The Ditry Truth About Atlas


#1

I just figured I would give a short PSA for those in Atlas and those without. Yes, the invader base is easy and at first it SEEMED like the buffs were worth it. But every new iteration they get worse and worse. The cap remains the same but the amount you have to hold to achieve it gets higher and higher.

Land, which I was proposed to be the most important thing of all basically plays almost no part in your ranking and if you level the shit out of it the ROI is awful. It’s a giant race that people think has this amazing prize at the end. It doesn’t.

As much as I don’t want to admit it but I criticized how certain teams did things but it seems they were right all along. Hit the smallest team imaginable and take more land. By the metrics pg is pushing that is what atlas is. Finding the weakest team you can and attack them.

Now you all know. Best of luck to you :sweat_smile:.


#2

And that ladies and gentlemen, is the ditry truth.


#3

Unfortunately, I cannot find the definition of the word “ditry” in the dictionary. :thinking:

Can you provide a definition for it, Panda?


#4

I think it’s a combination of the words dirty and petri. So like it’s the examined dirtiness under the proper setting (on the Petri dish) that makes the truth, all the more credible.

Ditry: noun/adj. Observable dirtiness


#5

New update seems awful for small sapphire teams and for big Dimond teams as well
I’ll give feedback,since I’m playing in both
So…new garrisons future SUPPOSED to help small teams to be able to protect themselves and prevent holding lvl 2-3 lands by big teams
But…here what we got de facto
So as you all know,if you own lands lvl 3(even if it’s maxed lands) you’ll be able to defend yourself only with primarches with troops on them
Otherwise,your garrison base will be awful(let’s use polite words) Gustav base
So basically you must keep primarches on base,otherwise your island will be free GP farm
As player of D1 team I saw,that our island garrison have been attacked by sapphire dragon :roll_eyes:
Ok,let’s suggest,that PG wants to give some benefits for middle Sapphire teams
I have Sapphire team as well
So,let’s say,we have 5-7 top guys there,who somehow can protect us with primarches
Now they must keep all their troops on primarches and their primarches at home permanently(already not cool for them)
Since you guys took away any ability to use strategy to defend ourselves(control which ppl will hold troops in garrison or assign base,which can defend island,as you did for lvl 4+ lands)
You basically made small teams GP farms for everyone else
We attacked another sapphire team with mind and wiped out 200k troops in 15min
It it even normal?
Can’t see any point in owing lands under lvl 4 now🤷🏻‍♀️
Also…you guys make standard defender(Gustav) base,based on lands lvl
And it’s same gif everyone
So,I can be D1 team with s…trange 260 lvl farm base or I can be in plat,without even 260 lvl in my team(!) and I’ll havr this base.as garrison defender.Basically,they can buy players base to defend themselves,if they will have enough gold to up infra,lol
So actually,there is not much sense in recruiting bigger guys in Sapphire league teams at all now (for Atlas)
:fleur_de_lis:️If it’s offense action-he will be enfeebled to farm base
:fleur_de_lis:️If it’s defending part-he will need to keep at least 50k on each primarch(which is unfair to player,comparing to other teammates) and that’s all that he can do
Is it any chance to help?
Maybe we can put limits on lvl base,which we can assign to defend lvls 2-3 lands
But it will be our teammate base?
It will make sense
Because now it’s kinda frustrating @PGDave @pgEcho


#6

Those buffs/bonuses you have all been hearing aboutt are probably not as good as you think. Certainly, what you can actually attain is not.

I’ll let Panda say, if he wishes, what Dread gets (keeping in mind they have the highest concentration of good land of any team). Here are the max possible, translation to normal English:

  1. Max reduction is 50 seconds per troop trained.
  2. Max token payout is 2111
  3. Max boost to a specific crafting item is 1000
  4. Max XP bonus on the mine is 70% of the base XP
  5. Max troop payout is 500
  6. Max gold bonus is 100% boost of base payout
  7. Max speedup payout is 75 1-hour speedups per day.

Tokens, troops, and speedups do not stack–you can pick one per day.

I will say this–I don’t know any team that is even close to the max. Based on what I do know, my guess is that you would get better bonuses own the max possible level 2 and level 3 lands than if you owned level 4 and 5 lands that you could successfully defend.

Removing some of the key defense strategies hurts everyone. I’m not looking for a stagnant map. I’m looking for the motivation to do something other than hit the weakest possible team that will still give glory. So far, that motivation is not there. Without that motivation, and without sufficient ROI, even if the goal is “more movement” on the map, what we are being given will have the opposite effect in any way that actually matters.


#7

How to make Atlas something better
The design of the map is flawed, in my opinion, and leads to what we have seen thus far—no motivation to attack peers. The “reward” system has the same effect. It appears to be a fixed pool—so, as more teams are added, the rewards attainable by any specific team decline.
How could the map design be changed?
Have a centralize area (or two) that are “safe.” Think of it as the tadpole pond. Make the land level 0, and in addition to the normal upkeep charges, have a “king’s tax” or whatever that would let newer teams, in relatively safety, build up to level 3 infrastructure that could then be stored without being conquered and moved to another location in the “real world.”
As we move out from the “King’s” land, there could be very few neutral zones, but far more no man’s lands. So, if I were designing it, the Kings land is mostly safe (by this I mean that, for a price, someone could still attack you there—it’s not a hiding zone. But the king’s guards are not easily bribed…. So, the price is not insignificant. It’s not 100% safe, but if the “bribe” is paid, the king will “be busy.”
Surrounding the safe zone, is a ring of no man’s land, with a few level 2 plots, but most of the level 2 land does not directly touch the safe zone. Then we move out a little further, and we start seeing a mix of level 2 and 3 in clumps, but also a lot of NML.
Go out further, and now we have larger clumps, with a level 4 as a hub of sorts, and level 3 and 2 also there. Again, lots of NML between the clumps…. Not so much that traveling is a burden, but enough that “staging” an attack is not a freebie.
On the outer ring, have the level 5 lands, again, clumped with 4, 3, and 2. So, we end up with “islands” of player-ownable land, but rather than encouraging centralization and bottlenecks, the power structure is diffuse. Very strong teams would have a motivation to own the best land, naturally, but weaker teams that were ready (or tired of paying the taxes for relative safety) could get better land, especially if they were willing to work with a stronger team.
Portals should be brought back, but it should be more like a beacon… Have a kind of prime that has one purpose—to light that beacon. The portal it opens is immediately “full strength” but it lasts only as long as that prime is alive. For balance, this prime should be fairly easy to kill, but maybe it can learn a skill that gives it stealth or a kind of cloak that works while in NML, but with the right infrastructure, it can be detected. Also, lighting the beacon disables the cloak AND anyone can use it. After all, it’s a beacon. So, both allies of the attackers and allies of the defenders can use it—this introduces a strategy regarding how quickly to kill it. Once the beacon is lit, that prime is in a “locked” state for a set amount of time (could be reduced by being at high levels). Whatever the time is, it should be relatively easy to kill this particular prime either because the defense power is relatively low or because it cannot carry a huge number of troops…. I don’t think both are necessary—if the attacker wishes to sacrifice a large number of troops to keep the portal open longer, I think that should be an option.
I don’t know what a reasonable range for the beacon should be—probably depends upon how big the map is. I don’t think you should be able to travel in this fashion from one corner to the next, but I think a range that allowed for one level 5 “clump” to reach out and touch someone two clumps away would be reasonable. This kind of thing is really hard to gauge without seeing it in action. If the stealth skill is high enough, this prime should be able to get beyond the “meat shield” of the 2s and 3s and get to the 4s or even the 5s before being detected (unless the beacon is lit, then stealth is disabled, and prime cannot move or be unsummoned).
Regarding rewards…. Since troops are expensive in any large quantity, and infrastructure is VERY expensive once you get above 9 or so (yes, it’s expensive before that, but it gets insanely expensive), the rewards for having it need to be commensurate with the cost. The bonuses should be higher (and attainable). I think level 5 (even though I have none) should have special payouts that lower level lands do not have. Maybe the poachers have ALL the crafting materials in substantially larger amounts AND they drop scrolls too. Maybe with high enough infrastructure, a certain number of troops can be instantly revived each day at zero cost. There are lots of things that could make this far more interesting and engaging without leading to a stagnant map where the level 2 and 3 lands change owners, but the 4s and 5 pretty much stay with who has them.
I think there could even be some (very few) level 6 land… but this is special. Not whoever gets it first. Possibly a reward for an Atlas “season” It’s already fully upgraded, and you can lose it, but when the next season starts, it’s on the table again for the “winner.” So, Team A wins the first season and gets this land. They manage to keep it for the whole season, but they come in second place, so they lose it. The new winner gets it, and they can keep it up to a full season, if no one takes it from them. And it’s not just bragging rights. Huge payouts, maybe further portal range, maybe ruby mines or something… IDK… something huge that makes it worth fighting not only to get it, but also to steal it.
Just some thoughts.
Feel free to improve, destroy, or ignore.


#8

You feeling okay Panda?


#10

FTFY :rofl:


#11

I think a simple solution is scale the influence and bonus a land can give based on the teams strength. Team strength should be determined by global ranking (my suggestions…can possibly be something else). The idea is, the stronger a team is, the less lower level lands 1. Contribute to their bonus, and 2. Add to their influence. This will eliminate ALL motivation for a top ranked team to own lower level land at all.


#12

I do see your point. But how would you scale rewards in this fashion easily? It would be a programming nightmare.

And

There is still not really an incentive to massacre yourself to take a 5 that you now cannot hold, even against a strong D2/S1 opponent. Well, short of dropping a few more thousand dollars. That is not a solution, imo. That is the problem. Money fixes everything.


#13

I told me so. :eyes:


#14

I dont see that as being beneficial. I see value in both what Dread and what NMO does and there should be benefits to both. I dont like that PG punished NMO by limiting the number of islands owned. But i also see Panda’s point. Teams should be rewarded for getting as much land as possible AND for getting higher values land. Both strategies SHOULD have their weaknesses too though, which aren’t happening.

In the case of Dread owning the majority of the highest level land, people should want that land and should be hitting dread constantly for it. But that doesn’t happen, its not worth the risk.

In the case of NMO owning a ton of smaller islands, this strategy SHOULD spread them out too thin, making it nearly impossible for them to hold it all. Again, this doesn’t seem to be happening.

The issue is it is too costly to try to take land. Atlas does not encourage teams to fight one another. That has always been the issue from the very onset of Beta. Fighting over land needs to be encouraged in a more significant way than it is now… I dont know if this will ever be fixed (or even if it can be).

But what i have noticed is the only time we see people fight in a meaningful way is when new land is introduced… Perhaps Atlas should make that more of a focus and capitalize on it?
Which brings me back to an idea similar to what i have mentioned before… have the value of land degrade… Maybe set up a system that constantly expands while closing down the oldest territory… Afterall new teams dont get the new land (as they should). So instead of setting it up for them to get new land, set up the system so that the new land is for old teams and let the new guys fight over old degraded land where they can establish themselves. anyways im just throwing ideas out there.


#15

If you go for quantity and I’m not even trying to argue right now but one of the biggest problems with a top team taking so much unnecessary land. It creates an artificial shortage. So, assuming Dread has higher performance and we are capable of doing the same thing…a map with all the land controlled by lets say 5 teams alone? That should go over really well.

I think the problem with that concept was that we were incapable of doing it that way. Versus it was just a simple choice.


#16

If you make the low lvl lands worthless to high level teams they will have NO choice but to attack teams that occupy higher lvl lands, which usually are other high lvl teams.

In the case of NMO they saw it as easier to choose devour low lvl lands and the small teams in them as opposed to challenging higher lvl teams for their lands. There should be no benefit for a higher team owning low level land. Even 20 lvl 2s is too much. If u deprive teams of the benefits those lands provide them, u eliminate the need and desire to gain and hold them.


#17

Theres no solution as long as money is involved.


#18

Well that’s why it shouldn’t be so easy to keep that much land, a problem i acknowledged. It shouldn’t be easy for any team to keep land. This applies to you guys keeping so many level 5’s AND to NMO keeping a crapload of level 2’s for the reasons i mentioned above. As i agree, Atlas should not be owned by so few teams. But i dont like the idea of limiting those that try…


#19

Thats not really true. They did challenge and were kicked to the curb (specifically when Dread broke a no hit agreement at a time when defending wasn’t working and when ship loss was permanent). As a result they had to rebuild from the outskirts (acquiring all that low level land). They didn’t just enter Atlas thinking “hey lets go bully other teams”. They played according to the position they were in, within the rules at the time. It made more sense to to what they did.

But thats besides the point. I was more commenting that the most action in Atlas occurs when new land is opening up, when little to no infrastructure has been build and when the rewards for taking the risk are most prevalent. THAT is when Atlas is fun and exciting and i am merely proposing PG learns from that part of Atlas… They can’t just expand forever so i suggested they would need to devalue old land… or do something drastic to encourage more Atlas battles. If battles happened more often land would change more often and Atlas as a whole could be more fun…


#20

Lol and we tried so hard to keep it from getting personal…

We “broke” a no hit? Or…your leader threanted us with millions of ships he didn’t have as a bluff? In any case, that’s an internal issue.

I stand by what I said for the most part. If the game is going to be, who can hit the smallest/weakest group. Should get interesting


#21

Seers said that? doesn’t sound like her… she was leader at the time. Interesting…

I suppose there is always things going on behind the scenes i am not aware of…