Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Contesting Capture Points


TheGrimm.5624

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'd say yes, if only for the money/badges etc involved in making them. Once the golem's destroyed all of that investment goes poof. The argument about calling in the cavalry goes both ways too. The way this mode has degenerated it's just as easy for a scout to eye the camp, and if it's desired enough to strip it from the enemy they stay at a remove and call their own realm over to blitz the camp. Golem's aren't that strong and with the amount of damage floating around today they go down in a matter of seconds to a zerg- even a moderately- to small sized blob. Bigger fish to fry when it comes to improving this mode, but that's just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tbh its not that often a camp is golemed. Zergs usually have themselves to blaim for a T3 feeding a contested keep, since commanders will go "BuT yOu OnLy nEEd aOnE RoAmEr!" When its a camp with 3+ golems, ballistas, 10 defending it and 5 on every dolly then they complain when the keep upgrades.

But granted its always been a little odd that Anet decided it is ok.

Add it to the pile of things Anet could fix in minutes with a few lines of code if they wanted to together with things like changing mount hp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Doug.4930 said:Personally no they shouldn't. The tactic of building 5 omega's in a single camp to prevent capture is a little silly. Players should need to fight and actively defend their camp. Not sit in golems screaming in map chat for the cavalry to arrive.

What you are asking for is players to sit in a camp and wait for someone to attack. That's terrible when they could be elsewhere fighting instead. Yes, the cavalry should be given time to try and defend. Attackers already get a 30 second head start before swords appear. And if you want actual fights, then the delay is crucial so that attackers can't simply cap and leave fast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Chaba.5410 said:

@Doug.4930 said:Personally no they shouldn't. The tactic of building 5 omega's in a single camp to prevent capture is a little silly. Players should need to fight and actively defend their camp. Not sit in golems screaming in map chat for the cavalry to arrive.

What you are asking for is players to sit in a camp and wait for someone to attack. That's terrible when they could be elsewhere fighting instead. Yes, the cavalry should be given time to try and defend. Attackers already get a 30 second head start before swords appear. And if you want actual fights, then the delay is crucial so that attackers can't simply cap and leave fast.

I'm not saying that players need to wait in camps for people to attack, what I'm saying is IF players DO decide to sit in a camp and wait for people to attack, they shouldn't be able to sit in a golem and contest the point once all the mobs are dead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Doug.4930 said:

@Doug.4930 said:Personally no they shouldn't. The tactic of building 5 omega's in a single camp to prevent capture is a little silly. Players should need to fight and actively defend their camp. Not sit in golems screaming in map chat for the cavalry to arrive.

What you are asking for is players to sit in a camp and wait for someone to attack. That's terrible when they could be elsewhere fighting instead. Yes, the cavalry should be given time to try and defend. Attackers already get a 30 second head start before swords appear. And if you want actual fights, then the delay is crucial so that attackers can't simply cap and leave fast.

I'm not saying that players need to wait in camps for people to attack, what I'm saying is IF players DO decide to sit in a camp and wait for people to attack, they shouldn't be able to sit in a golem and contest the point once all the mobs are dead.

OK you didn't say that, but that's the effect. How about swords go up right away when an objective gets attacked instead of 30s later? If you want there to be actual fights, that's the way for there to be actual fights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Gop.8713 said:It's not really something I could ever see myself doing but I'm fine with ppl being able to do it if they want. I was fine with mounts contesting too though, so I'm maybe the wrong person to ask . . .

That's one of the reason I am curious. Seems that we have a double rule in place here, which is why I was curious from at least the forum goers perspective. If you block one, shouldn't we block the other? HP differences were already account for in the differences in cost so,,,why block one and not the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@TheGrimm.5624 said:

@Gop.8713 said:It's not really something I could ever see myself doing but I'm fine with ppl being able to do it if they want. I was fine with mounts contesting too though, so I'm maybe the wrong person to ask . . .

That's one of the reason I am curious. Seems that we have a double rule in place here, which is why I was curious from at least the forum goers perspective. If you block one, shouldn't we block the other? HP differences were already account for in the differences in cost so,,,why block one and not the other.

The mount is not only highly mobile, but also has three dodges. The only way to counter it is with damage. A golem does not have the dodges nor is very mobile and also has a very good counter: siege disablers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Chaba.5410 said:

@"Gop.8713" said:It's not really something I could ever see myself doing but I'm fine with ppl being able to do it if they want. I was fine with mounts contesting too though, so I'm maybe the wrong person to ask . . .

That's one of the reason I am curious. Seems that we have a double rule in place here, which is why I was curious from at least the forum goers perspective. If you block one, shouldn't we block the other? HP differences were already account for in the differences in cost so,,,why block one and not the other.

The mount is not only highly mobile, but also has three dodges. The only way to counter it is with damage. A golem does not have the dodges nor is very mobile and also has a very good counter: siege disablers.

This is a good argument I can support, too. (also, what others said about "re-enforcement" from both sides)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Chaba.5410 said:

@Gop.8713 said:It's not really something I could ever see myself doing but I'm fine with ppl being able to do it if they want. I was fine with mounts contesting too though, so I'm maybe the wrong person to ask . . .

That's one of the reason I am curious. Seems that we have a double rule in place here, which is why I was curious from at least the forum goers perspective. If you block one, shouldn't we block the other? HP differences were already account for in the differences in cost so,,,why block one and not the other.

The mount is not only highly mobile, but also has three dodges. The only way to counter it is with damage. A golem does not have the dodges nor is very mobile and also has a very good counter: siege disablers.

Disabling a golem does not make it stop from contesting a point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Caedmon.6798 said:

@Gop.8713 said:It's not really something I could ever see myself doing but I'm fine with ppl being able to do it if they want. I was fine with mounts contesting too though, so I'm maybe the wrong person to ask . . .

That's one of the reason I am curious. Seems that we have a double rule in place here, which is why I was curious from at least the forum goers perspective. If you block one, shouldn't we block the other? HP differences were already account for in the differences in cost so,,,why block one and not the other.

The mount is not only highly mobile, but also has three dodges. The only way to counter it is with damage. A golem does not have the dodges nor is very mobile and also has a very good counter: siege disablers.

Disabling a golem does not make it stop from contesting a point.

Yea, and? I am talking about counters in the context of balance. There's a bunch of other skills that have no real counter that also can't contest points: Renewed Focus and Elixir S are quick to come to mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Chaba.5410 said:

@Gop.8713 said:It's not really something I could ever see myself doing but I'm fine with ppl being able to do it if they want. I was fine with mounts contesting too though, so I'm maybe the wrong person to ask . . .

That's one of the reason I am curious. Seems that we have a double rule in place here, which is why I was curious from at least the forum goers perspective. If you block one, shouldn't we block the other? HP differences were already account for in the differences in cost so,,,why block one and not the other.

The mount is not only highly mobile, but also has three dodges. The only way to counter it is with damage. A golem does not have the dodges nor is very mobile and also has a very good counter: siege disablers.

Disabling a golem does not make it stop from contesting a point.

Yea, and? I am talking about counters in the context of balance. There's a bunch of other skills that have no real counter that also can't contest points: Renewed Focus and Elixir S are quick to come to mind.

And,this thread is about golems Contesting a point where if they are getting disabled they are still able to do so. The issue here is the contesting aspect,not about being unable or able to kill one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Caedmon.6798 said:

@Gop.8713 said:It's not really something I could ever see myself doing but I'm fine with ppl being able to do it if they want. I was fine with mounts contesting too though, so I'm maybe the wrong person to ask . . .

That's one of the reason I am curious. Seems that we have a double rule in place here, which is why I was curious from at least the forum goers perspective. If you block one, shouldn't we block the other? HP differences were already account for in the differences in cost so,,,why block one and not the other.

The mount is not only highly mobile, but also has three dodges. The only way to counter it is with damage. A golem does not have the dodges nor is very mobile and also has a very good counter: siege disablers.

Disabling a golem does not make it stop from contesting a point.

Yea, and? I am talking about counters in the context of balance. There's a bunch of other skills that have no real counter that also can't contest points: Renewed Focus and Elixir S are quick to come to mind.

And,this thread is about golems Contesting a point where if they are getting disabled they are still able to do so. The issue here is the contesting aspect,not about being unable or able to kill one.

Right. We're talking about balance with regards to contesting points. There's no real counters to skills and mechanics that do not contest points because that would be unbalanced if they could contest. The things that do contest points have counters and golems are one of them.

And it's great that points can be contested with golems since it helps delay the cap for a fight, especially since attackers have a 30 second head start before the point shows it is contested. I suppose what you should be asking for if you don't like that golems can contest is to have the 30 seconds removed so that defenders have that time to respond.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Chaba.5410 said:

@Gop.8713 said:It's not really something I could ever see myself doing but I'm fine with ppl being able to do it if they want. I was fine with mounts contesting too though, so I'm maybe the wrong person to ask . . .

That's one of the reason I am curious. Seems that we have a double rule in place here, which is why I was curious from at least the forum goers perspective. If you block one, shouldn't we block the other? HP differences were already account for in the differences in cost so,,,why block one and not the other.

The mount is not only highly mobile, but also has three dodges. The only way to counter it is with damage. A golem does not have the dodges nor is very mobile and also has a very good counter: siege disablers.

Disabling a golem does not make it stop from contesting a point.

Yea, and? I am talking about counters in the context of balance. There's a bunch of other skills that have no real counter that also can't contest points: Renewed Focus and Elixir S are quick to come to mind.

And,this thread is about golems Contesting a point where if they are getting disabled they are still able to do so. The issue here is the contesting aspect,not about being unable or able to kill one.

Right. We're talking about balance with regards to contesting points. There's no real counters to skills and mechanics that do not contest points because that would be unbalanced if they could contest. The things that do contest points have counters and golems are one of them.

And it's great that points can be contested with golems since it helps delay the cap for a fight, especially since attackers have a 30 second head start before the point shows it is contested.

The thing is that siege disabling is no counter to them because they still contest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Caedmon.6798 said:

@Gop.8713 said:It's not really something I could ever see myself doing but I'm fine with ppl being able to do it if they want. I was fine with mounts contesting too though, so I'm maybe the wrong person to ask . . .

That's one of the reason I am curious. Seems that we have a double rule in place here, which is why I was curious from at least the forum goers perspective. If you block one, shouldn't we block the other? HP differences were already account for in the differences in cost so,,,why block one and not the other.

The mount is not only highly mobile, but also has three dodges. The only way to counter it is with damage. A golem does not have the dodges nor is very mobile and also has a very good counter: siege disablers.

Disabling a golem does not make it stop from contesting a point.

Yea, and? I am talking about counters in the context of balance. There's a bunch of other skills that have no real counter that also can't contest points: Renewed Focus and Elixir S are quick to come to mind.

And,this thread is about golems Contesting a point where if they are getting disabled they are still able to do so. The issue here is the contesting aspect,not about being unable or able to kill one.

Right. We're talking about balance with regards to contesting points. There's no real counters to skills and mechanics that do not contest points because that would be unbalanced if they could contest. The things that do contest points have counters and golems are one of them.

And it's great that points can be contested with golems since it helps delay the cap for a fight, especially since attackers have a 30 second head start before the point shows it is contested.

The thing is that siege disabling is no counter to them because they still contest.

As they should. They're no different from someone contesting the point with a tanky, heal build. You can counter those builds too, btw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Chaba.5410 said:

@Gop.8713 said:It's not really something I could ever see myself doing but I'm fine with ppl being able to do it if they want. I was fine with mounts contesting too though, so I'm maybe the wrong person to ask . . .

That's one of the reason I am curious. Seems that we have a double rule in place here, which is why I was curious from at least the forum goers perspective. If you block one, shouldn't we block the other? HP differences were already account for in the differences in cost so,,,why block one and not the other.

The mount is not only highly mobile, but also has three dodges. The only way to counter it is with damage. A golem does not have the dodges nor is very mobile and also has a very good counter: siege disablers.

Disabling a golem does not make it stop from contesting a point.

Yea, and? I am talking about counters in the context of balance. There's a bunch of other skills that have no real counter that also can't contest points: Renewed Focus and Elixir S are quick to come to mind.

And,this thread is about golems Contesting a point where if they are getting disabled they are still able to do so. The issue here is the contesting aspect,not about being unable or able to kill one.

Right. We're talking about balance with regards to contesting points. There's no real counters to skills and mechanics that do not contest points because that would be unbalanced if they could contest. The things that do contest points have counters and golems are one of them.

And it's great that points can be contested with golems since it helps delay the cap for a fight, especially since attackers have a 30 second head start before the point shows it is contested.

The thing is that siege disabling is no counter to them because they still contest.

As they should. They're no different from someone contesting the point with a tanky, heal build. You can counter those builds too, btw.

Because having 20k hp equals to having 300khp + around 4.5k armor and other added stats+,Righto.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Caedmon.6798 said:

@Gop.8713 said:It's not really something I could ever see myself doing but I'm fine with ppl being able to do it if they want. I was fine with mounts contesting too though, so I'm maybe the wrong person to ask . . .

That's one of the reason I am curious. Seems that we have a double rule in place here, which is why I was curious from at least the forum goers perspective. If you block one, shouldn't we block the other? HP differences were already account for in the differences in cost so,,,why block one and not the other.

The mount is not only highly mobile, but also has three dodges. The only way to counter it is with damage. A golem does not have the dodges nor is very mobile and also has a very good counter: siege disablers.

Disabling a golem does not make it stop from contesting a point.

Yea, and? I am talking about counters in the context of balance. There's a bunch of other skills that have no real counter that also can't contest points: Renewed Focus and Elixir S are quick to come to mind.

And,this thread is about golems Contesting a point where if they are getting disabled they are still able to do so. The issue here is the contesting aspect,not about being unable or able to kill one.

Right. We're talking about balance with regards to contesting points. There's no real counters to skills and mechanics that do not contest points because that would be unbalanced if they could contest. The things that do contest points have counters and golems are one of them.

And it's great that points can be contested with golems since it helps delay the cap for a fight, especially since attackers have a 30 second head start before the point shows it is contested.

The thing is that siege disabling is no counter to them because they still contest.

As they should. They're no different from someone contesting the point with a tanky, heal build. You can counter those builds too, btw.

Because having 20k hp equals to having 300khp + around 4.5k armor and other added stats+,Righto.

Yea, only if you ignore skill usage and mobility on the tanky build and the fact that a golem that has been disabled can't use skills nor is very mobile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Chaba.5410 said:

@Gop.8713 said:It's not really something I could ever see myself doing but I'm fine with ppl being able to do it if they want. I was fine with mounts contesting too though, so I'm maybe the wrong person to ask . . .

That's one of the reason I am curious. Seems that we have a double rule in place here, which is why I was curious from at least the forum goers perspective. If you block one, shouldn't we block the other? HP differences were already account for in the differences in cost so,,,why block one and not the other.

The mount is not only highly mobile, but also has three dodges. The only way to counter it is with damage. A golem does not have the dodges nor is very mobile and also has a very good counter: siege disablers.

Disabling a golem does not make it stop from contesting a point.

Yea, and? I am talking about counters in the context of balance. There's a bunch of other skills that have no real counter that also can't contest points: Renewed Focus and Elixir S are quick to come to mind.

And,this thread is about golems Contesting a point where if they are getting disabled they are still able to do so. The issue here is the contesting aspect,not about being unable or able to kill one.

Right. We're talking about balance with regards to contesting points. There's no real counters to skills and mechanics that do not contest points because that would be unbalanced if they could contest. The things that do contest points have counters and golems are one of them.

And it's great that points can be contested with golems since it helps delay the cap for a fight, especially since attackers have a 30 second head start before the point shows it is contested.

The thing is that siege disabling is no counter to them because they still contest.

As they should. They're no different from someone contesting the point with a tanky, heal build. You can counter those builds too, btw.

Because having 20k hp equals to having 300khp + around 4.5k armor and other added stats+,Righto.

Yea, only if you ignore skill usage and mobility on the tanky build and the fact that a golem that has been disabled can't use skills nor is very mobile.

I already responded on the exact same thing you said. I also think i already said it's not about being able to kill them,and assuming i run on a tanky build is irrelevant aswell,which im not doing btw. Golems contest,usually not even 1 but mostly 2 which equals to 600k hp while they ask for more support,youre one godlike dpser if you burn through both of those and when the golems are destroyed ( Which isnt gonna happen in the time more people show up ) they get ejected and having to kill them while reinforcement is on the way. Albeit you talk like you know you have a clue,i don't think you quite do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...