Disable golem capture point contribution

[Zebulon.1850]

It's high time to remove the ability for golems to prevent capping of points. The abuse of golems to prevent flipping of camps has gotten much worse recently, I usually see 5+ golems at camps now.

 

You shouldn't need a full zerg to flip a camp, that is just poor game design. 1 person shouldn't be able to stall for unlimited time based on just having golems at a camp.

 

Not sure how to attach this image - but

Example: https://imgur.com/a/MeMBJkK

 

Edit - at the bare minimum, if a golem is disabled, it shouldn't count for capture points.

Edited February 19, 2022 by Zebulon.1850

[Forgotten Legend.9281]

a slight clarification: golems themselves don't count. ONLY the player character inside of the golem counts toward capture.

 

however, i see the frustration from the OP, and frankly, i'd like to see what happens if a disabled golemed player is prevented from contributing to capture, since it's prevented from using any skills for the time.

[Caedmon.6798]

58 minutes ago, Zebulon.1850 said:

It's high time to remove the ability for golems to prevent capping of points. The abuse of golems to prevent flipping of camps has gotten much worse recently, I usually see 5+ golems at camps now.

 

You shouldn't need a full zerg to flip a camp, that is just poor game design. 1 person shouldn't be able to stall for unlimited time based on just having golems at a camp.

 

Not sure how to attach this image - but

Example: https://imgur.com/a/MeMBJkK

 

Edit - at the bare minimum, if a golem is disabled, it shouldn't count for capture points.

I made this same post about a year ago or longer,strangely..most people didn't even agree. This game mode became such a joke.

[TrollingDemigod.3041]

You could always, you know, just kill the dollies on their way?

[Caedmon.6798]

48 minutes ago, TrollingDemigod.3041 said:

You could always, you know, just kill the dollies on their way?

Have you even seen his screenshot ?

[Feyd Rautha.7298]

Bring back bannering the lord, we even have illusion and signets now.  :)

[Dawdler.8521]

Add it to the pile of incredibly simple things Anet should do but does not because reasons.

[Xenesis.6389]

20 minutes ago, Feyd Rautha.7298 said:

Bring back bannering the lord, we even have illusion and signets now.  🙂

So the boon blobs can take longer to cap a keep? no thanks.

[Zyreva.1078]

2 hours ago, TrollingDemigod.3041 said:

You could always, you know, just kill the dollies on their way?

If only invulnerable dolyaks weren't a thing ...

[Xenesis.6389]

Starting to see more of it too.. not sure why people trying so hard to save camps.

https://i.imgur.com/IBaLfDt.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/WVeGfZb.jpg

Edited February 20, 2022 by Xenesis.6389

[Dawdler.8521]

10 minutes ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

not sure why people trying so hard to save camps.

Foreign thought, but maybe they just want to win?

[HazyDaisy.4107]

This is a rare and severely extreme example of golems in a camp. 

 

But, if you're seeing upwards of 5 regularly, chances are that's a dominating server that's just trolling to troll and they wouldn't even need all 5 because you'd be plowed down by the zerg before you had a chance to disable 1. 

 

Neither of those scenarios are the norm for camp defense golems and shouldn't be illustrated as such in order to make a case for eliminating another form of valid defense.

[Zyreva.1078]

2 minutes ago, HazyDaisy.4107 said:

This is a rare and severely extreme example of golems in a camp. 

 

But, if you're seeing upwards of 5 regularly, chances are that's a dominating server that's just trolling to troll and they wouldn't even need all 5 because you'd be plowed down by the zerg before you had a chance to disable 1. 

 

Neither of those scenarios are the norm for camp defense golems and shouldn't be illustrated as such in order to make a case for eliminating another form of valid defense.

Doesn't matter if ther are 50 golems or 1, they shoudn't contest capture points for the same reason stealthed o invulnerable players can't. If you want to defend a camp, you should have to fight for it and not stall without having to do anything but sit in a golem.

[Magnuzone.8395]

  Solution: Leave the camp alone and actually go kill someone.

1 hour ago, HazyDaisy.4107 said:

This is a rare and severely extreme example of golems in a camp. 

 

Neither of those scenarios are the norm for camp defense golems and shouldn't be illustrated as such in order to make a case for eliminating another form of valid defense.

Agreed. This is a non issue.

[Avengedeath.4671]

Maybe just me but looked like maguuma owned that camp? They are infamous for being trolly in ebg?

[TheQuickFox.3826]

This is too funny. But I take that it is annoying and probably unwanted. I would ignore the camp for an hour and then come back. If they're still there they wasted an hour of play time and if they're gone they wasted a ton of golems and supplies. Don't give them attention or bodies and they get bored.

[Ronin.4501]

21 hours ago, HazyDaisy.4107 said:

This is a rare and severely extreme example of golems in a camp. 

 

But, if you're seeing upwards of 5 regularly, chances are that's a dominating server that's just trolling to troll and they wouldn't even need all 5 because you'd be plowed down by the zerg before you had a chance to disable 1. 

 

Neither of those scenarios are the norm for camp defense golems and shouldn't be illustrated as such in order to make a case for eliminating another form of valid defense.

Clearly you've never faced HoD in a match.  They routinely defend camps with multiple golems and multiple players for hours at a time, and it's not to troll.  They simply try to defend/upgrade every objective they hold.

Edited February 21, 2022 by Ronin.4501

[Sinmir.6504]

I'd say it's a trade off with Golems. If it didn't belong to the player that is in it then it might not even be how the builder was wanting it to be used. Every strike that is done to it can't be repaired, so if I fail to take  a camp but do a huge amount of damage to the Golem, try bringing it to a structure and I'll finish it off before it does much damage.

I've seen them defending a camp before, we had a big group but lost anyway. This was an upgraded camp that had chilling mist on at one point. Don't now how many Golems they threw at us to defend the camp, we destroyed loads and more kept appearing. Pretty sure they were all Omegas.

I went back to the waypoint feeling good about the battle even though we lost. They lost the supplies and blueprints needed to make those Golems. We were given less chance of an army of Golems being brought to one of our structures. Might have even annoyed an enemy commander that had intended to use them for that if they had previously been built and left at spawn to flip the map. "Let's travel flip the Red BL, we have an army of Golems ready to take their keeps." "Not any more, a few of us used most of them defending the nearby camp."

That's why I don't see a problem with them being used to defend and being able to contest.  If you use it and I damage it then that particular Golem is permanently damaged.

23 hours ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

Starting to see more of it too.. not sure why people trying so hard to save camps.

https://i.imgur.com/IBaLfDt.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/WVeGfZb.jpg

To upgrade keeps and towers, and the camp itself. More fortification, more PPT. If you don't save camps, only keeps and towers you'll only have basic keeps and towers.

Edited February 21, 2022 by Sinmir.6504

[Xenesis.6389]

11 minutes ago, Sinmir.6504 said:

To upgrade keeps and towers, and the camp itself. More fortification, more PPT. If you don't save camps, only keeps and towers you'll only have basic keeps and towers.

Thanks for the information, I played wvw for nine years and didn't know any of this.... 😏

 

I'm surprised the golem builders aren't in here complaining about participation loss.

[moonboi.1764]

Don’t lose participation, when the bags keep returning to the camp lol. 

[codesherpa.1275]

I can't imagine keeping all that siege refreshed.   They must of had a defender living inside that camp for many hours.  Most players eventually get bored 24/7 defending a camp since there would be long stretches of nothing.  I suppose it would be oddly satisfying to turn a simple supply camp into a weapons factory more difficult to take than a t3 tower.

[Zephyrus.9680]

Is the only intended purpose of siege to discourage fights? Because this is actually the best possible use of siege by allowing a fight to escalate as the whole map potentially comes to fight. If a zerg wins the fight they will have no problem destroying those golems. It's not like the golems themselves meaningfully contribute to the fight. Just because it stops solo roamers doesn't make it unintended. 

[MedievalThings.5417]

The golems are not a problem.  Even if it was a small problem, it's not as bad as superblobs trebbing everything from SMC for no effort tower captures.

[Zyreva.1078]

44 minutes ago, Zephyrus.9680 said:

Is the only intended purpose of siege to discourage fights? Because this is actually the best possible use of siege by allowing a fight to escalate as the whole map potentially comes to fight. If a zerg wins the fight they will have no problem destroying those golems. It's not like the golems themselves meaningfully contribute to the fight. Just because it stops solo roamers doesn't make it unintended. 

Just because it mainly hurts small scale doesn't mean it is intended either. Especially when considering that the design of camps make those the ideal focus points for smaller grps while towers and keeps might be what larger grps are supposed to fight for.  Also a lot of the time golems don't even result in zerg fights. The camps either end up being ignored for hours or a zerg just sweeps over them with little resistance. As such golems contesting capture points often do the opposite of encouraging fights.

[Zephyrus.9680]

1 hour ago, UmbraNoctis.1907 said:

Just because it mainly hurts small scale doesn't mean it is intended either. Especially when considering that the design of camps make those the ideal focus points for smaller grps while towers and keeps might be what larger grps are supposed to fight for.  Also a lot of the time golems don't even result in zerg fights. The camps either end up being ignored for hours or a zerg just sweeps over them with little resistance. As such golems contesting capture points often do the opposite of encouraging fights.

 

It only "hurts" roamers trying to sneak camps uncontested or small groups trying to 4v1 before the other side can respond. For actual fights it creates them. My server does this and it motivates large amounts of fights at all scales so that isn't an issue. 

 

I'm going to guess the real issue is the server attacking the camp was having trouble winning a fight in the first place. This is the only context where golems in a camp make sense. They can't be repaired and it takes a loong time to build that many so a server has to be in a decisively weaker position for that to happen. The argument would be without golems contesting they might have at least captured the camp before the other server could respond. Maybe there's a point about demoralization no one wants to admit but hurting fights is not what it does.