Storage Capacity for Gold

Im having an issue with leveling my Primarches in Atlas: I simply cannot store the amount of gold that is required for leveling up a Primarch.

Im lvl 102 and my storage is currently lvl 33, the max gold amount I can store is 2.58kk. The amount of gold required to lvl up a Primarch from lvl 2 to 3 however is 3.18kk and I suppose it will also increase further.
If I were to use glory I have banked during past events to get points in the current event I would have to spend rubies, I believe 1 ruby for 1k gold, which could be fine to a certain extent but definitely not fine if the amount of gold required for lvling a Primarch is going to scale in that manner (about +400k each lvl a Primarch gets) furter.

Two questions regarding this issue:

  1. If it is intended to be that way, why are low level players like myself limited to have only lvl 2 destroyer, lets say? I can not see low level players with maxed or close to maxed Primarches being a threat to balance in atlas, especially given that they can be attacked from high lvl players who can beat their base/Primarch with one dragon regardless of it being defended. Intuitively, low level players have actually to be encouraged to lvl up their primarches to be able to stand up for themselves and their team with higher primrchs stats. I can not understand why actually the opposite is the case.

  2. I would like to know at what lvl of storage what amount of gold can be stored, so if anyone has that information feel free to share it with me :slightly_smiling_face:

Please excuse me for my typing errors.

Yeah it’s frustrating not being able to level a primarch. I think at somewhat higher levels, starting around the mid 100s, things are more balanced because you can hold enough gold for upgrades if you put work into your storage. Maybe an attempt to get people to stop neglecting it? I don’t have a particularly strong opinion on this one

To answer #2: Gold protection level in personal storage

Thx for the table!
Though I find it weird that the amount of gold remains the same from lvl 1 to lvl 36. What could be a possible justification for that?

Rhetorical question: is it frustrating lvl 103 to not be able to upgrade your flak tower to lvl 60?

1 Like

For level 1-36 those levels typically…well don’t have Atlas.

I don’t believe the analogy stands.
The tower lvl progression and dragons progression bound together as they are right now are a good way of structuring the overall game progression.

It would make no sense to fly Noctua on lvl 20 towers or it would equally make no sense of having lvl 60 flack against orange tier dragons. The reason why it is not the case is that players should compete with players that they could potentially beat. For the same reason there is a league separation and the search of enemies in normal attack.

There is no such separation in atlas so low level players have to compete with end game players. Which im totally fine with, btw, I just don’t agree with the terms of that competition. Not only do endgame players have an advantage of having better dragons and better bases (advantage that they have for right) but also they can lvl up their primarches cheaper (no or little rubies to pay required).
In comparison to lvl 60 flack (tge access to which is limited by ur overall lvl) you actually can have a lvl 15 Primarch on lvl 102 (so it is not limited by overall lvl in game and hence is not a treat to the balance) but you have to pay rubies for that. Why? And why does the max amount of gold you can store not scale from lvl 1 of the storage to lvl 36?

I would appreciate a full answer to this, not a rhetorical question. I don’t understand those.

1 Like

Its gated exactly the same as tower levels.
Same mechanic same goal.

If it is currently possible to get past the gate using rubies then either be thankful for it or report the bug so they can fix it.

But hey, maybe they dont want to leave those kids behind either, who knows. Maybe the next request should be to get primes that allow lvl 100s to fight level 500s without needing the base either… Oh wait

I was refering to the storage lvl not players lvl.

1 Like

Yes but storage level is what gates tower lvl, not player lvl

Eg if you hacked your game to give you lvl 80 storage, you would be able to level all towers to 60

Could you then give me a funktional explanation of why low level players should not have access to max lvl primarch?

As i have stated earlier the analogy between tower lvls and primarch lvl is missleading, the mere fact of me being able to lvl up my primarch kind of proves that. Consider also the actual difference in stats between lvl 30 flack and lvl 55 flack - the latter is 10 times stronger that the former ( lvl 30 flack has 666k attack power, lvl 55 has 6.66kk) and the difference between lvl 1 destroyer and lvl 15 destroyer (170 attack and deffence power vs 220 and 220). How come can we even compare those?

Why should I be thankful for a necessity to invest significantly more resources in my primarch to get the same stats as an endgame player would get for free / only for gold?

1 Like

We asked this previously and the reply was that its a motivation to level up, similar to towers or unlocking stronger dragons.

Your values for the primes are off (destroyer ones) but the value comes into troop cost.

I (opinion) don’t think the difference between prime levels justifies the cost (aka troop loss) but I’ve been told a plenty I’m wrong.

Lets take a lvl 1 sieger (230 attack/-5 fort and lvl 15 sieger (360 attack/-11 fort)

Both players load up 10k and hit a lvl 5 rusher (258 defense) at a level 1 fort +30 defense) and do a 4 flame attack.

Lvl1: 230:283 = 0.81 x1.5 for 4 flame = kills 12296 troops.

Lvl15: 360:277 x1.5 = 19494 troops

Difference 7198 troops.

Those troops are worth roughly $64. Just on that single attack.

So thats why high level primes are worth more than low level = aka you inflict more losses or take less losses.

Either way it makes the player with the higher prime benefit financially.

As this is a fremium type of game, the business model is that they need people to spend money to keep it running.

The options are simple: get higher level (costs money) ; gem (costs money) or stay low level and rebuild more troops (cost money)

So in summary, the higher level player has already invested more, to get to that status, why should a low lvl get the same benefits without the cost?

1 Like

I would not say the benefits are the same because a high Level player already has a better dragons and better base, hence he or she would have more chances to get five flames in the attack or be able to proteckt himself and reduce the troop costs. Though I see your “wanna be strong - pay for it” point, I just try to avoid this type of thought when thinking of why did the developers made that and that decision.

The point that the lvl or storage requirements pose an incentive to lvl up also seems plausible to me, but again that does not justify the gap of storage capacity, nor does that explain why the storage capacity only begins to scale on lvl 35. I think that those lvl requirenmentrs are a bit rough, because for me again to be able to upgrade my prime from lvl 2 to lvl 3 only would mean to jump over 15 lvls in base levels, which in terms of time playing would mean two or even three building events, depending from base-building strategy. And that only to gain additional 6 attack and defence Points on a destroyer. That does not give me a strong incentive to lvl up, but rather deminishes the incentive to play in Atlas. So if that reqierenments were thought to drive players to lvl up faster or play more intensively, that strategy proves counterproductive and as such has to be debated at least or even replaced with a better one.

There are pinch points built into the game in many places–den caps, Sapphire wall, spike in build times for towers over level ~45, storage requirements that have huge build times for a pittance in increased storage, needing to be level 275 to max legendary Obsidians etc etc etc. Some people quit, some become spenders, some make peace with the nonspender progression. That’s the business model. Not sure why this particular pinch point needs relief when as Gox noted the high level already paid in money or time or both.

Because for this buisness model to be successful there should be an adequate reward for Investment. It might (and should) not be easy to get, but it has to be rewarding.
This particular pinch Point seems (for me) to be inadequate because the amount of efford does not correspond with the payout as it is right now. Compare the progress you make when you jump from lvl 102 to lvl 136: you jump from having platinum Dragons to having Hauheset, one of the best Dragons in the game, which may justify the amount of Investment, be it spending, grinding or both, you have done to get there. At the same time you’ll be only able to unlock 2-3 additional primarch lvls, meaning 12 to 18 additional stats on a destroyer. Those stats can make a difference, sure, but this difference doesnt even compare with a jump from plat dragons to hauheset, though the amount of efford remains the same. That makes it inadequate.

In Addition to that the sapphire wall and other pinch points are also a subject of debate, and as far as Im concerned PG actually said they would look colser on these issues, wich at least makes it worth raising questions about them.

1 Like

Ah got you.

As I said I kind of feel the same, aka I think the difference in a lvl 1 and 15 prime isnt enough to justify the enormous cost in time,gold, troops etc.

Unfortunately the troop ruby value is so high that it financially turns out to be just that - but if its any consolation I’m nearer your opinion on value per upgrade.

For reference going from lvl 305-310 for example does the following
: costs about 1100 days of timers
Aka $1000
: gives nothing dragon/Base wise
: your base is slightly stronger, but the same dragon that solod it still does

At low lvls the game just has major improvements for low costs, so sadly the"small gain for large cost" mechanic dominantes later :disappointed:

You have my vote to change all pinch points so that adequate value for investment is delivered for sure.

In a world where going from storage 53—>54 is a jump from 13d to 42d build time for a whopping increase in storage of 20k and protection of 3k, I can’t get too excited about this particular one. And there are plenty of den cap unlocks that don’t deliver anything on the order of Hauheset vs not Hauheset once achieved.

1 Like

It does seem to be an odd version of a pinch point though; you have to be level 115 with a maxed storage to upgrade Bronze Primarchs to level 3. Fair enough. But… press this “spend gems” button and you can magically get past the pinch point.
Same goes with the 2nd Primarch slot. And the 3rd. Just seems more like a gem grab than a true pinch point.

This topic was automatically closed after 30 days. New replies are no longer allowed.