Let’s say the team troops acquire at a flat rate of 10k per week.
If a small team along the safe zone is attacked every week, on week 10, they have 10k troops.
But the large team that everyone is afraid to attack, on week 10, has 100k troops.
Who gets attacked on week 11?
Let’s say the team troops acquire at a flat rate of 10k per week.
So it’s just a farming mechanism, where the attacker earn G, and the home team earns none?
well, can’t have that single player earn 500K glory for being the defender and the troops being used to be killed is from the contribution of your whole team.
It might be complicated if they designed something that each troop will go toward each player’s dragon rider that is assigned on a perch.
Example of this is:
Player 1 - contributed 500 troops
Player 2 - contributed 200 troops
Player 3 - contributed 800 troops
Player 4 is defending and all troops got wiped out in 1 battle
Player 1 gained xx glory
Player 2 gained yy glory
Player 3 gained zz glory
Imagine having all 50 member contribute and gets glory for each battle on each island being defended. That’s a bit too much for the server to handle.
Might be possible in the future, but right now, few improvement at a time is needed.
@Atops That seems like a legitimate way to think about it. I suppose it shifts glory earning to a slightly more active endeavor (harder to sit around and wait for someone to attack you, not that that was a particularly viable approach anyway if you wanted to most bang for your troop). But glory earning potential will remain unchanged – since the goal is about enabling people to engage in offense without feeling like it’s counter-productive.
For me, we can start with the basics, small team/large team…all teams have 50 member so they have the same parameters there.
When you move into why teams perform better than others. I dont think there should ever be a mechanic that “fixes” that. People dont want to be better sometimes and other teams so…each team has the same general restrictions so…?
Why would they be a flat rate?
I think that was just being used for the example, but yeah flat rate seems like a less interesting choice.
Upcoming "World War Season"
I currently don’t see any alternatives that don’t drastically reduce a team’s ability to defend their castles. We can currently have 50 player bases per castle, each with a serious number of troops. This proposal seems to weaken the garrisons extremely.
Maybe we can keep all player’s troops on the garrisons in the first step but the marshall is the first base to be displayed for the attacker and only the marshall will get the fort buffs?
In this case I hope there won’t be a cooldown >1h to swap homes so players that build more troops can reinforce other castles. Or team troops should be transferable maybe with a transfer time like RSS?
I think a lvl400+ Rusher with max troops is a solid defense. I’m not sure how many players have more troops in garrisons than they could fit on their prims.
I’m sure that if this proposal went live tomorrow, I would put all my troops on defensive prims to guard our castles. Glory ratios and kill ratios are meaningless. You can get glory from Kingpins so PvP isn’t even needed anymore (which is a little sad tbh.). Playing defensive means I can revive all of my troops and use fort bonuses. Holding on to a castle has a much greater benefit, especially with tribute items for the core game, than risky attacks have. Especially when all you can do is trigger a shield, so attacks need to be carefully planned and take a lot of time to actually conquer anything.
So in my opinion (or for my situation), sitting and waiting with my troops had been of great value and will be of even greater value if this proposal goes live.
Version 4.16 Release Notes
Neutral zone is overloaded
Bump; I’ve updated the original post (alllll the way up at the top!) with the latest proposal.
Just running through various scenarios for understanding:
- Setup: Marshal picks a L400 base for garrison defense
- Are primarch bases still relevant? (Or, phrased differently, will it continue to work like how it does now?) e.g. Taunter with 80k troops is a L300 base. Attacker hits the taunter. The aggressor flies against the L300 Taunter owner’s base but pulls troops from the castle guard pool, so long as there are guards to pull from.
- And then, the difference: If there are no primarchs, instead of needing to attack all the bases with troops garrisoned there, it’ll just be attacks on the marshal-selected garrison base until castle troops are depleted or bubble is popped.
- How often can home be changed, or will there be any limitations on troop summons? It’ll be much easier to instantly summon troops to various areas, so removes a bit of strategy.
- Will there be a conversion for current troops to castle troops, and will there be another kingpin event before castle troops?
So we can’t just drop troops in the safe zone anymore? If they’re only moving out of inventory, then we can’t put them someplace else?
Well you wouldn’t have to since your primarch can also now fly - just fly back to your Home castle, transfer troops from inventory to primarch, then fly off again. That’s why SF mentioned it removes a bit of strategy.
@forScience is spot on! And for the Qs:
Good question. Currently there’s no cooldown. You also cannot currently summon Primarchs (or transfer troops) when an enemy is present. This limits the ability to jet troops to a new area. I think we may want to consider introducing a rehome timer (say 30hr … or perhaps variable based on army size), at least if you have more than some number of troops or have been in Atlas for a little while. This really only matters if you own territory that isn’t connected – if your territory is connected, it will be pretty quick to ‘fly’ your primarch from your current home to any other destination in your territory.
Yes, though I don’t have an exact plan yet. I just know it won’t be “zero”.
I don’t believe so, based on our current dates.
They’ll just be on (a) one of your Primarchs or (b) in inventory, milling about your base (which is as good as being in the safe zone now, except less hard to find 'em!).
@PGDave thanks for the update on the proposal, most of my points seem to be solved now.
So now that we need glory to build castle guards, offense is the best defense?
In that case I hope the glory calculation is going to be improved, so we don’t earn more glory for attacking poorly and losing more troops in an attack.
One more thing that I’m still worried about, is that basically our defenses are weakened.
We will only be able to guard max up to 4 castles per player (1 with our base designated to a castle by the marshal, 3 more with our primarchs) whereas before we could guard all castles (having troops on every garrison):
So a team of 50 players with 100 primarchs and 20 castles can have 5 primarchs to guard on every castle and their castles guards assigned to their 20 strongest bases. That’s 6 players to defeat if noone has their primes elsewhere.
Right now we can have 50 player bases on a garrison plus additional primarchs to guard.
If this is intended, I really hope for a further cost reduction of the third primarch slot so I can have more primarchs to guard our castles.
This isn’t the case now (you get double the glory per troop from fighting well versus losing miserably), but it will be more clear after v4.15 goes live because the attack kill cap will also become the attack lose cap (so you can’t lose any more troops than you could kill [ratios unchanged, so defender would lose less when your losses are capped]). There’s more on this in the World War Season thread somewhere (around post #90 I think).
Still working on this bit, stay tuned.
Updated the original post with two changes:
First, the garrison will now be defended by an NPC base leveled based on the fort level:
Second, we’ll tweak the rules for when you’re allowed to attack the garrison so that Rushers can help you bypass enemy Primarchs that are sitting in the way:
NPC bases are always horrible unless you can somehow defend them and even then that’s iffy. Maybe give people the ability to decide?
If you beat the garrison but there are still enemy primes around, do you need to beat them also to win the castle?
Will a team at least be able to do the layout of this base? (Will give smaller teams a defense chance against big attackers)
It could become a “team base”
The harder they build on their fort the stronger the “team base” could potentially be.