Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Weird stupid idea maybe


Justine.6351

Recommended Posts

@Justine.6351 said:

@Dawdler.8521 said:Why shouldnt 50 man be able to map hop?

Sorry for the weird stupid question.

trim down on the omega blobbing karma training. Gives smaller servers a chance to threaten them elsewhere without getting insta surprised 50 man hurdur we good blown up.

idk just a thought.

I get the idea to an extent, with a theory being it would be trying to break up Omni Zergs into 10 man groups to hop around.

But it would also make it easier for the 50 man Zerg to steamroll borders.

And we’ve all seen the 20 guild members hanging out at spawn waiting for the rest of their group..... that would likely only increase the occurrence of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Justine.6351 said:

@Dawdler.8521 said:Why shouldnt 50 man be able to map hop?

Sorry for the weird stupid question.

trim down on the omega blobbing karma training. Gives smaller servers a chance to threaten them elsewhere without getting insta surprised 50 man hurdur we good blown up.

idk just a thought.But... what rule says 50 man is omega blobbing?

What if its two 20 man guilds and 10 randoms responding to a T3 under attack by 70+ enemies already on that border?

Are you going to tell the guilds that they are in fact an omegablob and they arent allowed to port in so fast against whats clearly not omegablob then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@Dawdler.8521 said:Why shouldnt 50 man be able to map hop?

Sorry for the weird stupid question.

trim down on the omega blobbing karma training. Gives smaller servers a chance to threaten them elsewhere without getting insta surprised 50 man hurdur we good blown up.

idk just a thought.But... what rule says 50 man is omega blobbing?

What if its two 20 man guilds and 10 randoms responding to a T3 under attack by 70+ enemies already on that border?

Are you going to tell the guilds that they are in fact an omegablob and they arent allowed to port in so fast against whats clearly not omegablob then?

In situation where facing 2 big blobs in home and EB, this situation favors the many.

Ktrain would become easier in some situations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the thinking behind the OP's suggestion. Here is what I think is wrong with it;

  • Having two or more queued maps means even greater dominance verses a smaller, more flexible force that hops around the maps. -This is increases SNOWBALLING by making big and powerful servers even more powerful and dominant.
  • This suggestion would result in a lot of standing around at spawn, waiting.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Aeolus.3615 said:

@Dawdler.8521 said:Why shouldnt 50 man be able to map hop?

Sorry for the weird stupid question.

trim down on the omega blobbing karma training. Gives smaller servers a chance to threaten them elsewhere without getting insta surprised 50 man hurdur we good blown up.

idk just a thought.But... what rule says 50 man is omega blobbing?

What if its two 20 man guilds and 10 randoms responding to a T3 under attack by 70+ enemies already on that border?

Are you going to tell the guilds that they are in fact an omegablob and they arent allowed to port in so fast against whats clearly not omegablob then?

In situation where facing 2 big blobs in home and EB, this situation favors the many.

Ktrain would become easier in some situations.Which has nothing to do with what I said.

The point was that with a filter for entrance - 10 players per minute, whatever - specifically to keep 50 man zergs from borderhopping how do you actually know its a 50 man zerg and not a far smaller group which is what is supposed to be encouraged?

What happens if its several guilds at once?What happens if EWP was popped and players from 3 other maps respond?What happens if its 20+ randoms?What happens if its two different 25 man zergs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@Dawdler.8521 said:Why shouldnt 50 man be able to map hop?

Sorry for the weird stupid question.

trim down on the omega blobbing karma training. Gives smaller servers a chance to threaten them elsewhere without getting insta surprised 50 man hurdur we good blown up.

idk just a thought.But... what rule says 50 man is omega blobbing?

What if its two 20 man guilds and 10 randoms responding to a T3 under attack by 70+ enemies already on that border?

Are you going to tell the guilds that they are in fact an omegablob and they arent allowed to port in so fast against whats clearly not omegablob then?

In situation where facing 2 big blobs in home and EB, this situation favors the many.

Ktrain would become easier in some situations.Which has nothing to do with what I said.

The point was that with a filter for entrance - 10 players per minute, whatever - specifically to
keep 50 man zergs from borderhopping
how do you
actually know its a 50 man zerg
and not a far smaller group which is what is
supposed
to be encouraged?

What happens if its several guilds at once?What happens if EWP was popped and players from 3 other maps respond?What happens if its 20+ randoms?What happens if its two different 25 man zergs?

I think it has, cause if attackers were increasing in home for sure home will call more, for a server to stack that many has u say, their value was incremental over time, so home players had time to scout and close that gap since enemy can’t spike that many players instantly to overwhelm a structure.

What m8 happen wich was the example I gave was in situations where a server is facing 2 diferent serve while can only respond to 1 map.

At the end, still would not work, cause that means no one could enter in wvw whenever one wants, or players would exit and join a map if was a way to bypass the 10 players per minute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if there was already a 50 man on a map and another 50 man tries to respond, they couldn't. interesting direction tho.

editit would be jank and piss people off at first, but we might see a slight tactics change over time. have dedicated 10 mans on every border with a keep. it would make defending harder, yes, but also more important. the thing is tho people would no doubt fall back to siege which imo is backwards. I would up the number to 20 per 30 sec tho or something like that. you want it to be just enough to deter people from waiting in spawn to ball up but not enough to be a no win situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@XenesisII.1540 said:So uh... when a t3 garrison is attacked and ewp is pulled... 1 guy shows up from another map like what every 5 mins?

Well the other options is the blob can split their group up to defend it.

I've seen this mentioned by quite a few people before in the past and it probably isn't the worst idea; given the placement of the server, stick a timer on how often they can map hop. For example, 1st place it's 1hr, 2nd place is 30 min, 3rd place no restriction. So if a blob leaves EB to go defend their garrison and they are in 1st place, they are stuck on that map for an hour before they can move again. Solution, split the group up to defend both. Then it's a case of, if the groups split up, those players are going to have to learn to get far better than they are instead of getting carried.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@DeadlySynz.3471 said:I've seen this mentioned by quite a few people before in the past and it probably isn't the worst idea; given the placement of the server, stick a timer on how often they can map hop. For example, 1st place it's 1hr, 2nd place is 30 min, 3rd place no restriction.

that's a cool idea but an hour is waaaay too long lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would much prefer sticking a timer on players to stay on a map for a minimum amount of time before they can switch maps like 30mins, rather than trying to restrict how many can enter a map per minute, there's just too much that can snowball and make this feature more bothersome for defenders than attackers. Maybe only stick this on attacking enemy maps? Maybe only do it after map populations even off to keep numbers more even?

Attackers already have a big advantage in being able to sneak into an empty map and getting to a target before a response can be made, and while you can rely on human "scouting", some things are not obvious to some people to notice the signs of an attack. Again attackers can take their time to stack a map, avoid detection until they get to their target easily, when an immediate response is needed for defending, well the defenders get royally screwed and need to rely on really early detection calls to get people to respond. Maybe you can make ewp bypass this, but it might be more abused, the spies will definitely abuse it.

Well just split up your groups! It won't work that way, it'll just make people not care to map hop to defend even more, which over the years more people have already grown tired to bother with unless it's a t3 keep and a fat zerg is attacking.

I really do hate when zergs map hop to empty maps to avoid fights and get free caps, especially these days when wvw is less populated, so annoying. But either way timers can get messy and may turn people off from playing if they don't freely have the choices to play wherever whenever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@DeadlySynz.3471 said:

@XenesisII.1540 said:So uh... when a t3 garrison is attacked and ewp is pulled... 1 guy shows up from another map like what every 5 mins?

Well the other options is the blob can split their group up to defend it.

I've seen this mentioned by quite a few people before in the past and it probably isn't the worst idea; given the placement of the server, stick a timer on how often they can map hop. For example, 1st place it's 1hr, 2nd place is 30 min, 3rd place no restriction. So if a blob leaves EB to go defend their garrison and they are in 1st place, they are stuck on that map for an hour before they can move again. Solution, split the group up to defend both. Then it's a case of, if the groups split up, those players are going to have to learn to get far better than they are instead of getting carried.

Lock people on a map for an hour at a time? I can't think of a worse idea. There's already no point in winning PPT, now there would be an incentive to not win.

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...