Can we all push to get it so on a successful defense we get the glory based on the troops the attacker lost? The only benefit to defending is to save your troops. Successful defends should be rewarded with fair glory.
@PGGalileo this is a worthy topic I hope you all might consider. We spend tons of hammers and effort defending our bases but get little reward. Here are two examples of how bad glory rewards are on defenses:
I clipped so the attackers remain anonymous. But they were won. But because we dropped them early enough, I barely lost troops which mean I get less rewards than if they destroyed more of my base.
Consequently, and I’m not sure how I feel about this per se, but correcting this issue could also possibly end player swapping. I happen to be a fan of player swapping to a point, but I believe it’s consider not part of the intended game play. At the least, this change should be implemented when defending team castles, though not necessarily just YOUR 5TA castles, it should apply to enemy castles as well.
Your glory isn’t not bad in these cases. You’re getting about 100% glory.
Remember that glory is capped at 1.5x your troops lost, so if you want “better” glory than what you are getting there you need to lose more troops (but still less than opponent).
As your opponent has lost way more troops than you did, just think about how bad their return on troop investment was for those attacks (hint: they got less glory than you did and lost way more troops)
Edit: retooling at your screenshots you actually got more than 1.5x your troops lost, so are truely earning better glory than the attacker would have.
Under the current system…. That was the point of the thread .
Maybe you need additional context to consider.
You can only defend one base at a time and if you are defending, you are not attacking. So you win a defense, lose few troops, and get no glory. But while you and your teammates were busy defending someone else was attacking you, possibly undefended, and kills you anyway. So now you’re still losing those troops AND you get shit glory. This happens to me all the time because I’m not carting around a maxed base let alone maxed towers yet. So I’m a nice fast target to kill and get waved early on…
Edit: I forgot the Oxford comma. Phew… that was close.
The point here is defense glory should be based off of what the attacker loses in troops. Who the hell wants to continuously drop and waste hammer for 800 glory? In those examples his glory should be off of the 5k troops the attacker lost, which should be around 7k. This will also reduce the people who continuously snipe over and over and over for hours on end. If they can’t fly defended then they won’t want to give away good glory to the enemy.
Also, that second example he should have got max glory.
This is what I’d agree with, it came when they did their best to eliminate early quits. It sucks, but I can’t think of any way to fix it without throwing the balance. Maybe if a different ratio was used for defenders, but if you do it purely off how many troops are lost from the attacker you’ll get players swapping like that and getting about 2x the glory for the same amount of troops that they’re losing currently to swapping.
Personally though, I defend to kill troops, not to get good glory. You just have to hope your defense is consistent against all the attackers, which takes a lot of work from your team.
Agreed. I would personally like to see a bonus defenders glory based on percentage of base defeated. Maybe only when your base is defended? So when you defend it activates a glory multiplier that decreases as your base is defeated.
I like this. And hell, the defense glory doesn’t even have to be fully based on the attacker. A “bonus” payout for a successful defense might be a better solution.
I think it could work if defense used a different mechanic like you’re saying, perhaps 1/2 of the attackers lost troops are multiplied without taking into account your lost troops. It wouldn’t be good for successful defenses on an offensive prim, but would definitely be nice for trappers and taunters. You have to remember that if defending gets too good for glory, people will swap and take turns quitting at 0 gaining more glory for fewer troops lost that way.
Edit: Actually that wouldn’t work, cause unsuccessful defenses would suck… I like what Dashyt said.
Exactly. I’m not saying I need full glory for defense. But as people continue to complain about glory swaps, those of us who are active but can’t spend every waking moment attacking other players(as hunting is time consuming), it might be nice to get rewarded for all aspects of pvp attacks. Especially given we can’t choose who attacks us…
They can just make it so 0% is nothing like a mega quit. Which would be bad for the attacker as someone else could be smashing them while they went in to attack. So it’s either fight on or take the hit.
This is why I suggested based on base destruction. A similar mechanic to how mega points are given seems to be an appropriate option.
To clarify, I am referring to a bonus glory mechanic for defending. So undefended or unsuccessful defenses won’t be worse, as they would be exactly what happens now.
If I already see exploits to this. People could just pop in and load SS and gain the bonus glory for teammate.
But I don’t necessarily see an issue with this as waves on one person require this tactic.
There is an exploit to everything. I’m sure pg can drop in and help us out on some ideas. Even if the glory was based on 50% of the attackers troops lost, I don’t think that could be overly exploited
So i agree that defensive glory needs to be better…defend a base 10 times and get 8k glory under current system…based on the first attack in your image which is probably an accurate snipe in todays meta… Get 1 successful attack and get 8k glory…seems a little off in favor of the attack system.
That said I dont see how this change will mitigate player swapping…typically the swaps are set up to provide equal glory and revives…i feel players may need to adjust but as long as the glory and revives are equal those that love to swap will never stop.
My opinion with this is that if a player wants to swap, then let them. Currently they’re using more troops with worse revives than players that go hunting (which in turn means more money for PG since they’re less efficient), so I wouldn’t really consider it an exploit. As long as swapping doesn’t become more beneficial than real attacks, I think everything’s fine.
What’s been said though is accurate, attackers not only have an advantage, because the game leans that way, but they also get way better returns in atlas, so some changes to make it more worthwhile to defend would be great.
This is why player directed game changes are a bad idea.
You completely screwed your attackers and lost next to no troops. What are actually asking for here? To lose more troops?
Glory=Troops and Troops=Glory.
Unless you want to start paying another $20/mo for hammers, don’t ask for glory in exchange for hammers.
Edit: Came back in to correct spelling, But will add I still can’t believe how differently people can view Atlas. We all agree it sucks, but wouldn’t agree on much past that. This is why game design has to come from PG and not the players.
This thread is only now 19 posts and you couldn’t bother to read other posts. We’ve been quite clear.