What is your thought process behind this?



In any case, you still wouldn’t carry more than 7500 - as you are more likely than not to get hit by multiple attackers simultaneously especially if you have an unprotected sieger.

Now you can go hunt with a sieger taunter combo, but this change doesn’t make that tactic any more or less effective.

For me, I’m seriously considering keeping my rusher at bronze expert and not bothering with a silver. Sieger, yes Silver is the way to go now.


Hmm. If the garrison continues beyond its current max, silver will be necessary when assaulting high level castles.


Yep silver for attacking, bronze for defending - that’s my takeaway. Oh and silver Destoyers will be the favourite food for NML hunters now…lol (0.75 x 25k >>> 1.5 x 7.5k) I forgot glory is capped at the lower of the two… :man_facepalming:


Silver destroyers are going to be beastly. With a seasonal boost, it will be able to attack any bronze and will be able to defend as well.

If I stay long enough, it’s what I’m going for. Alas that my destroyer isn’t to 15 yet.


The scenario is simple

Someone at their own castle, attacks say a silver 2 maxed out taunter with their little bronze prime.

What do you think would happen on the old system? At least with the new system some poor sod cannot wipe out all his troops attacking a big bully.


Ehh. No

It incentivizes you to attack other silver primarchs.

From a risk vs reward standpoint it’s also more fair as the attacker is only risking by his tier, so you can no longer loose many time what was possible to win.

Also. Possibly most importantly is that it simplifies support for everyone who were mostly already super confused…

Not sure how you see it as not worth it. As pointed out the higher troop capacity, increased special ability buffs, and higher attack and defend buffs all result in better situations for you except when under attack by a well coordinated group that strikes fast…

It also adds new strategy elements during attacks and defends. It now is often better to send Your silver vs silver when attacking (and you can win) or bronze vs silver when you may lose.

The only things wrong with it to me is how large the thresholds are, how much overlap they have, and how fast it was released.


Everything is a stat, so not sure what you mean, but if you mean only the attack and defend ratings, no it also lets you bypass primarchs for having more troops, or not be bypassed for having more troops, or have longer trap durations, better taunt reset, higher sieger debuff, and lets not forget that silver vs silver you can kill more faster if that’s what you want.

If you have silver primarchs and you feel the need to hit small players who don’t have silver primarchs that’s kind of your choice. Personally I like hitting as high as I can with a decent shot of ~ 1:1 or better. Finishing off the season with 25k per attack we awesome. And losing 25k was humbling. It all feels right to me.


Yes the lesser of the two. 7500 max loss, but it’s also only able to kill 7500 of your troops so it’s fair IMO

Same deal here. Lesser cap applies. Since Bronze 2 is involved this is also capped at 7500 lost and/or killed.

Still only 7500 can be lost or killed. Because a bronze 2 primarch is involved. The previously even sieger vs trapper would no longer be even unless you get it 5 flamed due to increased stats. The new stats can allow a (maxed) silver taunter to attack a bronze rusher and get good ratios.

Well the losses are greater for the non bronze primarchs due to higher attack and defend ratios. But yes if you mean will the caps be essentially the same as if you attacked more times, yes. But most people when they completely screw up will not attack again unless the screwup was for a correctable reason… so where as someone attacking you previously could have lost 25k no matter if they were using bronze or silver, now they lose 7500 if it’s bronze and stop attacking… but if they attacked more they would have the same results.

Not sure what these are. Ratios? Silver primarchs have higher possible stats allowing better ratios which are in effect no matter if they are engaging any primarch type or class.

Not purely, but as explained above someone my
Quit while they are ahead after one loss of 7500 instead of one loss of 25000. But the amounts are exactly the same if you had more battles and had the same number of flames on all battles.


Unless there is a way to exploit it that I haven’t seen, this is better in my opinion. We already have enough trouble motivating people to hit in their weight clas. The higher losses just made it so If you do well you can get your max but if you do poor you can lose 3.33 times what your possible kill is. Basically it forces people to hit low and I don’t think we want that. We want competition amongst roughly similar players to provide more reward…

This is just my thought. Rewarding it the previous way is just going to make silver primarchs spenders only club. Just like the high rollers table in Vegas. Won’t matter how good you are, you have to be able to afford big losses for long enough to make big gains. (Only sustainable for spending)

Anyways that’s my thought on it.


Why not have both?

This allows people to have 2 of each primarch also. Imagine having two taunters or two trappers… I think it will make sense to use the old tiers in some cases

While I agree that it’s not a bad mechanic to punish the aggressor, the game can’t be a never ending stalemate either. This change makes the game more equitable to F2P and E2P and probably avoids an endless set of confusion with support


Hadn’t considered this :thinking:

Still like that the risk lay with the attacker before, but I get your point and @Gox1201’s point.


I suppose from my point of view, my rusher is there to protect my fort when I’m under attack. If that’s the case, I would want to reduce the amount of troops I can lose at any one time to as few as possible. This is because TIME is the real currency in Atlas.

Sure a silver rusher has better stats and what not. But when I’m under attack, just like war, expect back up. Expect 5 flames. Expect 10:1 loss. So, time is critical, troop loss needs to be minimised --> bronze is the way to go.

Any issues you see with this train of thought?


No you want to increase the troops you can hold.

The quicker you get bubbled makes no difference. Time only matters during the cooldown which that’s more of a be active, smart and have lots of buddies online thing. Having too few troops will hurt you on a castle as no bubble. Too many won’t matter. And if you kill more of their troops you can sour their attack and cause them to reconsider or even give up sooner during cooldown.

But no I disagree. More troops is better for castle defense.

But also taunter and rusher are king for defense. If you have two you can either get another castle or add a second taunter to make your first one harder to bypass.

I really don’t see a downside when it comes to defending a castle. The downsides are mostly in the red zone IMO.

EDIT: I really don’t see a downside, but I suppose an argument could be made to only use castle guards until a bubble came up, and then use primarchs only for active coordinated online defenses. But that’s likely to lure attention you don’t want when someone sees a castle without primarchs on it. And glory farming castle guards is a thing many do.


I tend to agree with @EidolonRM on this (castle defense), but I can see where @Grumpybigbird is coming from.

AND, you’re not going to suffer 10:1 with a max silver rusher that has the seasonal boost at your of castles. You will also have the buff from the castle (assuming there are not enough sIegers to cancel that out), so nothing will be able to match the defense with it’s offense. At least when you are defending what you own, a max silver rusher will almost never suffer a 10:1 loss. It would require enough seigers to remove the buff from the castle and that you be attacked while those silver siegers are still alive. So, someone may suffer the 10:1, but the more rushers you have there, the less likely it’s you. AND… if they are fully loaded, it’s not going to take many attacks to trigger that bubble.

Now… the three hour cooldown is a different ball of wax, and I would handle it differently. But I can’t give up all my secrets.


I supported this change for the reasons ably set forth by Gox and Eidolon. It’s easier to understand and, in my experience, most of the people suffering huge troop losses under the old system due to poor attacks were lower level players who attacked bases they probably couldn’t take undefended, let alone with 2/3 defenders. Basically, it mainly functioned as a trap for the unwary. So I think it is a positive change for the most part.




For a list of all Atlas Secrets by Savage© send a minimum of $100 to the following Bitcoin wallet:



Also, don’t send anything to that address. (Just so we’re clear).


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