Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Absolutely Ridiculous


cobbah.3102

Recommended Posts

@Chaba.5410 said:The amount of times yesterday I saw the random pug defenders on my team be pretty brain dead about how to defend/delay a zerg at a keep, or even properly scout, and then complain about attacker's numbers was just painful. The best was seeing red dots get into a T3 tower and no defender bothered to use the invulnerable walls tactic but map chat was full of complaints at the tag for not responding. It feels like the everyone is devolving, but only on my team of course, because the other team's defenders knew at least how to use supply traps to delay our zerg.

This thread is giving me bad flashbacks to yesterday.

How could we or anet help to educated new players about this stuff? I know when I started was hesitant to use things like tactivators out of fear of misusing those resources.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Don't care if it was you or not on a wall, I'm saying in general to everyone, don't dance on top of a wall in front of a zerg and expect to live, play smarter and stop complaining about attackers hitting people on a wall, if walls were meant to absolutely protect you they would have been made to do so, they could easily raise walls to be higher than 1200 range so that only seige can hit below, but obviously after 7 years they haven't done so, there is meant to be counterplay in the game, learn them use them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Zexanima.7851 said:

@Chaba.5410 said:The amount of times yesterday I saw the random pug defenders on my team be pretty brain dead about how to defend/delay a zerg at a keep, or even properly scout, and then complain about attacker's numbers was just painful. The best was seeing red dots get into a T3 tower and no defender bothered to use the invulnerable walls tactic but map chat was full of complaints at the tag for not responding. It feels like the everyone is devolving, but only on my team of course, because the other team's defenders knew at least how to use supply traps to delay our zerg.

This thread is giving me bad flashbacks to yesterday.

How could we or anet help to educated new players about this stuff? I know when I started was hesitant to use things like tactivators out of fear of misusing those resources.

Aside from whatever players write on guides and wikis for it, it has to be an Anet provided solution. Veteran players get tired after so many years of reteaching. That isn't something players signed on to do. It's been proposed in the past that there should be some sort of WvW tutorial like sPvP has. But such a thing may also become outdated. The game already provides tooltips explaining what the tactics do when you hover over them in the Objectives Upgrade ui.

Really it's also on the new player to find out this stuff for themselves. It isn't like there were guides when veteran players were learning. A lot of things are from experience. The dirty truth is some people just want someone else to lead them to the water while other people find a joy in self-guided experimentation to learn.

But also I'm pretty sure that the defenders yesterday who took offense at when I made useful suggestions were not new players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL. Just 1 hour ago I was defending my EBG keep cus YB was rushing it with 5-6 golems. I was pew pewing from inside wall, slowly chipping their golems down with aoe and rf / aa. I wasn't the only one defending. But we still won the fight and they never got our inner gate below 60%.

Do you think it's ok a single person should be able to defend vs 10 people? 2 people?That's something we have to think about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Chaba.5410 said:

@Chaba.5410 said:The amount of times yesterday I saw the random pug defenders on my team be pretty brain dead about how to defend/delay a zerg at a keep, or even properly scout, and then complain about attacker's numbers was just painful. The best was seeing red dots get into a T3 tower and no defender bothered to use the invulnerable walls tactic but map chat was full of complaints at the tag for not responding. It feels like the everyone is devolving, but only on my team of course, because the other team's defenders knew at least how to use supply traps to delay our zerg.

This thread is giving me bad flashbacks to yesterday.

How could we or anet help to educated new players about this stuff? I know when I started was hesitant to use things like tactivators out of fear of misusing those resources.

Aside from whatever players write on guides and wikis for it, it has to be an Anet provided solution. Veteran players get tired after so many years of reteaching. That isn't something players signed on to do. It's been proposed in the past that there should be some sort of WvW tutorial like sPvP has. But such a thing may also become outdated. The game already provides tooltips explaining what the tactics do when you hover over them in the Objectives Upgrade ui.

Really it's also on the new player to find out this stuff for themselves. It isn't like there were guides when veteran players were learning. A lot of things are from experience. The dirty truth is some people just want someone else to lead them to the water while other people find a joy in self-guided experimentation to learn.

But also I'm pretty sure that the defenders yesterday who took offense at when I made useful suggestions were not new players.

An in-game guide would be a start at least. It could be general enough as to avoid needing be changed per-update. Not everyone is good at just figuring it out but would still enjoy the mode. There are a lot of non-hardcore gamers that play this game that I think would enjoy WvW if they had an easy way to learn it. For example, my spouse would have never even considered WvW on her own had I not shown her the way around it but now she loves it.

As for experienced players being dinks, can't really do much about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's alright for the most part but I think the heart of the problem is the power creep the game mode has suffered. Where you once could stand there with a few buffs and fire off a couple shots of AC or balista you now get rewarded with insta-death. Also, some skills have ridiculously sized AoE. I mean when you can destroy and AC placed on the hut on the other side of the wall without even being able to see said AC , and hut for that matter, something is broken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Chaba.5410 said:

@"ArchonWing.9480" said:I would be more than willing to teach the art of siege humping, even though I didn't realize it was that hard. Of course, I won't, because that's bad for the game mode. You see, criticism is not allowed in a game like this and is branded as "tOXIC", so I'll just say everyone deserves a pat on the head and a "nice job, at least you tried" comment.

I got a random person mad at me yesterday for suggesting in chat that they should build a treb to counter a treb at NWT that was hitting garrison. You see, they just wanted more friendly numbers, which weren't available. Suddenly I'm the toxic one.

Sounds like the same players that go halp they're in lords room without saying who or what or how many. :lol:

I also love it when people ping/tell us about stuff that's been lost and then rage about it.... oh gee, we're sorta past that point aren't we?

As a side note I wonder how many objectives have been lost due to too many false alarms causing people to stop caring.

@Chaba.5410 said:

But also I'm pretty sure that the defenders yesterday who took offense at when I made useful suggestions were not new players.

I do think those are the worst. New players have an excuse; these people refuse to learn and need to get carried.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

easy solution, make all players and siege invulnerable until the attacker is inside the structure, and can attack them. Or make the

Then if the attackers are as good as they think they are (I emphasize the work think here), there would be no problem, they'd still simply avoid the defense, break down the gate or walls, go in and kill the defenders anyway, so there is really no problem here if Anet implements it.

On the flip side of this, we really don't want certain servers siege-abusing their towers/keeps up anymore than they do. There are 2 servers in particular that are major offenders at this (avoid fights and siege cap their structures).

Those of you whom are having trouble defending, get good at using a dragon banner, it's by far the best defense. Beats siege any day. Nothing seems to irritate attackers more than repeatedly destroying their siege with a dragon banner when it's just you defending against their map que. Part of getting good at it is having the proper class grab it. Don't be the player whose running say a spellbreaker, firebrand, or scourge and grabs it; mine as well just hand the structure and the battle over to the enemy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remove all siege except oil and rams, limit rams to 3 on a gate (where they can only hit the gate if the oil can hit them).Only siege damage contests structures.Make it so that all weapon skills require a target to cast. Now attackers and defenders have an equal chance (because now ALL weapon skills require line of sight).No more attackers painting walls with aoes (because they need a target and LOS to cast it, no more defender siege advantage inside - not that it really existed).

I could go on with the other suggestions, but this post was only talking about siege and walls, so I'll stop here for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ubi.4136 said:Remove all siege except oil and rams, limit rams to 3 on a gate (where they can only hit the gate if the oil can hit them).Only siege damage contests structures.Make it so that all weapon skills require a target to cast. Now attackers and defenders have an equal chance (because now ALL weapon skills require line of sight).No more attackers painting walls with aoes (because they need a target and LOS to cast it, no more defender siege advantage inside - not that it really existed).

I could go on with the other suggestions, but this post was only talking about siege and walls, so I'll stop here for now.Or...

You could just not stand on the walls.

It's the exact same thing after all. The argument here is that standing on the walls is death and gives the attacker the advantage. So why even do it? What's the point? What are you trying to do there? If you're standing inside the wall not attacking someone outside the wall... you have that exact equal situation you seek. They cant attack you, you cant attack them. Equal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@cobbah.3102 said:

@RedShark.9548 said:As if warclaw wasnt good enough for defenders to roll in en masse.How long do you want to keep away a far bigger zerg?Right now you have more than enough tools to slow them down for your reinforcememts to arrive. You have no reinforcements? Well you should lose it to a much bigger group then.

Much bigger toxic group ftw as most servers use , zergling mentality rules. Pffft

Dude... Even in reallife you could take big castles with a much bigger army. All you want it to be is untakable structures to hide behind.Honestly at what point would it be acceptable to take an objective in your opinion? If no defender is there at all?

@Arzurag.7506 said:

@RedShark.9548 said:As if warclaw wasnt good enough for defenders to roll in en masse.How long do you want to keep away a far bigger zerg?Right now you have more than enough tools to slow them down for your reinforcememts to arrive. You have no reinforcements? Well you should lose it to a much bigger group then.

Well, you can´t defend if there´s no defender or rather it´s pointlessto delay the inevitable when there are no reinforcements.

As it should be... If you have no reinforcements and cant hold it against a much bigger blob, then you should lose it.Same question to you.When exactly is it acceptable to take a structure in your opinion? If there is no scout, not a single defender?

You all make it seem like it should be impossible to take a keep, as long as there is atleast 1 person inside...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@RedShark.9548 said:

@RedShark.9548 said:As if warclaw wasnt good enough for defenders to roll in en masse.How long do you want to keep away a far bigger zerg?Right now you have more than enough tools to slow them down for your reinforcememts to arrive. You have no reinforcements? Well you should lose it to a much bigger group then.

Much bigger toxic group ftw as most servers use , zergling mentality rules. Pffft

Dude... Even in reallife you could take big castles with a much bigger army. All you want it to be is untakable structures to hide behind.Honestly at what point would it be acceptable to take an objective in your opinion? If no defender is there at all?

@RedShark.9548 said:As if warclaw wasnt good enough for defenders to roll in en masse.How long do you want to keep away a far bigger zerg?Right now you have more than enough tools to slow them down for your reinforcememts to arrive. You have no reinforcements? Well you should lose it to a much bigger group then.

Well, you can´t defend if there´s no defender or rather it´s pointlessto delay the inevitable when there are no reinforcements.

As it should be... If you have no reinforcements and cant hold it against a much bigger blob, then you should lose it.Same question to you.When exactly is it acceptable to take a structure in your opinion? If there is no scout, not a single defender?

You all make it seem like it should be impossible to take a keep, as long as there is atleast 1 person inside...

I think a part of the issue here is different hours of activity and people feeling they shouldn't lose everything when they have no one online.

I can understand the frustration of losing and feeling like there's no way to fight back, but in situations like those, people need to remind themselves that they can always come back later if they don't want to deal with it, or they can fight the good fight. Just because you're facing overwhelming numbers doesn't mean you should lay down and let the enemy roll you. Have fun with combat and enjoy the battle while it lasts.

For me, I love being outnumbered. It's fun because I don't have to go far to find a fight and I enjoy having to devise strategies to deal with fast responses from a massive group. I totally understand how it kills morale for some, but those people need to learn that the only way to truly lose is to give up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@RedShark.9548 said:

@RedShark.9548 said:As if warclaw wasnt good enough for defenders to roll in en masse.How long do you want to keep away a far bigger zerg?Right now you have more than enough tools to slow them down for your reinforcememts to arrive. You have no reinforcements? Well you should lose it to a much bigger group then.

Much bigger toxic group ftw as most servers use , zergling mentality rules. Pffft

Dude... Even in reallife you could take big castles with a much bigger army. All you want it to be is untakable structures to hide behind.Honestly at what point would it be acceptable to take an objective in your opinion? If no defender is there at all?

@RedShark.9548 said:As if warclaw wasnt good enough for defenders to roll in en masse.How long do you want to keep away a far bigger zerg?Right now you have more than enough tools to slow them down for your reinforcememts to arrive. You have no reinforcements? Well you should lose it to a much bigger group then.

Well, you can´t defend if there´s no defender or rather it´s pointlessto delay the inevitable when there are no reinforcements.

As it should be... If you have no reinforcements and cant hold it against a much bigger blob, then you should lose it.Same question to you.When exactly is it acceptable to take a structure in your opinion? If there is no scout, not a single defender?

You all make it seem like it should be impossible to take a keep, as long as there is atleast 1 person inside...

I think the problem the OP has (and several others), which I somewhat agree with, is it should take more than 25 seconds to take a T3 tower. More than 1 minute to take a T3 keep. Regardless of how many people were attacking or defending. Groups that know what they are doing can do that, from siege drop to flip, 25 seconds is ridiculous, especially since it likely took 2 hours or more to get the structure to T3. If you're lucky you might get a chance to use invulnerable, but in NA, it's almost always trolled right before the attack. Siege disablers are blocked because good groups are just that, and not every class has the option to make their attacks unblockable before trying to throw a disable. I totally agree that the structure should be lost, but the time to enter and flip is exactly what the ktrain blobs asked for and it's far too low. There needs to be a middle ground.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know the defenders got all the advantages the attackers have and more. You got the closest spawn, guild objective aura, walls, and more siege and supply. It's the defender's advantage that is too strong. Anet should nerf the defender's advantage, not buff it for people that can't play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ubi.4136 said:

@RedShark.9548 said:As if warclaw wasnt good enough for defenders to roll in en masse.How long do you want to keep away a far bigger zerg?Right now you have more than enough tools to slow them down for your reinforcememts to arrive. You have no reinforcements? Well you should lose it to a much bigger group then.

Much bigger toxic group ftw as most servers use , zergling mentality rules. Pffft

Dude... Even in reallife you could take big castles with a much bigger army. All you want it to be is untakable structures to hide behind.Honestly at what point would it be acceptable to take an objective in your opinion? If no defender is there at all?

@RedShark.9548 said:As if warclaw wasnt good enough for defenders to roll in en masse.How long do you want to keep away a far bigger zerg?Right now you have more than enough tools to slow them down for your reinforcememts to arrive. You have no reinforcements? Well you should lose it to a much bigger group then.

Well, you can´t defend if there´s no defender or rather it´s pointlessto delay the inevitable when there are no reinforcements.

As it should be... If you have no reinforcements and cant hold it against a much bigger blob, then you should lose it.Same question to you.When exactly is it acceptable to take a structure in your opinion? If there is no scout, not a single defender?

You all make it seem like it should be impossible to take a keep, as long as there is atleast 1 person inside...

I think the problem the OP has (and several others), which I somewhat agree with, is it should take more than 25 seconds to take a T3 tower. More than 1 minute to take a T3 keep. Regardless of how many people were attacking or defending. Groups that know what they are doing can do that, from siege drop to flip, 25 seconds is ridiculous, especially since it likely took 2 hours or more to get the structure to T3. If you're lucky you might get a chance to use invulnerable, but in NA, it's almost always trolled right before the attack. Siege disablers are blocked because good groups are just that, and not every class has the option to make their attacks unblockable before trying to throw a disable. I totally agree that the structure should be lost, but the time to enter and flip is exactly what the ktrain blobs asked for and it's far too low. There needs to be a middle ground.

Those numbers are not rly a thing, a full t3 keep takes more than 1 mimute to take, even when empty. Not to mention that structual invuln already is 1 whole minute when activated lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure you could build a bunch of omegas and sit on shield gens for hours blocking the bots and their treb fire. Or you could build a bunch of omegas and shield gens to take a keep in under a minute.

Hey ya know what people don't like spending an afternoon pressing 3 on a shield gen. People don't like doing callouts and falling back all day while waiting for the nonexistent backup to arrive.

People end up stacking to avoid the 20 hour cycle of watching the bandwagon walk by.

Servers and map cap abuse are what needs changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@RedShark.9548 said:

@Ubi.4136 said:

@RedShark.9548 said:As if warclaw wasnt good enough for defenders to roll in en masse.How long do you want to keep away a far bigger zerg?Right now you have more than enough tools to slow them down for your reinforcememts to arrive. You have no reinforcements? Well you should lose it to a much bigger group then.

Much bigger toxic group ftw as most servers use , zergling mentality rules. Pffft

Dude... Even in reallife you could take big castles with a much bigger army. All you want it to be is untakable structures to hide behind.Honestly at what point would it be acceptable to take an objective in your opinion? If no defender is there at all?

@RedShark.9548 said:As if warclaw wasnt good enough for defenders to roll in en masse.How long do you want to keep away a far bigger zerg?Right now you have more than enough tools to slow them down for your reinforcememts to arrive. You have no reinforcements? Well you should lose it to a much bigger group then.

Well, you can´t defend if there´s no defender or rather it´s pointlessto delay the inevitable when there are no reinforcements.

As it should be... If you have no reinforcements and cant hold it against a much bigger blob, then you should lose it.Same question to you.When exactly is it acceptable to take a structure in your opinion? If there is no scout, not a single defender?

You all make it seem like it should be impossible to take a keep, as long as there is atleast 1 person inside...

I think the problem the OP has (and several others), which I somewhat agree with, is it should take more than 25 seconds to take a T3 tower. More than 1 minute to take a T3 keep. Regardless of how many people were attacking or defending. Groups that know what they are doing can do that, from siege drop to flip, 25 seconds is ridiculous, especially since it likely took 2 hours or more to get the structure to T3. If you're lucky you might get a chance to use invulnerable, but in NA, it's almost always trolled right before the attack. Siege disablers are blocked because good groups are just that, and not every class has the option to make their attacks unblockable before trying to throw a disable. I totally agree that the structure should be lost, but the time to enter and flip is exactly what the ktrain blobs asked for and it's far too low. There needs to be a middle ground.

Those numbers are not rly a thing, a full t3 keep takes more than 1 mimute to take, even when empty. Not to mention that structual invuln already is 1 whole minute when activated lol

Not sure where you play or when, but those numbers are not something I made up. T3 towers are flipped before the swords even pop on it (which is 30 seconds). So we started timing certain megablobs, a T3 tower can be flipped in 25 seconds, from the second siege is dropped to the lord is dead. 25 whole seconds. It was only 45 seconds before all the crying T3 stuff was too hard to take, and anet agreed with the server hopping (paid gem transfer) superblobs, who just want to fight doors. Some T3 keeps require almost no time to flip. You can flip T3 hills in 50 seconds from siege drop to flip...if you are good, and know what you are doing. It should not be that easy, even if everyone is asleep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ubi.4136 said:

@Ubi.4136 said:

@RedShark.9548 said:As if warclaw wasnt good enough for defenders to roll in en masse.How long do you want to keep away a far bigger zerg?Right now you have more than enough tools to slow them down for your reinforcememts to arrive. You have no reinforcements? Well you should lose it to a much bigger group then.

Much bigger toxic group ftw as most servers use , zergling mentality rules. Pffft

Dude... Even in reallife you could take big castles with a much bigger army. All you want it to be is untakable structures to hide behind.Honestly at what point would it be acceptable to take an objective in your opinion? If no defender is there at all?

@RedShark.9548 said:As if warclaw wasnt good enough for defenders to roll in en masse.How long do you want to keep away a far bigger zerg?Right now you have more than enough tools to slow them down for your reinforcememts to arrive. You have no reinforcements? Well you should lose it to a much bigger group then.

Well, you can´t defend if there´s no defender or rather it´s pointlessto delay the inevitable when there are no reinforcements.

As it should be... If you have no reinforcements and cant hold it against a much bigger blob, then you should lose it.Same question to you.When exactly is it acceptable to take a structure in your opinion? If there is no scout, not a single defender?

You all make it seem like it should be impossible to take a keep, as long as there is atleast 1 person inside...

I think the problem the OP has (and several others), which I somewhat agree with, is it should take more than 25 seconds to take a T3 tower. More than 1 minute to take a T3 keep. Regardless of how many people were attacking or defending. Groups that know what they are doing can do that, from siege drop to flip, 25 seconds is ridiculous, especially since it likely took 2 hours or more to get the structure to T3. If you're lucky you might get a chance to use invulnerable, but in NA, it's almost always trolled right before the attack. Siege disablers are blocked because good groups are just that, and not every class has the option to make their attacks unblockable before trying to throw a disable. I totally agree that the structure should be lost, but the time to enter and flip is exactly what the ktrain blobs asked for and it's far too low. There needs to be a middle ground.

Those numbers are not rly a thing, a full t3 keep takes more than 1 mimute to take, even when empty. Not to mention that structual invuln already is 1 whole minute when activated lol

Not sure where you play or when, but those numbers are not something I made up. T3 towers are flipped before the swords even pop on it (which is 30 seconds). So we started timing certain megablobs, a T3 tower can be flipped in 25 seconds, from the second siege is dropped to the lord is dead. 25 whole seconds. It was only 45 seconds before all the crying T3 stuff was too hard to take, and anet agreed with the server hopping (paid gem transfer) superblobs, who just want to fight doors. Some T3 keeps require almost no time to flip. You can flip T3 hills in 50 seconds from siege drop to flip...if you are good, and know what you are doing. It should not be that easy, even if everyone is asleep.

Guess they dont karmatrain as hard, or atleast not when im online, i was never on a map with low amount of ppl where a keep was flipped that quick. That zerg must have been full dps to bust through gates and burst down a lord, so they didnt expect any competition anyways.Honestly i dont even care, if they are that many and you have nobody, well, why hinder their ktrain... Even if it took them 5 minutes then, would it change anything, if you still had nothing to fend them off?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ubi.4136 said:

@Ubi.4136 said:

@RedShark.9548 said:As if warclaw wasnt good enough for defenders to roll in en masse.How long do you want to keep away a far bigger zerg?Right now you have more than enough tools to slow them down for your reinforcememts to arrive. You have no reinforcements? Well you should lose it to a much bigger group then.

Much bigger toxic group ftw as most servers use , zergling mentality rules. Pffft

Dude... Even in reallife you could take big castles with a much bigger army. All you want it to be is untakable structures to hide behind.Honestly at what point would it be acceptable to take an objective in your opinion? If no defender is there at all?

@RedShark.9548 said:As if warclaw wasnt good enough for defenders to roll in en masse.How long do you want to keep away a far bigger zerg?Right now you have more than enough tools to slow them down for your reinforcememts to arrive. You have no reinforcements? Well you should lose it to a much bigger group then.

Well, you can´t defend if there´s no defender or rather it´s pointlessto delay the inevitable when there are no reinforcements.

As it should be... If you have no reinforcements and cant hold it against a much bigger blob, then you should lose it.Same question to you.When exactly is it acceptable to take a structure in your opinion? If there is no scout, not a single defender?

You all make it seem like it should be impossible to take a keep, as long as there is atleast 1 person inside...

I think the problem the OP has (and several others), which I somewhat agree with, is it should take more than 25 seconds to take a T3 tower. More than 1 minute to take a T3 keep. Regardless of how many people were attacking or defending. Groups that know what they are doing can do that, from siege drop to flip, 25 seconds is ridiculous, especially since it likely took 2 hours or more to get the structure to T3. If you're lucky you might get a chance to use invulnerable, but in NA, it's almost always trolled right before the attack. Siege disablers are blocked because good groups are just that, and not every class has the option to make their attacks unblockable before trying to throw a disable. I totally agree that the structure should be lost, but the time to enter and flip is exactly what the ktrain blobs asked for and it's far too low. There needs to be a middle ground.

Those numbers are not rly a thing, a full t3 keep takes more than 1 mimute to take, even when empty. Not to mention that structual invuln already is 1 whole minute when activated lol

Not sure where you play or when, but those numbers are not something I made up. T3 towers are flipped before the swords even pop on it (which is 30 seconds). So we started timing certain megablobs, a T3 tower can be flipped in 25 seconds, from the second siege is dropped to the lord is dead. 25 whole seconds. It was only 45 seconds before all the crying T3 stuff was too hard to take, and anet agreed with the server hopping (paid gem transfer) superblobs, who just want to fight doors. Some T3 keeps require almost no time to flip. You can flip T3 hills in 50 seconds from siege drop to flip...if you are good, and know what you are doing. It should not be that easy, even if everyone is asleep.Why shouldnt it be that easy, if no one defends it and no one scouts it? Would it matter if it took 25 seconds or 2.5 minutes? No it wouldnt. Which is why it's pointless to argue that "crying over T3 stuff being to hard to take" impact this. It had
heavy
impact on smallscale but for your "superblobs", the objective is still capped because the defending server failed at stopping that "superblob".

In a realistic and every day WvW scenario a T3 keep when defended can take hours to cap. Hell I've seen zergs spend 2 hours on it and still not cap it when they give up trying. T3 towers arent far behind, anything less than 20+ generally dont even bother because of the time it takes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ubi.4136 said:It was only 45 seconds before all the crying T3 stuff was too hard to take, and anet agreed with the server hopping (paid gem transfer) superblobs, who just want to fight doors. Some T3 keeps require almost no time to flip. You can flip T3 hills in 50 seconds from siege drop to flip...if you are good, and know what you are doing. It should not be that easy, even if everyone is asleep.

Because the worst would be to balance sieges on 50v1 situations rather than 50v50. If your server doesn't have enough people playing to defend, keeps will flip and so what?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Chaba.5410 said:

@Ubi.4136 said:It was only 45 seconds before all the crying T3 stuff was too hard to take, and anet agreed with the server hopping (paid gem transfer) superblobs, who just want to fight doors. Some T3 keeps require almost no time to flip. You can flip T3 hills in 50 seconds from siege drop to flip...if you are good, and know what you are doing. It should not be that easy, even if everyone is asleep.

Because the worst would be to balance sieges on 50v1 situations rather than 50v50. If your server doesn't have enough people playing to defend, keeps will flip and so what?

Keeps flip anyway, atacker just need to keep pushing and bug LoS with ac’s, rangers and eles, to clear any siege, mesmers scourges and fb will pull masses of players from the wall to outside and ok.

Thats how u win Zerg gameplay, but problem is that people only fight IF the take is a ktraintake to avoid effort,

There’s also the situation of players builds, where the server with less scourges will be wiped easilly, but that is another topic due classes in this game are made for awfull players feel happy with overperformance moments.

Gw2 is lame up and glitch cause it’s legal to win....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@RedShark.9548 said:

@RedShark.9548 said:As if warclaw wasnt good enough for defenders to roll in en masse.How long do you want to keep away a far bigger zerg?Right now you have more than enough tools to slow them down for your reinforcememts to arrive. You have no reinforcements? Well you should lose it to a much bigger group then.

Much bigger toxic group ftw as most servers use , zergling mentality rules. Pffft

Dude... Even in reallife you could take big castles with a much bigger army. All you want it to be is untakable structures to hide behind.Honestly at what point would it be acceptable to take an objective in your opinion? If no defender is there at all?

@RedShark.9548 said:As if warclaw wasnt good enough for defenders to roll in en masse.How long do you want to keep away a far bigger zerg?Right now you have more than enough tools to slow them down for your reinforcememts to arrive. You have no reinforcements? Well you should lose it to a much bigger group then.

Well, you can´t defend if there´s no defender or rather it´s pointlessto delay the inevitable when there are no reinforcements.

As it should be... If you have no reinforcements and cant hold it against a much bigger blob, then you should lose it.Same question to you.When exactly is it acceptable to take a structure in your opinion? If there is no scout, not a single defender?

You all make it seem like it should be impossible to take a keep, as long as there is atleast 1 person inside...

The problem is the lack of population. Anet never implemented an actual scaling to siege damage so if you´re outnumbered by a lot, the enemy will dominate the map without you being able to do anything. These weeks with such linking were horrible, though the outnumbered buff was quite nice due to it being available almost permanently.

Anyway, the population-issue is nothing that can actually be fixed without new influx of new players and Anet putting an end to server-hopping

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Arzurag.7506 said:

@RedShark.9548 said:As if warclaw wasnt good enough for defenders to roll in en masse.How long do you want to keep away a far bigger zerg?Right now you have more than enough tools to slow them down for your reinforcememts to arrive. You have no reinforcements? Well you should lose it to a much bigger group then.

Much bigger toxic group ftw as most servers use , zergling mentality rules. Pffft

Dude... Even in reallife you could take big castles with a much bigger army. All you want it to be is untakable structures to hide behind.Honestly at what point would it be acceptable to take an objective in your opinion? If no defender is there at all?

@RedShark.9548 said:As if warclaw wasnt good enough for defenders to roll in en masse.How long do you want to keep away a far bigger zerg?Right now you have more than enough tools to slow them down for your reinforcememts to arrive. You have no reinforcements? Well you should lose it to a much bigger group then.

Well, you can´t defend if there´s no defender or rather it´s pointlessto delay the inevitable when there are no reinforcements.

As it should be... If you have no reinforcements and cant hold it against a much bigger blob, then you should lose it.Same question to you.When exactly is it acceptable to take a structure in your opinion? If there is no scout, not a single defender?

You all make it seem like it should be impossible to take a keep, as long as there is atleast 1 person inside...

The problem is the lack of population. Anet never implemented an actual scaling to siege damage so if you´re outnumbered by a lot, the enemy will dominate the map without you being able to do anything. These weeks with such linking were horrible, though the outnumbered buff was quite nice due to it being available almost permanently.

Anyway, the population-issue is nothing that can actually be fixed without new influx of new players and Anet putting an end to server-hopping

Tell me about it.. When people see 60+ group on one team, 10 on the other team and maybe a handful on the poor red servers they seem to think its proper somehow..

Like im going to play CoD or battlefront when I know everyone is on a single team and its locked to any balancing.. heh yeah right.

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...