Team Portals Yes or No


#1

Do we want team portals brought back?

  • Bring back Team portals we love them!
  • Don’t bring back team portals
  • I don’t know what a portal is.

0 voters


#2

I mean, it doesn’t have to be portals but the outlook on navigation right now doesn’t look good


#3

@PGDave @pgEcho I really thought this was one of the better features of Atlas AND as the map expands (I can continue to assuming the player base grows or conditionally). This seemed like a very good mechanic with every little downside when implemented. What caused their demise?


#4

It’s pretty obvious even if you did a wider poll…
With more people what our response would be.

I’d like an answer too.


#5

Team portals were designed to allow teams to establish footholds in several distinct parts of the world so that if they were attacked and wiped out in one area, they would still survive and retain landholdings in other parts of the world. So it was intended to help prevent a complete wipeout. In practice, it’s a pretty subtle idea and operating various disconnected colonies makes coordination harder on players. The killing blow was that we wanted travel paths to really matter – and being able to teleport around the world (and possibly to an enemy’s back door) is pretty counter to the kinds of relationships and gameplay we hope to achieve with this travel paradigm. All that said, we’ve explored a lot of ways of moving around Atlas since the very early beta days, and I think it’s worth continuing to look at travel critically and think about how it’s working (and not) and where to go from here. Thanks for the feedback.


#6

Understood, I think this may be the usual case of theoretical vs practical but the new system might just take time to take hold.

That part is working well.

You just saw them as an escape exit? I guess that is different than how they were implemented. I thought they had much more practical value.

I still think they can, the constraint just cannot be time. Paths still matter, the problem is you combined travel paths with making them a neutral zone to live in. Those two really should not be one thing. Ideally, paths should be maybe like a game trail. People move and can hunt on those.

True, but you also set it to 2 teams which is way too restrictive. Additionally, the teams often in the path are just in the wrong place at the wrong time. That is not the combat I think either side wants. You could also consider going the OTHER way…allowing teams to grant passage through each others portals? This would make land MORE strategic in some sense and could lead to some interesting interactions.

I agree though, we have to see how this current iteration of travel works, but this was pretty disheartening losing this feature.


#7

I agree this part is a bit confusing.
If the theoretical plan is for teams to bubble castles on the way to attack a big target, can’t they simply escape through that same bubbled route back to neutral land? No need for a back door when you can go out the front door and wave bye to them as you pass them on the road.

We use our portals so that our land locked lands (ones that are in the middle of nowhere) can have access to a land which connects to the neutral zone. That way we only have to hold one neutral adjacent castle (or our alliance does) and we can all just port as required to a certain place on the neutral zone to travel around.


#8

I’ll say this:

If my team is required to have access to Neutral on all our lands, that means I will be removing some smaller teams from level 2 lands that inevitability give me access to neutral so I can move freely. I won’t even do anything other than move tiny teams off of it.

Portals remove the need for me to keep lower level land away from smaller teams. Portals = more land for more teams, otherwise.


#9

I remember there was a time in Atlas where a lot of land was “empty” because teams needed it to move around. And if you took it…one of the larger teams came and killed you off simply because you were blocking their access. Seems we are going to back to those days. :man_shrugging:


#10

Good thing my island is isolated :face_with_raised_eyebrow:


#11

I don’t understand what is meant by

You can’t use a team portal to teleport anywhere but land your team already owns. So in this scenario you’re already at your enemies back door, long before u ever built a portal. It’s not like it’s a surprise “hey I’m here now and I wasn’t a second ago” type situation. If you’re bordering enemy territory, then u should be prepared for that type of scenario. The opposing team has the ability to use team portals as well. It’s not some kind of unfair advantage.

I think what u will find is exactly what Panda said

What’s going to happen is all the stronger teams in an area will keep clear paths to neutral unowned, so there’s a way in and out. I guess new teams are out of luck.

As long as there is higher level land mixed in with the lower levels, this problem will exist. Only other solution would be to build a low level land only area…that could fit all these new teams. I think NMO is already capped on low level land so not like they have a reason to conquer it all anymore.


#12

Getting rid of the portals right now will cause very big issues as we all have colonized in multiple areas in maps and not always have allies next door which may land lock many of us in many castles we wirked hard to get… we also wirked hard to build the portals and the whole aystem with what you gave us so now forcing us to change all over is a bit unfair in my opinion :sweat_smile::disappointed_relieved: let alone how will we get different shard lands and teavel between if not next to allies or safe zone? Safe zones front castles wil become prime property and vwry hard to get or hold by any team orher than the top teams…


#13

Yes many of us have lands in isolated locations… Like the early beta lands.

@pgDave when will existing team portals be phased out?


#14

Well, you took away portals, and then you limited safe passage to two teams PER TEAM. Not per castle as it had been. This is severley hampering progress and straining alliances due to limited movement. I don’t see how those two recent changes are good at all.


#15

Of corse things can change and I might misunderstand, but any existing portals were said to be grandfathered in and can exist until the land is taken/lost…


#16

Technically you can have 5 teams which each have passage with each other (alliance) as well as 2 teams per team.

Last I heard they were considering raising the limit from 2, but who knows. Keep in mind lots of new land is available and while I think the game benefits from new teams having new land, there should be ample available for existing teams who need to move to safezone accessible places.

I suspect no changes will be made until the new change is given some time to see how it works. (After new land is released)


#17

I initially thought that’s what I read as well. Maybe ppl were misunderstanding. But in game support is sending out responses like these and it’s confusing.

Now we already know in game support can often be useless at times, but you can’t completely disregard msgs like these either.

I hope they do change their minds and keep portals as they are now.


#18

I remember reading on the forums they were staying but I think everything is subject to change.


#19

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