castles is what makes atlas…well atlas.
Im just saying that the lower league teams suffer when conquering a castle can be done by any billy, bob, joe, sue, and so on the team.
