One-hit dismount without knockdown penalty - Page 3 — Guild Wars 2 Forums

One-hit dismount without knockdown penalty

13>

Comments

  • Anput.4620Anput.4620 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 28, 2019

    @DeadlySynz.3471 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Jayden Reese.9542 said:

    @spectrito.8513 said:

    @Jayden Reese.9542 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Voltekka.2375 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @SoV.5139 said:

    @spectrito.8513 said:

    @SoV.5139 said:

    @spectrito.8513 said:

    @SoV.5139 said:
    Here's where the contradiction lies.
    There are tons of "roamers" on the forums claiming roaming sucks now that mounts are in WvW.
    Are you all on the same server?
    Since the answer is likely no, why aren't you all fighting each other 1v1 in WvW?

    Some manage to play WvW with a broken mount for 3+months, some dont.

    The contradiction is they all claim to want fights on the forums, but are all mounted up and trolling eachother in game to see if the other guy will blow their kit to dismount them. If they all wanted the fights as claimed, mounts are a non issue.

    The contradiction to me is WHAT ARE YOU DOING IN A OPEN WORLD PVP MAP IF YOU'RE NOT WILLING TO PVP ?

    PVP does not mean mindlessly fighting through anything that comes your way. A support build running back to its PPT zerg is doing the right thing by avoiding being singled out and ganked, and using the available tools to do so.

    There seems to be no shortage of roamers who want to fight it out the way you describe on the forums, so why arent the WvW maps as populated with these players as the forums are? Do these folks not wish to fight others who are set up for the same, and are only mad because they cant gank builds not set up for the same?

    "PVP does not mean mindlessly fighting through anything that comes your way."

    "running back to its PPT zerg"

    Also, just because the tools are available doesn't mean they are balanced, because they obviously aren't.

    sPvP is your friend. Wvw isnt spvp.

    What does this have to do with the contradictory comment i qouted?

    @Whiteout.1975 has perfectly explained already what is wrong with the mode, it is an open zone PvP mode.

    What does SPvP have to do with open world PvP, why has the whole philosophy of it suddenly bne changed to be different from open PvP in about any other MMORPG just because mounts came out? It makes zero sense here.

    But what has your reply to do with what i commented again?

    This is not open world pvp. The main part of wvw is capture objective team based in a pvp environment. It means not everyone is rolling in their top pvp single target dps build. Why does every single mmo with pvp zones or realm vs realm always have pve aspects to it? It is to draw pvers into a pvp mode because there are not enough gankers/griefers to have a full open pvp world mmo w/o them. Imaging just a mmo w open world pvp and all of you full pvp specced could only fight other full pvp specced players. Where all the gankers could only fight other gankers. How long would you play that? You all just want to catch weaker easy targets or support specced players on your pvp spec build. There is an entire spvp mode but you gankers are too much of a kitten to play that instead you complain on here all day cuz a staff ele or a reaper got away on their mount and you couldn't insta kill them on multipe cheese builds. Plus for the 10th time anput doesn't play gw2 he just trolls over and over w no clue of how many more fights there are now overall then before.

    People in support builds ganks me pretty often, why shouldn't i kill support builds too ?
    Zerglings dont hesitate to jump on me with a group of 10+, why should i not kill them ?
    PvE elements are there to lure players to fight, not to lure PvErs to a PvP mode, by your logic is DAoC a PvE game ?
    Also sPvP is trash, 5+ min queues, a lot of bots, MMR is completely broken, wintraders, restrictive builds and so many other issues and differences between WvW and sPvP and thats why many PvPers migrate to WvW.
    Why people who like to fight should move away from WvW just because you dont like to die in a open world PvP ?
    Also in regards to having more fights, this is just not true, we barely have 1 map queued even on prime time and other BL's are dead compared to before, there are way less people playing either zergers and roamers.

    You can kill whoever,however you want it's just you aren't entitled for every single person to fight you if they chose not to for a variety of reasons. Most likely zergling jump you half the time cuz you pick off stragglers which i also do outnumbered. I die all the time I'm not asking you to leave wvw but stop crying cause someone mounts off just like pre mounts dozens of mobile classes ran from me if losing and I was just as helpless in pursuit. Of course the pve aspects are there to lure pveers to do the quest while the pvpers dont do the quests and jump the guys questing again usually for an easy kill cuz that's all you want.Of course there are more fights if you actually take camps def camps and go to where objectives are being taking because every1 gets back to that fight faster. Are there less oppurtunitys to camp an area and pick off reinforcements sure that's kinda gone. Constantly getting jumped between my keep and smc isn't fun or my spawn and keep isn't fun so find other ways to find fights at objectives. I roam on reaper and fight everyone at objectives but no reason to hop off mount vs certain classes in the middle of nowhere.

    "You can kill whoever,however you want it's just you aren't entitled for every single person to fight you if they chose not to for a variety of reasons."

    And that is a fundamental design flaw for any PvP game because it inherently creates stalemates.

    Not entirely. The player will just engage when it works for them and to their advantage. They will basically fight when they're good and ready.

    Because this is a WvW forum, why on earth would someone (whose trying to go help their group take a keep per-say), hop off their mount and fight you out in the middle of nowhere when they have nothing to gain from it whether they win or lose? What's the point? The map objective in this example calls for our group to collectively try to take a keep, so in what universe would it make sense for me to hop off my mount and fight you? This is a PvP game and you must fight me? Sure, then come to the keep where I'm going and we'll fight there. Sure you may be met with 60 others who'll run you over, but hey, it's a PvP mode right?

    I will never fight in WvW on someone else's terms at all for any reason what so ever, ever. If they try, they will fail, and they always will. They will get beat, and they will repeatedly get beat (and often targeted and camped until they log). Roamers won't get their way anymore, those days are long gone.

    The problem here yes is that no one will fight unless it is in their favour, and most won't fight in equal numbers either, or at all. So this creates situations where no one wants to fight ever and poeple just PPT stuff down.

    This just creates a bad PvE zergfest with no real redeemable qualities.

    If poeple will only fight when it is in their favor and can always flee, then 1 side will always not fight, resulting in no fights. Where does the PvP come in here? No PvP game does this BS.

    This just doesn't create a good PvP game.

    The point before mounts was that if you kill a support on their way to their group, theior group has 1 less support. Very simple and valid strategy.

    @KrHome.1920 said:
    What's the difference between a player that runs away and a player that does not exist because he does not play the game?

    Hint: One of these two players populates the map and might be killed while doing stuff (which you can not do mounted).

    The same hyperbole since day1 mount release... "Don't play the game mode if you don't want to fight!" That's a dumb argument as a player not playing at all is still worse than a player that runs away 95% of the time but can be killed 5% of the time.

    Maybe the so called roaming guilds may stop spawnganking and start to play the game mode as intended and capture and defend structures and camps. I am running into other players all day long while doing this. Nothing has changed with warclaw.

    At this point you aren't even playing a PvP mode anymore.

  • Whiteout.1975Whiteout.1975 Member ✭✭✭

    @BadMed.3846 said:
    Fight those who want to fight you. Don't cry over your inability to 5v1 roam due to mounts. That's a positive.

    I fight whatever enemy I feel like honestly... because they're my enemy. I don't really care about their "wants"... because they're my enemy. The moment the player joined a PvP mode and became my enemy... They were asking for a fight. So they better not "cry" to me or their Warclaw bodyguard if they run into one they suddenly don't like.

    Aside from that. I could say the same to ton's of zergs... due to being zergs. No mount necessary. I remember a great many times zergs chasing Roamer's much much smaller in size vs them. Worse than the example you gave. Though, I don't say anything... because I'm their enemy. So I expect that to happen. That's just what happens when you sign up to become somebody's enemy... How Surprising.

  • L A T I O N.8923L A T I O N.8923 Member ✭✭✭

    @iKeostuKen.2738 said:
    Something I'm really interested in knowing with all these defense posts is how does a change to the mounts HP stop you from getting to your zerg? 🤔

    -You still have the speed and 3 evades.
    -If the hp is 1 on mounts you have a better chance at escaping your pursuers if you know how to outplay them by traps, running through towers, sentries, anything with AI, etc.
    -If your dismounted you are not stunned so you can immediately swap to defense or offense.

    There's no commander telling Them how to Dodge, that might be hard

  • BadMed.3846BadMed.3846 Member ✭✭✭

    @Whiteout.1975 said:

    @BadMed.3846 said:
    Fight those who want to fight you. Don't cry over your inability to 5v1 roam due to mounts. That's a positive.

    I fight whatever enemy I feel like honestly... because they're my enemy. I don't really care about their "wants"... because they're my enemy. The moment the player joined a PvP mode and became my enemy... They were asking for a fight. So they better not "cry" to me or their Warclaw bodyguard if they run into one they suddenly don't like.

    Aside from that. I could say the same to ton's of zergs... due to being zergs. No mount necessary. I remember a great many times zergs chasing Roamer's much much smaller in size vs them. Worse than the example you gave. Though, I don't say anything... because I'm their enemy. So I expect that to happen. That's just what happens when you sign up to become somebody's enemy... How Surprising.

    Well, sure fight whatever you like. Clearly the ones on mount think you're a waste of time for them and that's why they flee. It's not just about skill, not everyone is interested in a duel. Sometimes they just want to run with their group. Mount gives them the ability to enjoy the game. Nothing wrong with it really.

  • Psycoprophet.8107Psycoprophet.8107 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 29, 2019

    I love this so much. This is a perfect example of how ignorant,short sighted and selfish people are lmao all these pve'rs stating why should I have to fight someone if my builds set up for zergs when I'm on route to zerg? All these roamers are just mad that now I have a free pass to bypass them to get to MY prefered playstyle cuz its THE only one that's legit and matters lol. Do these weebs play fps too? Do they take a sniper and get pissy that a class with a assault rifle gunned them down on way to a perch spot?lmao mounts single handedly ruined playstyles and multiple dynamics that were available in wvw and drove alot of people out that enjoyed those alternative playstyle options so what's left are the stubborn ones that havent left yet and zergers. Soon itl be just zergers which will be such a negative impact on the mode it just might finish it off and kill the mode,u can already easily tell the difference in population in wvw now vs yr or so ago. U mount lovers are blindly opting for the game mode to be in a worse overall health because it fits UR specific gameplay choice but no surprise there lmao u guys just go ahead and help anet kill wvw more :) u deserve what it is now,a clown fiesta lol
    Taking away risk and the risk of pvp engagements in 75% of a pvp game mode will eventually kill it as that's what a huge amount of players frequented the mode for,PVP. If u guys or anet think wvw will survive on zergers and zerging alone good luck with that lol.

  • SoV.5139SoV.5139 Member ✭✭✭

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @DeadlySynz.3471 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Jayden Reese.9542 said:

    @spectrito.8513 said:

    @Jayden Reese.9542 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Voltekka.2375 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @SoV.5139 said:

    @spectrito.8513 said:

    @SoV.5139 said:

    @spectrito.8513 said:

    @SoV.5139 said:
    Here's where the contradiction lies.
    There are tons of "roamers" on the forums claiming roaming sucks now that mounts are in WvW.
    Are you all on the same server?
    Since the answer is likely no, why aren't you all fighting each other 1v1 in WvW?

    Some manage to play WvW with a broken mount for 3+months, some dont.

    The contradiction is they all claim to want fights on the forums, but are all mounted up and trolling eachother in game to see if the other guy will blow their kit to dismount them. If they all wanted the fights as claimed, mounts are a non issue.

    The contradiction to me is WHAT ARE YOU DOING IN A OPEN WORLD PVP MAP IF YOU'RE NOT WILLING TO PVP ?

    PVP does not mean mindlessly fighting through anything that comes your way. A support build running back to its PPT zerg is doing the right thing by avoiding being singled out and ganked, and using the available tools to do so.

    There seems to be no shortage of roamers who want to fight it out the way you describe on the forums, so why arent the WvW maps as populated with these players as the forums are? Do these folks not wish to fight others who are set up for the same, and are only mad because they cant gank builds not set up for the same?

    "PVP does not mean mindlessly fighting through anything that comes your way."

    "running back to its PPT zerg"

    Also, just because the tools are available doesn't mean they are balanced, because they obviously aren't.

    sPvP is your friend. Wvw isnt spvp.

    What does this have to do with the contradictory comment i qouted?

    @Whiteout.1975 has perfectly explained already what is wrong with the mode, it is an open zone PvP mode.

    What does SPvP have to do with open world PvP, why has the whole philosophy of it suddenly bne changed to be different from open PvP in about any other MMORPG just because mounts came out? It makes zero sense here.

    But what has your reply to do with what i commented again?

    This is not open world pvp. The main part of wvw is capture objective team based in a pvp environment. It means not everyone is rolling in their top pvp single target dps build. Why does every single mmo with pvp zones or realm vs realm always have pve aspects to it? It is to draw pvers into a pvp mode because there are not enough gankers/griefers to have a full open pvp world mmo w/o them. Imaging just a mmo w open world pvp and all of you full pvp specced could only fight other full pvp specced players. Where all the gankers could only fight other gankers. How long would you play that? You all just want to catch weaker easy targets or support specced players on your pvp spec build. There is an entire spvp mode but you gankers are too much of a kitten to play that instead you complain on here all day cuz a staff ele or a reaper got away on their mount and you couldn't insta kill them on multipe cheese builds. Plus for the 10th time anput doesn't play gw2 he just trolls over and over w no clue of how many more fights there are now overall then before.

    People in support builds ganks me pretty often, why shouldn't i kill support builds too ?
    Zerglings dont hesitate to jump on me with a group of 10+, why should i not kill them ?
    PvE elements are there to lure players to fight, not to lure PvErs to a PvP mode, by your logic is DAoC a PvE game ?
    Also sPvP is trash, 5+ min queues, a lot of bots, MMR is completely broken, wintraders, restrictive builds and so many other issues and differences between WvW and sPvP and thats why many PvPers migrate to WvW.
    Why people who like to fight should move away from WvW just because you dont like to die in a open world PvP ?
    Also in regards to having more fights, this is just not true, we barely have 1 map queued even on prime time and other BL's are dead compared to before, there are way less people playing either zergers and roamers.

    You can kill whoever,however you want it's just you aren't entitled for every single person to fight you if they chose not to for a variety of reasons. Most likely zergling jump you half the time cuz you pick off stragglers which i also do outnumbered. I die all the time I'm not asking you to leave wvw but stop crying cause someone mounts off just like pre mounts dozens of mobile classes ran from me if losing and I was just as helpless in pursuit. Of course the pve aspects are there to lure pveers to do the quest while the pvpers dont do the quests and jump the guys questing again usually for an easy kill cuz that's all you want.Of course there are more fights if you actually take camps def camps and go to where objectives are being taking because every1 gets back to that fight faster. Are there less oppurtunitys to camp an area and pick off reinforcements sure that's kinda gone. Constantly getting jumped between my keep and smc isn't fun or my spawn and keep isn't fun so find other ways to find fights at objectives. I roam on reaper and fight everyone at objectives but no reason to hop off mount vs certain classes in the middle of nowhere.

    "You can kill whoever,however you want it's just you aren't entitled for every single person to fight you if they chose not to for a variety of reasons."

    And that is a fundamental design flaw for any PvP game because it inherently creates stalemates.

    Not entirely. The player will just engage when it works for them and to their advantage. They will basically fight when they're good and ready.

    Because this is a WvW forum, why on earth would someone (whose trying to go help their group take a keep per-say), hop off their mount and fight you out in the middle of nowhere when they have nothing to gain from it whether they win or lose? What's the point? The map objective in this example calls for our group to collectively try to take a keep, so in what universe would it make sense for me to hop off my mount and fight you? This is a PvP game and you must fight me? Sure, then come to the keep where I'm going and we'll fight there. Sure you may be met with 60 others who'll run you over, but hey, it's a PvP mode right?

    I will never fight in WvW on someone else's terms at all for any reason what so ever, ever. If they try, they will fail, and they always will. They will get beat, and they will repeatedly get beat (and often targeted and camped until they log). Roamers won't get their way anymore, those days are long gone.

    The problem here yes is that no one will fight unless it is in their favour, and most won't fight in equal numbers either, or at all. So this creates situations where no one wants to fight ever and poeple just PPT stuff down.

    This just creates a bad PvE zergfest with no real redeemable qualities.

    If poeple will only fight when it is in their favor and can always flee, then 1 side will always not fight, resulting in no fights. Where does the PvP come in here? No PvP game does this BS.

    This just doesn't create a good PvP game.

    The point before mounts was that if you kill a support on their way to their group, theior group has 1 less support. Very simple and valid strategy.

    @KrHome.1920 said:
    What's the difference between a player that runs away and a player that does not exist because he does not play the game?

    Hint: One of these two players populates the map and might be killed while doing stuff (which you can not do mounted).

    The same hyperbole since day1 mount release... "Don't play the game mode if you don't want to fight!" That's a dumb argument as a player not playing at all is still worse than a player that runs away 95% of the time but can be killed 5% of the time.

    Maybe the so called roaming guilds may stop spawnganking and start to play the game mode as intended and capture and defend structures and camps. I am running into other players all day long while doing this. Nothing has changed with warclaw.

    At this point you aren't even playing a PvP mode anymore.

    Then there wasnt a PVP mode before mounts either.

    This issue existed well before mounts, but its just the other side griping about it now. That support player running back to their zerg wasnt going to take that fight before mounts just like they wont take the fight now. It was just as boring chasing and killing supports running back to the blob as it is now having to dismount them, or having a few more escape because they have better mobility+3 dodges+10K more HP.

    Even if they completely did away with mounts, the people who didnt want to take the fights arent going to automagically now take them. The same folks who didnt 1v1 before mounts wont 1v1 after they take them out or give us an easier way to dismount.

    The myth that people will 1v1 again is akin to the myth that when the OP build is nerfed people will play something that takes skill. Those folks graduate to another meme build, and people not taking roamer fights now arent going to be taking them after any solution is implemented.

    TL;DR: People arent going to change their preferences for how they play because their playstyle gets nerfed. If it gets nerfed too heavily they find another game.

  • iKeostuKen.2738iKeostuKen.2738 Member ✭✭✭

    @SoV.5139 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @DeadlySynz.3471 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Jayden Reese.9542 said:

    @spectrito.8513 said:

    @Jayden Reese.9542 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Voltekka.2375 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @SoV.5139 said:

    @spectrito.8513 said:

    @SoV.5139 said:

    @spectrito.8513 said:

    @SoV.5139 said:
    Here's where the contradiction lies.
    There are tons of "roamers" on the forums claiming roaming sucks now that mounts are in WvW.
    Are you all on the same server?
    Since the answer is likely no, why aren't you all fighting each other 1v1 in WvW?

    Some manage to play WvW with a broken mount for 3+months, some dont.

    The contradiction is they all claim to want fights on the forums, but are all mounted up and trolling eachother in game to see if the other guy will blow their kit to dismount them. If they all wanted the fights as claimed, mounts are a non issue.

    The contradiction to me is WHAT ARE YOU DOING IN A OPEN WORLD PVP MAP IF YOU'RE NOT WILLING TO PVP ?

    PVP does not mean mindlessly fighting through anything that comes your way. A support build running back to its PPT zerg is doing the right thing by avoiding being singled out and ganked, and using the available tools to do so.

    There seems to be no shortage of roamers who want to fight it out the way you describe on the forums, so why arent the WvW maps as populated with these players as the forums are? Do these folks not wish to fight others who are set up for the same, and are only mad because they cant gank builds not set up for the same?

    "PVP does not mean mindlessly fighting through anything that comes your way."

    "running back to its PPT zerg"

    Also, just because the tools are available doesn't mean they are balanced, because they obviously aren't.

    sPvP is your friend. Wvw isnt spvp.

    What does this have to do with the contradictory comment i qouted?

    @Whiteout.1975 has perfectly explained already what is wrong with the mode, it is an open zone PvP mode.

    What does SPvP have to do with open world PvP, why has the whole philosophy of it suddenly bne changed to be different from open PvP in about any other MMORPG just because mounts came out? It makes zero sense here.

    But what has your reply to do with what i commented again?

    This is not open world pvp. The main part of wvw is capture objective team based in a pvp environment. It means not everyone is rolling in their top pvp single target dps build. Why does every single mmo with pvp zones or realm vs realm always have pve aspects to it? It is to draw pvers into a pvp mode because there are not enough gankers/griefers to have a full open pvp world mmo w/o them. Imaging just a mmo w open world pvp and all of you full pvp specced could only fight other full pvp specced players. Where all the gankers could only fight other gankers. How long would you play that? You all just want to catch weaker easy targets or support specced players on your pvp spec build. There is an entire spvp mode but you gankers are too much of a kitten to play that instead you complain on here all day cuz a staff ele or a reaper got away on their mount and you couldn't insta kill them on multipe cheese builds. Plus for the 10th time anput doesn't play gw2 he just trolls over and over w no clue of how many more fights there are now overall then before.

    People in support builds ganks me pretty often, why shouldn't i kill support builds too ?
    Zerglings dont hesitate to jump on me with a group of 10+, why should i not kill them ?
    PvE elements are there to lure players to fight, not to lure PvErs to a PvP mode, by your logic is DAoC a PvE game ?
    Also sPvP is trash, 5+ min queues, a lot of bots, MMR is completely broken, wintraders, restrictive builds and so many other issues and differences between WvW and sPvP and thats why many PvPers migrate to WvW.
    Why people who like to fight should move away from WvW just because you dont like to die in a open world PvP ?
    Also in regards to having more fights, this is just not true, we barely have 1 map queued even on prime time and other BL's are dead compared to before, there are way less people playing either zergers and roamers.

    You can kill whoever,however you want it's just you aren't entitled for every single person to fight you if they chose not to for a variety of reasons. Most likely zergling jump you half the time cuz you pick off stragglers which i also do outnumbered. I die all the time I'm not asking you to leave wvw but stop crying cause someone mounts off just like pre mounts dozens of mobile classes ran from me if losing and I was just as helpless in pursuit. Of course the pve aspects are there to lure pveers to do the quest while the pvpers dont do the quests and jump the guys questing again usually for an easy kill cuz that's all you want.Of course there are more fights if you actually take camps def camps and go to where objectives are being taking because every1 gets back to that fight faster. Are there less oppurtunitys to camp an area and pick off reinforcements sure that's kinda gone. Constantly getting jumped between my keep and smc isn't fun or my spawn and keep isn't fun so find other ways to find fights at objectives. I roam on reaper and fight everyone at objectives but no reason to hop off mount vs certain classes in the middle of nowhere.

    "You can kill whoever,however you want it's just you aren't entitled for every single person to fight you if they chose not to for a variety of reasons."

    And that is a fundamental design flaw for any PvP game because it inherently creates stalemates.

    Not entirely. The player will just engage when it works for them and to their advantage. They will basically fight when they're good and ready.

    Because this is a WvW forum, why on earth would someone (whose trying to go help their group take a keep per-say), hop off their mount and fight you out in the middle of nowhere when they have nothing to gain from it whether they win or lose? What's the point? The map objective in this example calls for our group to collectively try to take a keep, so in what universe would it make sense for me to hop off my mount and fight you? This is a PvP game and you must fight me? Sure, then come to the keep where I'm going and we'll fight there. Sure you may be met with 60 others who'll run you over, but hey, it's a PvP mode right?

    I will never fight in WvW on someone else's terms at all for any reason what so ever, ever. If they try, they will fail, and they always will. They will get beat, and they will repeatedly get beat (and often targeted and camped until they log). Roamers won't get their way anymore, those days are long gone.

    The problem here yes is that no one will fight unless it is in their favour, and most won't fight in equal numbers either, or at all. So this creates situations where no one wants to fight ever and poeple just PPT stuff down.

    This just creates a bad PvE zergfest with no real redeemable qualities.

    If poeple will only fight when it is in their favor and can always flee, then 1 side will always not fight, resulting in no fights. Where does the PvP come in here? No PvP game does this BS.

    This just doesn't create a good PvP game.

    The point before mounts was that if you kill a support on their way to their group, theior group has 1 less support. Very simple and valid strategy.

    @KrHome.1920 said:
    What's the difference between a player that runs away and a player that does not exist because he does not play the game?

    Hint: One of these two players populates the map and might be killed while doing stuff (which you can not do mounted).

    The same hyperbole since day1 mount release... "Don't play the game mode if you don't want to fight!" That's a dumb argument as a player not playing at all is still worse than a player that runs away 95% of the time but can be killed 5% of the time.

    Maybe the so called roaming guilds may stop spawnganking and start to play the game mode as intended and capture and defend structures and camps. I am running into other players all day long while doing this. Nothing has changed with warclaw.

    At this point you aren't even playing a PvP mode anymore.

    Then there wasnt a PVP mode before mounts either.

    This issue existed well before mounts, but its just the other side griping about it now. That support player running back to their zerg wasnt going to take that fight before mounts just like they wont take the fight now. It was just as boring chasing and killing supports running back to the blob as it is now having to dismount them, or having a few more escape because they have better mobility+3 dodges+10K more HP.

    Even if they completely did away with mounts, the people who didnt want to take the fights arent going to automagically now take them. The same folks who didnt 1v1 before mounts wont 1v1 after they take them out or give us an easier way to dismount.

    The myth that people will 1v1 again is akin to the myth that when the OP build is nerfed people will play something that takes skill. Those folks graduate to another meme build, and people not taking roamer fights now arent going to be taking them after any solution is implemented.

    TL;DR: People arent going to change their preferences for how they play because their playstyle gets nerfed. If it gets nerfed too heavily they find another game.

    Mounts aren't a playstyle. There a crutch that imbalances the game mode as well as leads to more questionable development that takes unneeded resources.

    What have mounts done for the mode though?
    -Increase speed of Ktrain
    -Gave an extra layer of defenses to already bunkered specs
    -Allowed groups of players to easily gank newer/f2p players
    -Desync'd player position
    -Lowered overall player engagement unless its through zerg/blob combat
    -Lowered overall risk for player build choice of the game mode
    -Helped to lower overall WvW population

    If players dont want to 1v1 they need to just find a group or join the blob and learn how to maneuver to their destination. Maps already reveal stealthed/roaming players if near towers/keeps/sentries so if you dont want to fight them then you gain map awareness, stack swiftness and rush to the closest teammate.

  • SoV.5139SoV.5139 Member ✭✭✭

    @iKeostuKen.2738 said:

    @SoV.5139 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @DeadlySynz.3471 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Jayden Reese.9542 said:

    @spectrito.8513 said:

    @Jayden Reese.9542 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Voltekka.2375 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @SoV.5139 said:

    @spectrito.8513 said:

    @SoV.5139 said:

    @spectrito.8513 said:

    @SoV.5139 said:
    Here's where the contradiction lies.
    There are tons of "roamers" on the forums claiming roaming sucks now that mounts are in WvW.
    Are you all on the same server?
    Since the answer is likely no, why aren't you all fighting each other 1v1 in WvW?

    Some manage to play WvW with a broken mount for 3+months, some dont.

    The contradiction is they all claim to want fights on the forums, but are all mounted up and trolling eachother in game to see if the other guy will blow their kit to dismount them. If they all wanted the fights as claimed, mounts are a non issue.

    The contradiction to me is WHAT ARE YOU DOING IN A OPEN WORLD PVP MAP IF YOU'RE NOT WILLING TO PVP ?

    PVP does not mean mindlessly fighting through anything that comes your way. A support build running back to its PPT zerg is doing the right thing by avoiding being singled out and ganked, and using the available tools to do so.

    There seems to be no shortage of roamers who want to fight it out the way you describe on the forums, so why arent the WvW maps as populated with these players as the forums are? Do these folks not wish to fight others who are set up for the same, and are only mad because they cant gank builds not set up for the same?

    "PVP does not mean mindlessly fighting through anything that comes your way."

    "running back to its PPT zerg"

    Also, just because the tools are available doesn't mean they are balanced, because they obviously aren't.

    sPvP is your friend. Wvw isnt spvp.

    What does this have to do with the contradictory comment i qouted?

    @Whiteout.1975 has perfectly explained already what is wrong with the mode, it is an open zone PvP mode.

    What does SPvP have to do with open world PvP, why has the whole philosophy of it suddenly bne changed to be different from open PvP in about any other MMORPG just because mounts came out? It makes zero sense here.

    But what has your reply to do with what i commented again?

    This is not open world pvp. The main part of wvw is capture objective team based in a pvp environment. It means not everyone is rolling in their top pvp single target dps build. Why does every single mmo with pvp zones or realm vs realm always have pve aspects to it? It is to draw pvers into a pvp mode because there are not enough gankers/griefers to have a full open pvp world mmo w/o them. Imaging just a mmo w open world pvp and all of you full pvp specced could only fight other full pvp specced players. Where all the gankers could only fight other gankers. How long would you play that? You all just want to catch weaker easy targets or support specced players on your pvp spec build. There is an entire spvp mode but you gankers are too much of a kitten to play that instead you complain on here all day cuz a staff ele or a reaper got away on their mount and you couldn't insta kill them on multipe cheese builds. Plus for the 10th time anput doesn't play gw2 he just trolls over and over w no clue of how many more fights there are now overall then before.

    People in support builds ganks me pretty often, why shouldn't i kill support builds too ?
    Zerglings dont hesitate to jump on me with a group of 10+, why should i not kill them ?
    PvE elements are there to lure players to fight, not to lure PvErs to a PvP mode, by your logic is DAoC a PvE game ?
    Also sPvP is trash, 5+ min queues, a lot of bots, MMR is completely broken, wintraders, restrictive builds and so many other issues and differences between WvW and sPvP and thats why many PvPers migrate to WvW.
    Why people who like to fight should move away from WvW just because you dont like to die in a open world PvP ?
    Also in regards to having more fights, this is just not true, we barely have 1 map queued even on prime time and other BL's are dead compared to before, there are way less people playing either zergers and roamers.

    You can kill whoever,however you want it's just you aren't entitled for every single person to fight you if they chose not to for a variety of reasons. Most likely zergling jump you half the time cuz you pick off stragglers which i also do outnumbered. I die all the time I'm not asking you to leave wvw but stop crying cause someone mounts off just like pre mounts dozens of mobile classes ran from me if losing and I was just as helpless in pursuit. Of course the pve aspects are there to lure pveers to do the quest while the pvpers dont do the quests and jump the guys questing again usually for an easy kill cuz that's all you want.Of course there are more fights if you actually take camps def camps and go to where objectives are being taking because every1 gets back to that fight faster. Are there less oppurtunitys to camp an area and pick off reinforcements sure that's kinda gone. Constantly getting jumped between my keep and smc isn't fun or my spawn and keep isn't fun so find other ways to find fights at objectives. I roam on reaper and fight everyone at objectives but no reason to hop off mount vs certain classes in the middle of nowhere.

    "You can kill whoever,however you want it's just you aren't entitled for every single person to fight you if they chose not to for a variety of reasons."

    And that is a fundamental design flaw for any PvP game because it inherently creates stalemates.

    Not entirely. The player will just engage when it works for them and to their advantage. They will basically fight when they're good and ready.

    Because this is a WvW forum, why on earth would someone (whose trying to go help their group take a keep per-say), hop off their mount and fight you out in the middle of nowhere when they have nothing to gain from it whether they win or lose? What's the point? The map objective in this example calls for our group to collectively try to take a keep, so in what universe would it make sense for me to hop off my mount and fight you? This is a PvP game and you must fight me? Sure, then come to the keep where I'm going and we'll fight there. Sure you may be met with 60 others who'll run you over, but hey, it's a PvP mode right?

    I will never fight in WvW on someone else's terms at all for any reason what so ever, ever. If they try, they will fail, and they always will. They will get beat, and they will repeatedly get beat (and often targeted and camped until they log). Roamers won't get their way anymore, those days are long gone.

    The problem here yes is that no one will fight unless it is in their favour, and most won't fight in equal numbers either, or at all. So this creates situations where no one wants to fight ever and poeple just PPT stuff down.

    This just creates a bad PvE zergfest with no real redeemable qualities.

    If poeple will only fight when it is in their favor and can always flee, then 1 side will always not fight, resulting in no fights. Where does the PvP come in here? No PvP game does this BS.

    This just doesn't create a good PvP game.

    The point before mounts was that if you kill a support on their way to their group, theior group has 1 less support. Very simple and valid strategy.

    @KrHome.1920 said:
    What's the difference between a player that runs away and a player that does not exist because he does not play the game?

    Hint: One of these two players populates the map and might be killed while doing stuff (which you can not do mounted).

    The same hyperbole since day1 mount release... "Don't play the game mode if you don't want to fight!" That's a dumb argument as a player not playing at all is still worse than a player that runs away 95% of the time but can be killed 5% of the time.

    Maybe the so called roaming guilds may stop spawnganking and start to play the game mode as intended and capture and defend structures and camps. I am running into other players all day long while doing this. Nothing has changed with warclaw.

    At this point you aren't even playing a PvP mode anymore.

    Then there wasnt a PVP mode before mounts either.

    This issue existed well before mounts, but its just the other side griping about it now. That support player running back to their zerg wasnt going to take that fight before mounts just like they wont take the fight now. It was just as boring chasing and killing supports running back to the blob as it is now having to dismount them, or having a few more escape because they have better mobility+3 dodges+10K more HP.

    Even if they completely did away with mounts, the people who didnt want to take the fights arent going to automagically now take them. The same folks who didnt 1v1 before mounts wont 1v1 after they take them out or give us an easier way to dismount.

    The myth that people will 1v1 again is akin to the myth that when the OP build is nerfed people will play something that takes skill. Those folks graduate to another meme build, and people not taking roamer fights now arent going to be taking them after any solution is implemented.

    TL;DR: People arent going to change their preferences for how they play because their playstyle gets nerfed. If it gets nerfed too heavily they find another game.

    Mounts aren't a playstyle. There a crutch that imbalances the game mode as well as leads to more questionable development that takes unneeded resources.

    What have mounts done for the mode though?
    -Increase speed of Ktrain
    -Gave an extra layer of defenses to already bunkered specs
    -Allowed groups of players to easily gank newer/f2p players
    -Desync'd player position
    -Lowered overall player engagement unless its through zerg/blob combat
    -Lowered overall risk for player build choice of the game mode
    -Helped to lower overall WvW population

    If players dont want to 1v1 they need to just find a group or join the blob and learn how to maneuver to their destination. Maps already reveal stealthed/roaming players if near towers/keeps/sentries so if you dont want to fight them then you gain map awareness, stack swiftness and rush to the closest teammate.

    All I'm saying is people arent going to play differently simply because you take their toys away. They will graduate to another version of the same toy, or if their playstyle is at too much of a disadvantage, find a different game to play. WvW is not going to turn into a wasteland of wandering support builds to kill before they reach their squad if mounts were to be redacted.

  • Whiteout.1975Whiteout.1975 Member ✭✭✭

    @BadMed.3846 said:

    @Whiteout.1975 said:

    @BadMed.3846 said:
    Fight those who want to fight you. Don't cry over your inability to 5v1 roam due to mounts. That's a positive.

    I fight whatever enemy I feel like honestly... because they're my enemy. I don't really care about their "wants"... because they're my enemy. The moment the player joined a PvP mode and became my enemy... They were asking for a fight. So they better not "cry" to me or their Warclaw bodyguard if they run into one they suddenly don't like.

    Aside from that. I could say the same to ton's of zergs... due to being zergs. No mount necessary. I remember a great many times zergs chasing Roamer's much much smaller in size vs them. Worse than the example you gave. Though, I don't say anything... because I'm their enemy. So I expect that to happen. That's just what happens when you sign up to become somebody's enemy... How Surprising.

    Well, sure fight whatever you like. Clearly the ones on mount think you're a waste of time for them and that's why they flee. It's not just about skill, not everyone is interested in a duel. Sometimes they just want to run with their group. Mount gives them the ability to enjoy the game. Nothing wrong with it really.

    I don't find it so much that I'm strictly a waste of their time (same going for other roamer's I've met). It's more that I'm a waste of a time up until they come across me again with their zerg; often out manning us roamers drastically. However, clearly I don't see them as a waste of my time if I am going to attack; outmanned or not.

    Having said that, they don't have to "duel" me. They can just die instead or run trying not to... Skilled or not. With that, I often don't know the complete build/skill level of someone I will be fighting for the first time at least anyways. Warclaw however, drastically reduce's the risk involved when running away from a fight. That's why I and others have an issue with it. It's a Warzone... It's suppose to be risky to allow for greater conflict to happen. Beside's that, there were people who fell in love with the Warclaw just based on the fact that it was a giant kitty cat. If people need a mount to "enjoy the game"... Then they never understood the enjoyment in WvW in the first place. Way back in the day at least; when people enjoyed WvW without it. And that's honestly sad.

    Also, just because you (and others) "enjoy" doing something... Doesn't mean you should be doing that something. Or even automatically justify/validate doing whatever it is just based on the simple fact you or others enjoy it and that's it. There's more to this whole thing than just some biased form of enjoyment... It's directly and negatively affecting a major long time role of Roamer's. It's not so much about who has what cheesy build, who is or isn't skilled, who is outmanning who where initally; zerg or not. The problem is this major role, of Roamer's, that once fed off a common healthy risk associated with WvW. Is now severely punishing for trying to fulfill it. That's bad.

    • I agree with the other's here 100% absolutely. When they say it's like playing an fps. Then arguing how you should never be or been "sniped" just because it doesn't suit you and you don't enjoy it 😐
  • BadMed.3846BadMed.3846 Member ✭✭✭

    @Whiteout.1975
    Rather than pick apart long winded arguments I'll just try to respond with a few key points:

    • WvW is an open warzone and not a PvP enabled zone within an MMO. I understand some MMOs provide that ability but GW2 is not the game for that. Being a warzone, you have tools and tactics available. Warclaw is just another one of those.
    • Many players come here to fight in groups and engage for a purpose. The necessity to engage in a fight is driven by objective attack and defence. Surely, groups often fight open field too. Ability to kill someone in open field in WvW is meaningless in terms of the purpose of the game mode.
    • Roaming lost its purpose years ago. I only ever see Xv1 bank squads now. But that just might be me.
    • if you're so desperate to fight without mounts then why don't just go PvP? Surely you don't seem to have any interest in the objectives of the game mode itself and it's all about the desire to pick and kill travellers.

    I think there's nothing wrong with what you're looking for but then again there's nothing wrong with warclaw either. I don't think your and some other roamers desires really provide a good enough reason to change what warclaw is.

  • Whiteout.1975Whiteout.1975 Member ✭✭✭

    @BadMed.3846 said:
    @Whiteout.1975
    Rather than pick apart long winded arguments I'll just try to respond with a few key points:

    • WvW is an open warzone and not a PvP enabled zone within an MMO. I understand some MMOs provide that ability but GW2 is not the game for that. Being a warzone, you have tools and tactics available. Warclaw is just another one of those.

    To me, if I can kill players, even in a warzone type mode. Then that's a form of enabled PvP. Which is all I mean by that. So it's hard for me to agree here. Unless it means something different to you?

    Warlaw being a "tool or tactic". Does not justify Warclaw being a necessary and healthy form of a tool or tactic that should be used in WvW. Context should matter here.

    • For instance I could have a button I could press that allow's me to go invulnerable and gain superspeed for 1 minute with a low cool down of 15-30 seconds. Call it a "tool/tactic"... But that still wouldn't just automatically justify it's existence or state of being based on that.
    • Many players come here to fight in groups and engage for a purpose. The necessity to engage in a fight is driven by objective attack and defence. Surely, groups often fight open field too. Ability to kill someone in open field in WvW is meaningless in terms of the purpose of the game mode.

    I'm fine with Players wanting to fight in a group. If they wish. However, this is the point where Roaming must be understood. At least when killing players. I'm gonna call it the "reason to engage" as opposed to the "necessity" to. I mean... No one has to fight haha. The "reason to engage" isn't driven completely by objective attack and defense. Unless you consider your enemy your objective here lol. We can gain On kill sigil stacks, PPK, Slow or Stop supply runs, help create the more Risk within the mode... I mean honestly the goal is to make the larger group have a harder time through use of small group tactics as Roamer's.

    • Roaming lost its purpose years ago. I only ever see Xv1 bank squads now. But that just might be me.

    Disagree with Roaming having lost it's purpose. I just think the game maybe trying to actively kill that "purpose" is another story. I've also seen that of zerglings who are "squirreling" around vs roamer's. So nah it's not just you.

    • if you're so desperate to fight without mounts then why don't just go PvP? Surely you don't seem to have any interest in the objectives of the game mode itself and it's all about the desire to pick and kill travellers.

    I don't care much if the mount is there. It's just that often the mount doesn't lead to fighting IMO.

    Because PvP != WvW. I think it's fair to say that their difference's are going to elicit different experience's. For more clarity... I like playing with/against multiple opponent's at a time. I like taking objective's when it's convenient enough for me to make use of them. Sometimes I take objective's just to help. I pretty much always go for camps as a roamer. I like not feeling an instantaneous magnetic like attraction to the points in PvP. I can just spend more time focused on fighting. I mean I can go on and on Why I prefer WvW in general over PvP... But where I go won't fix the problems with the Warclaw. Problems that are also recognized by Anet. Not just me.

    I think there's nothing wrong with what you're looking for but then again there's nothing wrong with warclaw either. I don't think your and some other roamers desires really provide a good enough reason to change what warclaw is.

    Well, cool because I'm looking see fix's to problems (like I mentioned) the Warclaw brings really. Apart from that I actually don't mind the fat kitty cat. Well, your welcome to think that, but I have yet to see the reason in keeping the Warclaw what it is. To me, this is still just defending "how you should never be or been "sniped" just because it doesn't suit you and you don't enjoy it".

    If Warclaw was just a mobility tool and didn't 💩 on the existence Roamers. I would probably love it. And Honestly if the thing favored me as a Roamer over a Zerg Player . To where that zerg player needs to run a specific set up just to maybe deal with it. And took purpose away from being a zerg player. Well, then I wouldn't want the thing around in that state ether. Why? well because I want them to still enjoy the game too and I'm also not biased there.

  • BadMed.3846BadMed.3846 Member ✭✭✭

    @Whiteout.1975 I guess it is perfectly OK to agree to disagree.
    However, please enlighten me on the purpose of roaming in this game presently.

    For me, if I'm solo wandering around (dare I say roaming :)), I expect to get fights around objectives. May it be camps or sentries. And I do get these fairly easily. Ye I can't shoot down that ramdom enemy flying past me, but then I don't care. Besides objectives in WvW, what's the purpose to engage? It would be fair if you said - "If it's red, I want it dead", but then that's not a good enough reason to discourage the Warclaw effect.

    The existence of roamers for anything other than actively engaging in the game mode is "pointless". And if someone wants to "pointlessly" roam, then the game mechanics don't need to change to favour them in any way. They're not really relevant to the game mode as such.

  • Whiteout.1975Whiteout.1975 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 30, 2019

    @BadMed.3846 said:
    @Whiteout.1975 I guess it is perfectly OK to agree to disagree.
    However, please enlighten me on the purpose of roaming in this game presently.

    Yea no problem. We can agree to disagree, sure, but that's gonna be a little hard if you wish to keep going. To be fair here haha :)

    So the "purpose" of roaming (no matter what time or date) is basically like I said before: "honestly the goal is to make the larger group have a harder time through use of small group tactics as Roamer's". The Goal is to do more with less ultimately... Does that always happen? No of course not, but who ever claimed War happens the way you want it to all the time ether? Players sometimes don't live up to expectation's, but that's their choice and your choice if you wish to ignore it. Beside's that... The other "goal" is obviously to try and have "fun" in the process.

    • Apart from that there can be an overall "purpose" to something. Yet there possibly issue's/complications in actually fulfilling that purpose. That fact that there are "present" issue's in fulfilling that purpose. Does not detract from the reasoning's behind having one in the first place :+1:

    So I'll just link this again like before regarding roaming https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/World_versus_World. Scroll down to the main "Role's" section and then find the "Roamer" subsection. Then proceed to read and hopefully learn. I'll be explaining more as I go on by the looks of it.

    For me, if I'm solo wandering around (dare I say roaming :)), I expect to get fights around objectives. May it be camps or sentries. And I do get these fairly easily. Ye I can't shoot down that ramdom enemy flying past me, but then I don't care. Besides objectives in WvW, what's the purpose to engage? It would be fair if you said - "If it's red, I want it dead", but then that's not a good enough reason to discourage the Warclaw effect.

    Alright, so a big thing here is you say "I don't care". To which I would say: A personalized sense of carelessness does not trump nor invalidate a purpose something actually has or can have. If you don't care... Then you just don't care. That's it.

    "what's the purpose to engage"?
    Sure, Let me start by saying if there was no purpose in "engaging" at all. Then we would not be rewarded for "killing" ether. However, we are indeed rewarded through killing in more way than one. This is including things like PPK, Heavy Loot bags, On Kill Sigil's (if you got them like most do), influencing a higher degree of Risk vs Reward to make the game more enjoyable for everyone. I mean if you never "risked" dying. Most people would find that game pretty dull considering what is suppose to be a warzone like gaming environment/mode. So things of that nature. Warclaw basically rob's the unique (possibly rewarding) opportunity's associated with killing and engaging together. Resulting to a lesser degree in which such things may be obtained. However, nether player can have that stuff to at least that degree of attainability if "engagement" does not happen. On Top of all that... If Anet did not want engaging Player vs Player kind of content. They would especially not encourage "engagement" by firstly allowing it and then creating actual possible reward's surrounding it.

    Yea, "If it's red, I want it dead" is right overall. However, with what I just said before this... Hopefully that's enough to discourage the "Warclaw effect". And strive towards a more healthy approach regarding WvW. Which Anet seems to be working on... So that makes me happy to see them understand at least :)

    The existence of roamers for anything other than actively engaging in the game mode is "pointless". And if someone wants to "pointlessly" roam, then the game mechanics don't need to change to favour them in any way. They're not really relevant to the game mode as such.

    Well, I'm not to sure what to say to someone at this point who just want's to state something is "pointless". IMO it's still not though. And you can refer back to my sourced and experienced reasoning's as to why if need be.

    • I mean this like me saying "Since it's possible to solo a tower. Running with/as Zerg is pointless"... "And if the game change's to never run as a zerg again... It's 100% justified... Especially just because I enjoy it" Well, it's like no... It's not so cut and dry with 1 sided emotions. There's a higher purpose that's being ignored here. Such as the valid reasoning's for wanting to run as a zerg in the first place. Roaming is no different in respect to it.

    Every player playing a game/mode... Is "relevant" to that game/mode just for being a Player. Relevant to you and your personal agenda/biases however... Well, that's another story.

  • BadMed.3846BadMed.3846 Member ✭✭✭

    @Whiteout.1975 thanks for clarifying. I guess to some extent what you're calling roaming is what I've always known as havoc squads. But that's just terminology. As long as you're playing for an objective you would get fights.
    There have been plenty for roamers who've just spent time picking fights around the ruins and in open field. I still do think that game mechanics don't need to change for them if they're no playing for objective.
    Again, at the heart of it is the inability to engage an enemy while they're on a mount. While I understand your opinion and desire for free engagement, as it used to be, I think warclaw is the right decision and a step in the right direction for the game.
    I'll leave it there to make room for others' opinions.

  • Anput.4620Anput.4620 Member ✭✭✭

    @BadMed.3846 said:

    @Whiteout.1975 said:

    @BadMed.3846 said:
    Fight those who want to fight you. Don't cry over your inability to 5v1 roam due to mounts. That's a positive.

    I fight whatever enemy I feel like honestly... because they're my enemy. I don't really care about their "wants"... because they're my enemy. The moment the player joined a PvP mode and became my enemy... They were asking for a fight. So they better not "cry" to me or their Warclaw bodyguard if they run into one they suddenly don't like.

    Aside from that. I could say the same to ton's of zergs... due to being zergs. No mount necessary. I remember a great many times zergs chasing Roamer's much much smaller in size vs them. Worse than the example you gave. Though, I don't say anything... because I'm their enemy. So I expect that to happen. That's just what happens when you sign up to become somebody's enemy... How Surprising.

    Well, sure fight whatever you like. Clearly the ones on mount think you're a waste of time for them and that's why they flee. It's not just about skill, not everyone is interested in a duel. Sometimes they just want to run with their group. Mount gives them the ability to enjoy the game. Nothing wrong with it really.

    So you are saying that a tool that allows poeple to be out of position and get out of bas situations for free without downside is good for a PvP game? Next time i don't want to be ganked when im pushed up in my MOBA i want a mount there too.

  • Anput.4620Anput.4620 Member ✭✭✭

    @SoV.5139 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @DeadlySynz.3471 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Jayden Reese.9542 said:

    @spectrito.8513 said:

    @Jayden Reese.9542 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Voltekka.2375 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @SoV.5139 said:

    @spectrito.8513 said:

    @SoV.5139 said:

    @spectrito.8513 said:

    @SoV.5139 said:
    Here's where the contradiction lies.
    There are tons of "roamers" on the forums claiming roaming sucks now that mounts are in WvW.
    Are you all on the same server?
    Since the answer is likely no, why aren't you all fighting each other 1v1 in WvW?

    Some manage to play WvW with a broken mount for 3+months, some dont.

    The contradiction is they all claim to want fights on the forums, but are all mounted up and trolling eachother in game to see if the other guy will blow their kit to dismount them. If they all wanted the fights as claimed, mounts are a non issue.

    The contradiction to me is WHAT ARE YOU DOING IN A OPEN WORLD PVP MAP IF YOU'RE NOT WILLING TO PVP ?

    PVP does not mean mindlessly fighting through anything that comes your way. A support build running back to its PPT zerg is doing the right thing by avoiding being singled out and ganked, and using the available tools to do so.

    There seems to be no shortage of roamers who want to fight it out the way you describe on the forums, so why arent the WvW maps as populated with these players as the forums are? Do these folks not wish to fight others who are set up for the same, and are only mad because they cant gank builds not set up for the same?

    "PVP does not mean mindlessly fighting through anything that comes your way."

    "running back to its PPT zerg"

    Also, just because the tools are available doesn't mean they are balanced, because they obviously aren't.

    sPvP is your friend. Wvw isnt spvp.

    What does this have to do with the contradictory comment i qouted?

    @Whiteout.1975 has perfectly explained already what is wrong with the mode, it is an open zone PvP mode.

    What does SPvP have to do with open world PvP, why has the whole philosophy of it suddenly bne changed to be different from open PvP in about any other MMORPG just because mounts came out? It makes zero sense here.

    But what has your reply to do with what i commented again?

    This is not open world pvp. The main part of wvw is capture objective team based in a pvp environment. It means not everyone is rolling in their top pvp single target dps build. Why does every single mmo with pvp zones or realm vs realm always have pve aspects to it? It is to draw pvers into a pvp mode because there are not enough gankers/griefers to have a full open pvp world mmo w/o them. Imaging just a mmo w open world pvp and all of you full pvp specced could only fight other full pvp specced players. Where all the gankers could only fight other gankers. How long would you play that? You all just want to catch weaker easy targets or support specced players on your pvp spec build. There is an entire spvp mode but you gankers are too much of a kitten to play that instead you complain on here all day cuz a staff ele or a reaper got away on their mount and you couldn't insta kill them on multipe cheese builds. Plus for the 10th time anput doesn't play gw2 he just trolls over and over w no clue of how many more fights there are now overall then before.

    People in support builds ganks me pretty often, why shouldn't i kill support builds too ?
    Zerglings dont hesitate to jump on me with a group of 10+, why should i not kill them ?
    PvE elements are there to lure players to fight, not to lure PvErs to a PvP mode, by your logic is DAoC a PvE game ?
    Also sPvP is trash, 5+ min queues, a lot of bots, MMR is completely broken, wintraders, restrictive builds and so many other issues and differences between WvW and sPvP and thats why many PvPers migrate to WvW.
    Why people who like to fight should move away from WvW just because you dont like to die in a open world PvP ?
    Also in regards to having more fights, this is just not true, we barely have 1 map queued even on prime time and other BL's are dead compared to before, there are way less people playing either zergers and roamers.

    You can kill whoever,however you want it's just you aren't entitled for every single person to fight you if they chose not to for a variety of reasons. Most likely zergling jump you half the time cuz you pick off stragglers which i also do outnumbered. I die all the time I'm not asking you to leave wvw but stop crying cause someone mounts off just like pre mounts dozens of mobile classes ran from me if losing and I was just as helpless in pursuit. Of course the pve aspects are there to lure pveers to do the quest while the pvpers dont do the quests and jump the guys questing again usually for an easy kill cuz that's all you want.Of course there are more fights if you actually take camps def camps and go to where objectives are being taking because every1 gets back to that fight faster. Are there less oppurtunitys to camp an area and pick off reinforcements sure that's kinda gone. Constantly getting jumped between my keep and smc isn't fun or my spawn and keep isn't fun so find other ways to find fights at objectives. I roam on reaper and fight everyone at objectives but no reason to hop off mount vs certain classes in the middle of nowhere.

    "You can kill whoever,however you want it's just you aren't entitled for every single person to fight you if they chose not to for a variety of reasons."

    And that is a fundamental design flaw for any PvP game because it inherently creates stalemates.

    Not entirely. The player will just engage when it works for them and to their advantage. They will basically fight when they're good and ready.

    Because this is a WvW forum, why on earth would someone (whose trying to go help their group take a keep per-say), hop off their mount and fight you out in the middle of nowhere when they have nothing to gain from it whether they win or lose? What's the point? The map objective in this example calls for our group to collectively try to take a keep, so in what universe would it make sense for me to hop off my mount and fight you? This is a PvP game and you must fight me? Sure, then come to the keep where I'm going and we'll fight there. Sure you may be met with 60 others who'll run you over, but hey, it's a PvP mode right?

    I will never fight in WvW on someone else's terms at all for any reason what so ever, ever. If they try, they will fail, and they always will. They will get beat, and they will repeatedly get beat (and often targeted and camped until they log). Roamers won't get their way anymore, those days are long gone.

    The problem here yes is that no one will fight unless it is in their favour, and most won't fight in equal numbers either, or at all. So this creates situations where no one wants to fight ever and poeple just PPT stuff down.

    This just creates a bad PvE zergfest with no real redeemable qualities.

    If poeple will only fight when it is in their favor and can always flee, then 1 side will always not fight, resulting in no fights. Where does the PvP come in here? No PvP game does this BS.

    This just doesn't create a good PvP game.

    The point before mounts was that if you kill a support on their way to their group, theior group has 1 less support. Very simple and valid strategy.

    @KrHome.1920 said:
    What's the difference between a player that runs away and a player that does not exist because he does not play the game?

    Hint: One of these two players populates the map and might be killed while doing stuff (which you can not do mounted).

    The same hyperbole since day1 mount release... "Don't play the game mode if you don't want to fight!" That's a dumb argument as a player not playing at all is still worse than a player that runs away 95% of the time but can be killed 5% of the time.

    Maybe the so called roaming guilds may stop spawnganking and start to play the game mode as intended and capture and defend structures and camps. I am running into other players all day long while doing this. Nothing has changed with warclaw.

    At this point you aren't even playing a PvP mode anymore.

    Then there wasnt a PVP mode before mounts either.

    This issue existed well before mounts, but its just the other side griping about it now. That support player running back to their zerg wasnt going to take that fight before mounts just like they wont take the fight now. It was just as boring chasing and killing supports running back to the blob as it is now having to dismount them, or having a few more escape because they have better mobility+3 dodges+10K more HP.

    Even if they completely did away with mounts, the people who didnt want to take the fights arent going to automagically now take them. The same folks who didnt 1v1 before mounts wont 1v1 after they take them out or give us an easier way to dismount.

    The myth that people will 1v1 again is akin to the myth that when the OP build is nerfed people will play something that takes skill. Those folks graduate to another meme build, and people not taking roamer fights now arent going to be taking them after any solution is implemented.

    TL;DR: People arent going to change their preferences for how they play because their playstyle gets nerfed. If it gets nerfed too heavily they find another game.

    Then you take out a valuable asset of the enemy factions group for free.

    @BadMed.3846 said:
    @Whiteout.1975
    Rather than pick apart long winded arguments I'll just try to respond with a few key points:

    • WvW is an open warzone and not a PvP enabled zone within an MMO. I understand some MMOs provide that ability but GW2 is not the game for that. Being a warzone, you have tools and tactics available. Warclaw is just another one of those.
    • Many players come here to fight in groups and engage for a purpose. The necessity to engage in a fight is driven by objective attack and defence. Surely, groups often fight open field too. Ability to kill someone in open field in WvW is meaningless in terms of the purpose of the game mode.
    • Roaming lost its purpose years ago. I only ever see Xv1 bank squads now. But that just might be me.
    • if you're so desperate to fight without mounts then why don't just go PvP? Surely you don't seem to have any interest in the objectives of the game mode itself and it's all about the desire to pick and kill travellers.

    I think there's nothing wrong with what you're looking for but then again there's nothing wrong with warclaw either. I don't think your and some other roamers desires really provide a good enough reason to change what warclaw is.

    Except just because the warclaw is available doesn't mean it is well balanced, it is way too overtuned right now, it isn't even a 50/50 escape chance where it takes skill or effort.

  • BadMed.3846BadMed.3846 Member ✭✭✭

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @BadMed.3846 said:

    @Whiteout.1975 said:

    @BadMed.3846 said:
    Fight those who want to fight you. Don't cry over your inability to 5v1 roam due to mounts. That's a positive.

    I fight whatever enemy I feel like honestly... because they're my enemy. I don't really care about their "wants"... because they're my enemy. The moment the player joined a PvP mode and became my enemy... They were asking for a fight. So they better not "cry" to me or their Warclaw bodyguard if they run into one they suddenly don't like.

    Aside from that. I could say the same to ton's of zergs... due to being zergs. No mount necessary. I remember a great many times zergs chasing Roamer's much much smaller in size vs them. Worse than the example you gave. Though, I don't say anything... because I'm their enemy. So I expect that to happen. That's just what happens when you sign up to become somebody's enemy... How Surprising.

    Well, sure fight whatever you like. Clearly the ones on mount think you're a waste of time for them and that's why they flee. It's not just about skill, not everyone is interested in a duel. Sometimes they just want to run with their group. Mount gives them the ability to enjoy the game. Nothing wrong with it really.

    So you are saying that a tool that allows poeple to be out of position and get out of bas situations for free without downside is good for a PvP game? Next time i don't want to be ganked when im pushed up in my MOBA i want a mount there too.

    WvW is not team Deathmatch where killing is everything. You can't mount up in combat. I don't see any reasonableness is comparing WvW to Moba. Maybe you should play stronghold in PvP.

  • SoV.5139SoV.5139 Member ✭✭✭

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @SoV.5139 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @DeadlySynz.3471 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Jayden Reese.9542 said:

    @spectrito.8513 said:

    @Jayden Reese.9542 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Voltekka.2375 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @SoV.5139 said:

    @spectrito.8513 said:

    @SoV.5139 said:

    @spectrito.8513 said:

    @SoV.5139 said:
    Here's where the contradiction lies.
    There are tons of "roamers" on the forums claiming roaming sucks now that mounts are in WvW.
    Are you all on the same server?
    Since the answer is likely no, why aren't you all fighting each other 1v1 in WvW?

    Some manage to play WvW with a broken mount for 3+months, some dont.

    The contradiction is they all claim to want fights on the forums, but are all mounted up and trolling eachother in game to see if the other guy will blow their kit to dismount them. If they all wanted the fights as claimed, mounts are a non issue.

    The contradiction to me is WHAT ARE YOU DOING IN A OPEN WORLD PVP MAP IF YOU'RE NOT WILLING TO PVP ?

    PVP does not mean mindlessly fighting through anything that comes your way. A support build running back to its PPT zerg is doing the right thing by avoiding being singled out and ganked, and using the available tools to do so.

    There seems to be no shortage of roamers who want to fight it out the way you describe on the forums, so why arent the WvW maps as populated with these players as the forums are? Do these folks not wish to fight others who are set up for the same, and are only mad because they cant gank builds not set up for the same?

    "PVP does not mean mindlessly fighting through anything that comes your way."

    "running back to its PPT zerg"

    Also, just because the tools are available doesn't mean they are balanced, because they obviously aren't.

    sPvP is your friend. Wvw isnt spvp.

    What does this have to do with the contradictory comment i qouted?

    @Whiteout.1975 has perfectly explained already what is wrong with the mode, it is an open zone PvP mode.

    What does SPvP have to do with open world PvP, why has the whole philosophy of it suddenly bne changed to be different from open PvP in about any other MMORPG just because mounts came out? It makes zero sense here.

    But what has your reply to do with what i commented again?

    This is not open world pvp. The main part of wvw is capture objective team based in a pvp environment. It means not everyone is rolling in their top pvp single target dps build. Why does every single mmo with pvp zones or realm vs realm always have pve aspects to it? It is to draw pvers into a pvp mode because there are not enough gankers/griefers to have a full open pvp world mmo w/o them. Imaging just a mmo w open world pvp and all of you full pvp specced could only fight other full pvp specced players. Where all the gankers could only fight other gankers. How long would you play that? You all just want to catch weaker easy targets or support specced players on your pvp spec build. There is an entire spvp mode but you gankers are too much of a kitten to play that instead you complain on here all day cuz a staff ele or a reaper got away on their mount and you couldn't insta kill them on multipe cheese builds. Plus for the 10th time anput doesn't play gw2 he just trolls over and over w no clue of how many more fights there are now overall then before.

    People in support builds ganks me pretty often, why shouldn't i kill support builds too ?
    Zerglings dont hesitate to jump on me with a group of 10+, why should i not kill them ?
    PvE elements are there to lure players to fight, not to lure PvErs to a PvP mode, by your logic is DAoC a PvE game ?
    Also sPvP is trash, 5+ min queues, a lot of bots, MMR is completely broken, wintraders, restrictive builds and so many other issues and differences between WvW and sPvP and thats why many PvPers migrate to WvW.
    Why people who like to fight should move away from WvW just because you dont like to die in a open world PvP ?
    Also in regards to having more fights, this is just not true, we barely have 1 map queued even on prime time and other BL's are dead compared to before, there are way less people playing either zergers and roamers.

    You can kill whoever,however you want it's just you aren't entitled for every single person to fight you if they chose not to for a variety of reasons. Most likely zergling jump you half the time cuz you pick off stragglers which i also do outnumbered. I die all the time I'm not asking you to leave wvw but stop crying cause someone mounts off just like pre mounts dozens of mobile classes ran from me if losing and I was just as helpless in pursuit. Of course the pve aspects are there to lure pveers to do the quest while the pvpers dont do the quests and jump the guys questing again usually for an easy kill cuz that's all you want.Of course there are more fights if you actually take camps def camps and go to where objectives are being taking because every1 gets back to that fight faster. Are there less oppurtunitys to camp an area and pick off reinforcements sure that's kinda gone. Constantly getting jumped between my keep and smc isn't fun or my spawn and keep isn't fun so find other ways to find fights at objectives. I roam on reaper and fight everyone at objectives but no reason to hop off mount vs certain classes in the middle of nowhere.

    "You can kill whoever,however you want it's just you aren't entitled for every single person to fight you if they chose not to for a variety of reasons."

    And that is a fundamental design flaw for any PvP game because it inherently creates stalemates.

    Not entirely. The player will just engage when it works for them and to their advantage. They will basically fight when they're good and ready.

    Because this is a WvW forum, why on earth would someone (whose trying to go help their group take a keep per-say), hop off their mount and fight you out in the middle of nowhere when they have nothing to gain from it whether they win or lose? What's the point? The map objective in this example calls for our group to collectively try to take a keep, so in what universe would it make sense for me to hop off my mount and fight you? This is a PvP game and you must fight me? Sure, then come to the keep where I'm going and we'll fight there. Sure you may be met with 60 others who'll run you over, but hey, it's a PvP mode right?

    I will never fight in WvW on someone else's terms at all for any reason what so ever, ever. If they try, they will fail, and they always will. They will get beat, and they will repeatedly get beat (and often targeted and camped until they log). Roamers won't get their way anymore, those days are long gone.

    The problem here yes is that no one will fight unless it is in their favour, and most won't fight in equal numbers either, or at all. So this creates situations where no one wants to fight ever and poeple just PPT stuff down.

    This just creates a bad PvE zergfest with no real redeemable qualities.

    If poeple will only fight when it is in their favor and can always flee, then 1 side will always not fight, resulting in no fights. Where does the PvP come in here? No PvP game does this BS.

    This just doesn't create a good PvP game.

    The point before mounts was that if you kill a support on their way to their group, theior group has 1 less support. Very simple and valid strategy.

    @KrHome.1920 said:
    What's the difference between a player that runs away and a player that does not exist because he does not play the game?

    Hint: One of these two players populates the map and might be killed while doing stuff (which you can not do mounted).

    The same hyperbole since day1 mount release... "Don't play the game mode if you don't want to fight!" That's a dumb argument as a player not playing at all is still worse than a player that runs away 95% of the time but can be killed 5% of the time.

    Maybe the so called roaming guilds may stop spawnganking and start to play the game mode as intended and capture and defend structures and camps. I am running into other players all day long while doing this. Nothing has changed with warclaw.

    At this point you aren't even playing a PvP mode anymore.

    Then there wasnt a PVP mode before mounts either.

    This issue existed well before mounts, but its just the other side griping about it now. That support player running back to their zerg wasnt going to take that fight before mounts just like they wont take the fight now. It was just as boring chasing and killing supports running back to the blob as it is now having to dismount them, or having a few more escape because they have better mobility+3 dodges+10K more HP.

    Even if they completely did away with mounts, the people who didnt want to take the fights arent going to automagically now take them. The same folks who didnt 1v1 before mounts wont 1v1 after they take them out or give us an easier way to dismount.

    The myth that people will 1v1 again is akin to the myth that when the OP build is nerfed people will play something that takes skill. Those folks graduate to another meme build, and people not taking roamer fights now arent going to be taking them after any solution is implemented.

    TL;DR: People arent going to change their preferences for how they play because their playstyle gets nerfed. If it gets nerfed too heavily they find another game.

    Then you take out a valuable asset of the enemy factions group for free.

    By introducing them to another game where their playstyle is more supported.

  • Whiteout.1975Whiteout.1975 Member ✭✭✭
    edited August 2, 2019

    @BadMed.3846 said:
    @Whiteout.1975 thanks for clarifying. I guess to some extent what you're calling roaming is what I've always known as havoc squads. But that's just terminology. As long as you're playing for an objective you would get fights.
    There have been plenty for roamers who've just spent time picking fights around the ruins and in open field. I still do think that game mechanics don't need to change for them if they're no playing for objective.
    Again, at the heart of it is the inability to engage an enemy while they're on a mount. While I understand your opinion and desire for free engagement, as it used to be, I think warclaw is the right decision and a step in the right direction for the game.
    I'll leave it there to make room for others' opinions.

    Well, thanks for your time in allowing me to explain the point's I have to offer. I have some more that seem necessary at this point. Given what's written. (Sorry for the late reply btw. I get busy IRL and don't always have time to give the comment I would like to)

    I've understood Roaming can be a variety of things close within the context I've previously given and shown. Havoc IMO, has seemed more primarily focused on actual structured objective's like Tower's and Keeps at the forefront of it's agenda. Though, Roaming & Havoc can easily end up walking a fine line next to each other I would say from time to time.

    So can a Player be a kind of "objective" in WvW? Well they should and here's why...
    Normally when we (as players) refer to objective's in WvW. It's usually regarding some structure or situation (often NPC related) with something to gain from it. In an effort of help towards the outcome of a match of course. However, Not all objective's are "PPT" related anyways. You can go for blood lust (a task often taken on by Roamers) or some other form of utility that can influence the outcome of a match.

    • However, the actual effort given is what was important. Some player's give more "effort" than other's, but don't be surprised if that effort (towards the main cause of "Winning") is lacking within a heavily favored Casual game mode (WvW). Which is lacking in the meaning to "Win" anyways.

    To continue... A player can easily be viewed as some kind of objective. Also through contribution of PPK... LIke PPT. Still contributing to the War score. However, it is important also to have fun along the way as well... As that's why people tend to play video games; since really the dawn of video game time.

    • There should be a healthy "Tug of War", so to speak, between reasonable abilities of who can do what and when.That IMO, strongly creates a fun interesting gaming experience. That's true balance. That's what's lacking here with Warclaw.

    I have yet to see any valid form of reasoning as to why Warclaw should function the way it does now. In a way that is currently detrimental to a greater health of a war zone environment. Despite those whom may "enjoy" it. Saying "Warclaw does not have problems" or "is not thought to be a problem". Is unfortunately not conformation that there is no problem. "I enjoy it" (even though I believe you) is not enough unfortunately ether. I've stated/shown what Roamer's can bring to the table, how not to hold high expectations for any player being any certain way and how Warclaw easily punishes some of what Roamers can bring to the table. As well as the significance of that. Even now how I've further demonstrated how Roamer's can easily contribute; in multiple ways. Showing they're not simply a "pointless" role.

    Thus, convincing me or anyone else that can see these real and presentable flaw's. That "Warclaw is not a problem"; is going to be extremely hard. After having personally dealt out more than enough consistent founded example's, similarities, facts, purposes and expectations around this whole topic. To the point which allow's almost anyone to simply connect the dot's and see actually why Warclaw is a problem. Is why I happen to say that. Unfortunately, at this point, I do believe we @BadMed.3846 must agree to disagree based on that. However, thanks again for the discussion :+1:

    Hopefully one day I can agree with you that "warclaw is the right decision and a step in the right direction for the game". Until then, I'll be looking forward to such a time. :)

  • Nickv.8031Nickv.8031 Member ✭✭

    @Whiteout.1975 Well said man.

  • Whiteout.1975Whiteout.1975 Member ✭✭✭
    edited August 2, 2019

    @Nickv.8031 said:
    @Whiteout.1975 Well said man.

    Thanks <3 Love the video showing what is basically playing "cat and mouse" btw. "Let's desperately get to our zerg"... right after we troll this guy on how he can't catch us. Reminds me of this lol...

  • @Nickv.8031 said:
    @Whiteout.1975 Well said man.

    Been on both sides of this. A great example of people trying to do the thing they want and not having to cater to the other person.

  • Anput.4620Anput.4620 Member ✭✭✭

    @Blockhead Magee.3092 said:

    @Nickv.8031 said:
    @Whiteout.1975 Well said man.

    Been on both sides of this. A great example of people trying to do the thing they want and not having to cater to the other person.

    That is not what open map PvP zones are for, look at any other game with a big open map, other MMO's, BR's, survival games. Implementing mechanics that allow for infinite stalemate if one side wants it is not good design for a PvP game.

  • @Anput.4620 said:

    @Blockhead Magee.3092 said:

    @Nickv.8031 said:
    @Whiteout.1975 Well said man.

    Been on both sides of this. A great example of people trying to do the thing they want and not having to cater to the other person.

    That is not what open map PvP zones are for, look at any other game with a big open map, other MMO's, BR's, survival games. Implementing mechanics that allow for infinite stalemate if one side wants it is not good design for a PvP game.

    Then it sounds like you need to move over to those other games. WvW doesn't need the gankers soley dictating who and when engagement occurs.

  • Anput.4620Anput.4620 Member ✭✭✭
    edited August 6, 2019

    @Blockhead Magee.3092 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Blockhead Magee.3092 said:

    @Nickv.8031 said:
    @Whiteout.1975 Well said man.

    Been on both sides of this. A great example of people trying to do the thing they want and not having to cater to the other person.

    That is not what open map PvP zones are for, look at any other game with a big open map, other MMO's, BR's, survival games. Implementing mechanics that allow for infinite stalemate if one side wants it is not good design for a PvP game.

    Then it sounds like you need to move over to those other games. WvW doesn't need the gankers soley dictating who and when engagement occurs.

    Why do we need a trashual ktrain mode? How is that a good PvP game? What is wrong with smallscale fighting in open PvP games? You seem to think it is inherently wrong when you provide no argument besides "I don't like getting rekt randomly". Where is the design here? Open map/world PvP is made to be a wild west, if you want a fixed ruleset where you can know what to expect and won't be randomly attacked you should look for games with structured PvP matches.

    There is no reason why WvW being made trashual suddenly makes it infinitely better than every other games fundamental design, just lowest common denominator here.

  • Whiteout.1975Whiteout.1975 Member ✭✭✭

    Well put at @Anput.4620

    There is also this https://www.guildwars2.com/en-gb/the-game/competitive-play/. I'm going to quote the first sentence from the WvW section of that post:

    • "Join World vs. World (WvW) for an epic PvP experience full of cunning strategy, earthshaking sieges, and pitched battles between hundreds of players."

    How can "battles between hundreds of players" be "epic" when that aspect has a far easier time being avoided and ignored? 😏

  • Anput.4620Anput.4620 Member ✭✭✭

    @Whiteout.1975 said:
    Well put at @Anput.4620

    There is also this https://www.guildwars2.com/en-gb/the-game/competitive-play/. I'm going to quote the first sentence from the WvW section of that post:

    • "Join World vs. World (WvW) for an epic PvP experience full of cunning strategy, earthshaking sieges, and pitched battles between hundreds of players."

    How can "battles between hundreds of players" be "epic" when that aspect has a far easier time being avoided and ignored? 😏

    Why don't they just call it silverwastes 0.5 at this point.

  • Whiteout.1975Whiteout.1975 Member ✭✭✭

    @Anput.4620 said:
    Why don't they just call it silverwastes 0.5 at this point.

    Lol... Because then we would also have to be making some real gold... And it's against @Anet Law to make some fair gold as a WvW players. No discrimination present whatsoever. /Sarcasm 🙃

  • Excursion.9752Excursion.9752 Member ✭✭✭

    While I respect everyone and their viewpoint and I understand where people are coming from. I however want to play the content I want to play no matter if it is a zerg fight or a 1v1 fight. Sometimes I stop to fight other times I do not. If you are having a hard time getting a fight you want that generally means that people "at that given moment" are not looking for what you are looking for. There are still a lot of good 1v1 scenarios in zerg fights as long as you stay on the outer flank and wait for people to engage in the fight.

    I personally like where mounts are at the moment. People are learning how to dismount people and that's great but its not easy. It does take skill and there is nothing wrong with that. 1 hit dismount sounds like a griefer's dream and I'm sure ANET had that on the table at one point but decided against it because of what their goals ended up being which I believe was adding more mobility to get back to the fight that the player wanted to engage in.

    While I think in the future there will be more ways to dismount people. I do not think it will be as simple as hitting a person one time.

                                                              There is a 50% chance you will not agree with me and a 50% chance I will not agree with you
    
  • Anput.4620Anput.4620 Member ✭✭✭
    edited August 7, 2019

    @Excursion.9752 said:
    While I respect everyone and their viewpoint and I understand where people are coming from. I however want to play the content I want to play no matter if it is a zerg fight or a 1v1 fight. Sometimes I stop to fight other times I do not. If you are having a hard time getting a fight you want that generally means that people "at that given moment" are not looking for what you are looking for. There are still a lot of good 1v1 scenarios in zerg fights as long as you stay on the outer flank and wait for people to engage in the fight.

    I personally like where mounts are at the moment. People are learning how to dismount people and that's great but its not easy. It does take skill and there is nothing wrong with that. 1 hit dismount sounds like a griefer's dream and I'm sure ANET had that on the table at one point but decided against it because of what their goals ended up being which I believe was adding more mobility to get back to the fight that the player wanted to engage in.

    While I think in the future there will be more ways to dismount people. I do not think it will be as simple as hitting a person one time.

    Dismounting is possible and takes skill? Like 2 builds can dismount, maybe 3, for the rest it is basiclally impossible, skill doesn't matter, escaping should be as hard as dismounting.

    It is open world wildwest PvP, this isn't sPvP and by entering it you agree that you don't always get to do what you want if someone stands in your way, it is how it was designed and balanced for years, all simillar games/modes work like this in other games.

    This is purely a balance issue, one that simply makes the game not fun for me, i'd love to want to play almost every day again ty.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 7, 2019

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Blockhead Magee.3092 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Blockhead Magee.3092 said:

    @Nickv.8031 said:
    @Whiteout.1975 Well said man.

    Been on both sides of this. A great example of people trying to do the thing they want and not having to cater to the other person.

    That is not what open map PvP zones are for, look at any other game with a big open map, other MMO's, BR's, survival games. Implementing mechanics that allow for infinite stalemate if one side wants it is not good design for a PvP game.

    Then it sounds like you need to move over to those other games. WvW doesn't need the gankers soley dictating who and when engagement occurs.

    Why do we need a trashual ktrain mode? How is that a good PvP game? What is wrong with smallscale fighting in open PvP games?

    Because it attracts a volume of players that pays the bills. The other does not.

    Frankly, I think it's high time Anet start charging different rates for different aspects of the game, depending on the fraction of the populations that play them. Yes, that means low-attendance game modes starting paying regularly. If you want to demand your PVP a certain way to ensure the population caps at some level, it should cost something. ONLY then can we start talking about freeing up game modes in a way that don't depend on returns on investment.

    If you think balancing is only driven by performance and justified by comparisons to other classes then prepare to be educated:

    https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/balance-updates-the-heralds-near-future-and-pvp-league-season-13/

  • Anput.4620Anput.4620 Member ✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Blockhead Magee.3092 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Blockhead Magee.3092 said:

    @Nickv.8031 said:
    @Whiteout.1975 Well said man.

    Been on both sides of this. A great example of people trying to do the thing they want and not having to cater to the other person.

    That is not what open map PvP zones are for, look at any other game with a big open map, other MMO's, BR's, survival games. Implementing mechanics that allow for infinite stalemate if one side wants it is not good design for a PvP game.

    Then it sounds like you need to move over to those other games. WvW doesn't need the gankers soley dictating who and when engagement occurs.

    Why do we need a trashual ktrain mode? How is that a good PvP game? What is wrong with smallscale fighting in open PvP games?

    Because it attracts a volume of players that pays the bills. The other does not.

    Frankly, I think it's high time Anet start charging different rates for different aspects of the game, depending on the fraction of the populations that play them. Yes, that means low-attendance game modes starting paying regularly. If you want to demand your PVP a certain way to ensure the population caps at some level, it should cost something. ONLY then can we start talking about freeing up game modes in a way that don't depend on returns on investment.

    Consumers just care about a quality product, which this isn't atm.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 8, 2019

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Blockhead Magee.3092 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Blockhead Magee.3092 said:

    @Nickv.8031 said:
    @Whiteout.1975 Well said man.

    Been on both sides of this. A great example of people trying to do the thing they want and not having to cater to the other person.

    That is not what open map PvP zones are for, look at any other game with a big open map, other MMO's, BR's, survival games. Implementing mechanics that allow for infinite stalemate if one side wants it is not good design for a PvP game.

    Then it sounds like you need to move over to those other games. WvW doesn't need the gankers soley dictating who and when engagement occurs.

    Why do we need a trashual ktrain mode? How is that a good PvP game? What is wrong with smallscale fighting in open PvP games?

    Because it attracts a volume of players that pays the bills. The other does not.

    Frankly, I think it's high time Anet start charging different rates for different aspects of the game, depending on the fraction of the populations that play them. Yes, that means low-attendance game modes starting paying regularly. If you want to demand your PVP a certain way to ensure the population caps at some level, it should cost something. ONLY then can we start talking about freeing up game modes in a way that don't depend on returns on investment.

    Consumers just care about a quality product, which this isn't atm.

    This statement really doesn't make sense ... but you already know that. Do you really think making these negative, generalizing statements has some real impact on how Anet develops WvW? How people interact with you on the forum? That's definitely a special way of thinking if you do.

    It doesn't change what I said anyways. Anet is just aligning game modes to provide there core market with more options. If that means you get kicked to the curb, it's a good sign you aren't the targeted market in the first place.

    If you think balancing is only driven by performance and justified by comparisons to other classes then prepare to be educated:

    https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/balance-updates-the-heralds-near-future-and-pvp-league-season-13/

  • Tao.5096Tao.5096 Member ✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    This statement really doesn't make sense ... but you already know that. Do you really think making these negative, generalizing statements has some real impact on how Anet develops WvW? How people interact with you on the forum? That's definitely a special way of thinking if you do.

    It doesn't change what I said anyways. Anet is just aligning game modes to provide there core market with more options. If that means you get kicked to the curb, it's a good sign you aren't the targeted market in the first place.

    What options do you speak about?
    80% of the entire game is pure PvE.
    10% is WvW which was a cluster-F with variety of play scenarios where build diversity was at the very peak. Even if many scenarios were unfair and lead to waypoint, it still was fun.
    Another 10% was PvP which had it's ups and downs, but it had quite a nice diversity until first expansion hit the rail.

    And what now?
    80% of the game is still pure PvE
    WvW is going to be aligned with PvE because of what? Because EotM has been rekt and is empty? Instead of fixing it and making it again a WvW paradise for PvErs and those who wish to level up and earn a coin, then take the fun from old players who did WvW for years and yet were and are customers who spend cash in Gem Store, just so PvErs can have fun and no QQ on the forums about balance and other shizz?
    That way PvP has been butchered.
    We had a wide range of build diversity for each class. Now go meta or grind the floor with your teeth.

    It's common sense that if you wish to align a product or feature, then you consult it first with customers who actively use/pay for that product/feature.
    Then you consult it with the potential customers and align it so current customers are pleased and new customers will obtain what they are looking for.

    Obviously, you cannot make it happen that 100% of the current and potential customers will be happy.
    But the decline is showing how certain features make a negative impact on the entire product.
    In this case, WvW is in decline due to implementing features that cater for new and temporary customers and cripple current customers.

    Of course, I personally am against implementing every wish that is spoken by customers - since many ideas are just purely stupid.
    But there are few that are quite nice, they are not much of a work to implement, and they were never even taken to the table.
    But again, other things that were never asked, never needed, implemented, thrown in the face.
    And what then? Adapt?
    Yes, people adapt the way that they quit.
    Population of WvW has decreased heavily in the past years and the spike of decline was due to many changes to WvW that were annoying instead of helping.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 8, 2019

    @Tao.5096 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    This statement really doesn't make sense ... but you already know that. Do you really think making these negative, generalizing statements has some real impact on how Anet develops WvW? How people interact with you on the forum? That's definitely a special way of thinking if you do.

    It doesn't change what I said anyways. Anet is just aligning game modes to provide there core market with more options. If that means you get kicked to the curb, it's a good sign you aren't the targeted market in the first place.

    What options do you speak about?

    The option to use a mount in WvW. As for the rest of your post ... I'm not responding to such anger-fueled. There isn't a point unless I wanted to get another response with more of the same.

    If you think balancing is only driven by performance and justified by comparisons to other classes then prepare to be educated:

    https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/balance-updates-the-heralds-near-future-and-pvp-league-season-13/

  • Tao.5096Tao.5096 Member ✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    The option to use a mount in WvW. As for the rest of your post ... I'm not responding to such anger-fueled. There isn't a point unless I wanted to get another response with more of the same.

    Well, I did notice that once you have no argument then you shoot your "anger-fueled" snowflake thingie.
    Welp...some people sure are easy to make teh tears drop.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 8, 2019

    @Tao.5096 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    The option to use a mount in WvW. As for the rest of your post ... I'm not responding to such anger-fueled. There isn't a point unless I wanted to get another response with more of the same.

    Well, I did notice that once you have no argument then you shoot your "anger-fueled" snowflake thingie.
    Welp...some people sure are easy to make teh tears drop.

    I wasn't making an argument though ... I was simply giving the poster clarification on why his line of thinking about how WvW works is constantly wrong. The only person making the argument here is you.

    But hey, if you want to have a discussion and put your angry tone away, I'm all for that to.

    If you think balancing is only driven by performance and justified by comparisons to other classes then prepare to be educated:

    https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/balance-updates-the-heralds-near-future-and-pvp-league-season-13/

  • Stand The Wall.6987Stand The Wall.6987 Member ✭✭✭✭

    lol ranger might actually finally be useful... for demounting ppl.

    you don't know till you know, ya know.

  • Anput.4620Anput.4620 Member ✭✭✭
    edited August 11, 2019

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Blockhead Magee.3092 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Blockhead Magee.3092 said:

    @Nickv.8031 said:
    @Whiteout.1975 Well said man.

    Been on both sides of this. A great example of people trying to do the thing they want and not having to cater to the other person.

    That is not what open map PvP zones are for, look at any other game with a big open map, other MMO's, BR's, survival games. Implementing mechanics that allow for infinite stalemate if one side wants it is not good design for a PvP game.

    Then it sounds like you need to move over to those other games. WvW doesn't need the gankers soley dictating who and when engagement occurs.

    Why do we need a trashual ktrain mode? How is that a good PvP game? What is wrong with smallscale fighting in open PvP games?

    Because it attracts a volume of players that pays the bills. The other does not.

    Frankly, I think it's high time Anet start charging different rates for different aspects of the game, depending on the fraction of the populations that play them. Yes, that means low-attendance game modes starting paying regularly. If you want to demand your PVP a certain way to ensure the population caps at some level, it should cost something. ONLY then can we start talking about freeing up game modes in a way that don't depend on returns on investment.

    Consumers just care about a quality product, which this isn't atm.

    This statement really doesn't make sense ... but you already know that. Do you really think making these negative, generalizing statements has some real impact on how Anet develops WvW? How people interact with you on the forum? That's definitely a special way of thinking if you do.

    It doesn't change what I said anyways. Anet is just aligning game modes to provide there core market with more options. If that means you get kicked to the curb, it's a good sign you aren't the targeted market in the first place.

    Yeah they sell trashual content, but that doesn't make a better game, all esports are competitive hardcore games that aren't forgiving like this, i am talking about objective game design, i tell you a steak is better than a bad burger from mcdonalds, but you tell me mcdonalds sells, that doesn't mean the steak isn't better.

    @Stand The Wall.6987 said:
    lol ranger might actually finally be useful... for demounting ppl.

    Well they just nuked that for no reason.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 11, 2019

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Blockhead Magee.3092 said:

    @Anput.4620 said:

    @Blockhead Magee.3092 said:

    @Nickv.8031 said:
    @Whiteout.1975 Well said man.

    Been on both sides of this. A great example of people trying to do the thing they want and not having to cater to the other person.

    That is not what open map PvP zones are for, look at any other game with a big open map, other MMO's, BR's, survival games. Implementing mechanics that allow for infinite stalemate if one side wants it is not good design for a PvP game.

    Then it sounds like you need to move over to those other games. WvW doesn't need the gankers soley dictating who and when engagement occurs.

    Why do we need a trashual ktrain mode? How is that a good PvP game? What is wrong with smallscale fighting in open PvP games?

    Because it attracts a volume of players that pays the bills. The other does not.

    Frankly, I think it's high time Anet start charging different rates for different aspects of the game, depending on the fraction of the populations that play them. Yes, that means low-attendance game modes starting paying regularly. If you want to demand your PVP a certain way to ensure the population caps at some level, it should cost something. ONLY then can we start talking about freeing up game modes in a way that don't depend on returns on investment.

    Consumers just care about a quality product, which this isn't atm.

    This statement really doesn't make sense ... but you already know that. Do you really think making these negative, generalizing statements has some real impact on how Anet develops WvW? How people interact with you on the forum? That's definitely a special way of thinking if you do.

    It doesn't change what I said anyways. Anet is just aligning game modes to provide there core market with more options. If that means you get kicked to the curb, it's a good sign you aren't the targeted market in the first place.

    Yeah they sell trashual content, but that doesn't make a better game, all esports are competitive hardcore games that aren't forgiving like this, i am talking about objective game design, i tell you a steak is better than a bad burger from mcdonalds, but you tell me mcdonalds sells, that doesn't mean the steak isn't better.

    You have this obsession with what you want being better. Maybe if the game was customized to what you wanted, that would be relevant. People like different things ... and Anet is serving the market they are targeting. It's not about what you think is better, who you think Anet should accommodate or what your opinion of the current content is. All of the things you continue to base your argument on are irrelevant.

    If you think balancing is only driven by performance and justified by comparisons to other classes then prepare to be educated:

    https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/balance-updates-the-heralds-near-future-and-pvp-league-season-13/

©2010–2018 ArenaNet, LLC. All rights reserved. Guild Wars, Guild Wars 2, Heart of Thorns, Guild Wars 2: Path of Fire, ArenaNet, NCSOFT, the Interlocking NC Logo, and all associated logos and designs are trademarks or registered trademarks of NCSOFT Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.