Warclaw: An In-depth Review.

Sobx.1758 · May 30, 2019

Precisely why people blob in WvW. They dont want your small fights. They want to roll you over, take the objective, and move on. There is zero flaw in playing the mode right, despite people insisting otherwise, or insisting it needs to be played their way.

Pretty sure you're the one that insists the mode needs to be played 'your way'? Smaller scale fights in WvW are a fact whether you like it or not, yet you're dismissing them "because people like blobbing up and farming objectives" -some people do, others don't. It could be easly argued that people 'blob up' because it requires less effort from the individual player and enables easier farming. Is it more fun than smaller scales fights though? It really depends who's answering. Roaming/small scale WvW is also a different experience from the spvp. Use your own advice and don't tell people how to play the mode that makes multiple playstyles valid.

Silinsar.6298 · May 30, 2019

@"SoV.5139" said:Precisely why people blob in WvW. They dont want your small fights. They want to roll you over, take the objective, and move on. There is zero flaw in playing the mode right, despite people insisting otherwise, or insisting it needs to be played their way.
Ironic, that they wont play the actual mode where small fights matter most, and instead lobby for a completely different mode to be changed to fit this description instead.

Ironic, that they won't play the actual mode where rolling over enemies with a overwhelming force earns more rewards (hint: PvE), and instead lobby for a completely different mode to be changed to fit their description instead.

WvW always has been including several playstyles. Zerging up has it's place in WvW, scouting, rroaming, havoc, guild raids with limited sizes etc. too. You're the one trying to tell people there's only "your" right way to play.

zengara.8301 · May 30, 2019

@Silinsar.6298 said:
@zengara.8301 said:-What I mean about weird, is that you create a huge scenario that heavily favours 1 side, you do not create a fair scenario were both sides are equal. And then it becomes more about ganking/NPC's helping out, you having to use all attacks or other weird stuff that heavily favours the one on mount instead of the person not on mount. you instinctively created a sceneraio were you un-mount on opponents side of the map (only way they can keep up) them having gankers or NPC's, while it could be on your side of the map, while you defending and decided to un-mount first or have gankers. That is why it is simply weird, it has nothing to do with actually un-mounting, but more to do with everything else that is going bad for you...

The scenario I created is pretty much you venturing into enemy territory when roaming and the enemy not being willing to give up his advantage or objective. If you are not going to an objective because someone's following you... nothing happens. Unless someone dismounts and engages, or waits for backup and then does so... If you go to claim an objective my scenario happens. If you assume players to be defensive and staying in the territory they are already controlling well... we're back to nothing happening. And one having to concede the advantage of higher speed by being the one entering enemy territory if they want any action at all. The only case where Warclaw is balanced is between 2 servers moving within a territory controlled by the 3rd one. And that, again, is 2 parties willing to move within a territory where another has the advantage.

@zengara.8301 said:And the last part.......I usually un-mount, if they do not attack. I leave. If they still are on their mount, it is not stalemate, they clearly just do not want to fight you....At the very least, alone.

Yeah, that can happen, but I don't see the point of enemy encounters in a PvP mode having 0 impact on the map and having no interactivity between you and the enemy to speak of. I get that some people don't want to fight certain other people under certain circumstances but let there be something happening between those anyway. E.g. an interesting chase to the next objective where the fleeing players can try to get to... This was happening before the mount was introduced, if you're on a zerg build you moved carefully, close to your objectives, waited for more people to move with you, made use of all of your skills to disengage from a fight etc. Sometimes you succeeded and sometimes not. And while a zerg build usually doesn't do well vs roaming specs it used to be an accomplishment for them to get away or to their zerg. Or they could outplay them with the build anyway. With the mount such encounters are uninteresting and unfun. You basically press forward and dodge if something big's flying at you. That's it, 2 buttons. Most of the time enemies can literally move through you when they haven't wasted their dodges, they don't even need to curve from your position more than the slightest bit. You don't even slow them. You're encountering enemies but other than them having to time 2-3 button presses your presence has zero impact.

Due to this getting somewhere on the map is barely a challenge anymore. Making it to north camp on alpine borders when there were a couple of enemy roamers around in itself was a little win, because you probably had to win a few fights or do some successful jukes when disengaging to get there. Now you just ride there.

Enemy encounters should matter, they should be a challenge and have an impact. Not "Eh, just run by each other if just one doesn't feel like it".Warclaw doesn't make WvW unplayable but it is a wrong direction and indicates a lack of understanding (or at least the unwillingness to finish the mechanic and proper counter play options before introducing it) for the game mode by the developers. And the track record of ANet isn't good when it comes to making new stuff work well in WvW, because they always seem to disregard some of the playstyles it contains.

-As I explained several times, that is about speed of the mount, or people defending objectives (I still do not have anything against defenders advantage, but seems like you do?) or any 100 of other things that creates this stalemate for some people (I still jump in, if only 1 opponent in camp). Not actually un-mounting=dis-advantage....That is exactly why it is weird, obviously 1 party want to fight, at least alone the other obviously do not, so they have to have 100000 guards before un-mounting becomes a dis-advantage? Sorry, but it is straight up weird, and the stalemate requires way more than just un-mounting (1 party not wanting to fight, NPC's, gankers), and has nothing to do with actual dis-mounting first gives a dis-advantage. I am basically trying to Isolate un-mounting, where the main focus is not 50 gankers or 10 npc's inside a keep because you want to solo it, but 2 people who want to fight each other.

To put it simply, since I could literally rotate the scenario (gankers, NPC's) and based on your theory, it suddenly becomes a dis-advantage to un-mount last? (It really just seems like you are against mounts/defenders advantage and speed of the mount. If you jump of first with the mount, it does simply not create a dis-advantage, unless if you see positioning as a major dis-advantage which I can grant you with specifically rangers, but even then you should be able to walk to them while they run away until 5 seconds is up?

-Because their build is created for blobs while yours is for 1v1? I got 2 builds, 1 staff build, around top DPS, but literally die in any 1v1. And a 1v1 build, where I win a lot of 1v1 and sometimes 1v2 (rarely 1v3+). There is no direct method behind which PvP fight mode WvW was created for. But morally it is simply hard to value yours over the idea of roamers fight roamers, because they created the ultimate build for that and blob builds fight blob builds. I mean, it is the same to jump a person who do not want to fight you, as ganking a lvl 30 in WoW while being 80 (Do not really play WoW, but I guess that is how it works) As a pvp'er, I guess you want to fight fair fights, and not just gank people who are build for blobbing or got green gear on (Obviously you can say that you do want to jump green gear, but then it becomes more about you not being able to fight people on your own level kind of thing). Or at the very least, it is very hard to argue that it is fair fight to jump a person, who is not build for it and wants to do something else, even if you have the chance to do so and they understand the rules in WvW.

Again, obviously you can say that it is a open pvp field, and just because they want to be optimal for a blob fights, it does not mean that it is wrong to jump them. But then it would just jump straight back to the "not being able to fight vs people who are build for 1v1"

You just seem to mangle together people who just defend their territories with actual roamers who wants to fight, and pull out the idea that you should be able to fight everyone, even people who is build for blobbing (which goes back to unfair fight, not the right build, lvl 80vs30, not being able to fight vs other roamers etc)

sephiroth.4217 · May 31, 2019

@SoV.5139 said:
@sephiroth.4217 said:
@SoV.5139 said:
@sephiroth.4217 said:
@SoV.5139 said:
@coro.3176 said:
@"zengara.8301" said:2: Maybe I am the only one not playing a full on burst zerker build, but I don't understand how people believe that the first one jumping off mount is at an disadvantage, I almost always dis-mount first rather than using number 1 skill, since it creates an easy way to locate where to CC the person or put an AOE, the animation is so amazingly long and damage so low that I always get ahead from first attacks (CC, damage for a while, person basically uses all form for stab/teleport utilities=Gg)

Imagine this: You and your opponent are 600 range away from each other, both mounted. You want to kill them. They want to kill you. You're both running a generic unspecified build (has damage, CC, sustain, mobility).

Whoever initiates is at a disadvantage because you need to dismount yourself to start attacking them. This means you are throwing away 10k of health, 3 dodges, and a ton of mobility. Your opponent can now kite and dodge while you waste your damage and mobility skills trying to dismount them. When you get close to dismounting them, they dismount themselves and start the fight fresh, while your skills are on cooldown having not done any damage to their actual health.

The one who stayed on their mount is playing the mode correctly.

When they give us the ability to dismount other players from our own mount the gankers will have their daddys records back.

When I want fair isolated 1v1s I play PVP.

then you be playing PvP wrong because that's what duelling servers are for.

Dismounting skills would also heavily favour zergs and numbers over solo roaming gankers.please stop with this ganksters paradise memes. its complete dribble.

Nope. I play the modes correctly - both PVP and WVW.

Those who refuse to play the modes correctly are the ones asking for the changes to favor their own playstyle at the expense of others - in a game that already has a mode far more similar to what they are asking for - its just not the one they are trying to get changed.

Stop complaining that football needs to be more like basketball, and just go to the part of the park with the basketball court on it.

if you pvp for duels, then you ARE playing it wrong.PvP is a team game of 5 people centered around holding nodes.

and again... please stop with the ganksters paradise meme dribble.

Its actually quite concerning how little thought is put forward.

Its also concerning that WvW is no longer an open world pvp map and that pvp is for dueling.like, when did that happen?To roam is to play WvW wrong and to duel during pvp matches is playing it right?No wonder both game modes are spinning in the toilet.

Youre right, it is concerning indeed. For instance: WVW is not dueling mode. Sure you can roam, but people playing the mode correctly will escape you when they arent looking for 1v1s, or zerg roll you. This is what happens when you get on the football field with basketball gear. You dont get to play iso-ball there. That gets played on the basketball court. This park has one of those, so why demand the football field be changed to a basketball court as well?

Anyway, your argument is a strawman, as I never stated I like to duel in PVP matches. Since you cannot address the real argument you had to make this "dueling" stuff up in order to have something to oppose. I do PVP when I want more isolated 1v1s, where everyone else is playing a PVP optimized build (rather than chasing group support builds who are NOT looking for 1v1 combat across maps). While I can get ganked there, its not always strategically sound for the other team to do so as they leave points open. This is the mode you want to play if you want smaller fights to matter. Not WVW.

Lets have a look here."When I want fair isolated 1v1s I play PVP." - Sov"then you be playing PvP wrong because that's what duelling servers are for." - Sephiroth"Nope. I play the modes correctly - both PVP and WVW" - Sov

You don't even know the meaning of the words you're using.You're talking about football fields and junk. You can't even put together an analogy that makes sense or is relevant.Strait up ridiculous, seriously.

As I said, no wonder both game modes are spinning in the toilet.WvW is a mode that caters to all open world PvP. (or has for 6 years anyway)PvP matches are 5 players, no one duels in the matches (unless they are below silver) because there are dueling servers for that.

You literally cant tell people they are playing open world PvP wrong, its like telling people they are doing open world PvE wrong.Youre trying to enforce your ways upon everyone else..

EDiT: looks like quite a few people have pointed this out to you.

g fueled.1279 · May 31, 2019

Some people are happy now because they think mounts prevent them from getting ganked, but imo the opposite is true. Me and my friends usually try to fight people fairly as in even number fights. So like if we see 1 roamer running around, we don't all gang up on that individual. But with the introduction of mounts, it turned me and my friends into gankers because it takes a team effort to take them off their mount. I can't count the number of stare downs i had with people on mounts. And also people trolling - like getting very close to my group knowing we can't do anything about it. I miss fighting anyone I encountered but now that's not possible in wvw.

Also there are those that say mounts prevent spawn camping. But I never had those issues when I'm even on a necro. There are multiple exits in every map, people think just because they can't exit from the main opening, they can't get out and cry about getting spawn camped.

There's a lot of stuff I want to say but I agree with what someone said on this thread about mounts being a gimmick to bring in more money by having people purchase pof and possibly mount skins.

Silinsar.6298 · May 31, 2019

@zengara.8301 said:
@Silinsar.6298 said:
@zengara.8301 said:-What I mean about weird, is that you create a huge scenario that heavily favours 1 side, you do not create a fair scenario were both sides are equal. And then it becomes more about ganking/NPC's helping out, you having to use all attacks or other weird stuff that heavily favours the one on mount instead of the person not on mount. you instinctively created a sceneraio were you un-mount on opponents side of the map (only way they can keep up) them having gankers or NPC's, while it could be on your side of the map, while you defending and decided to un-mount first or have gankers. That is why it is simply weird, it has nothing to do with actually un-mounting, but more to do with everything else that is going bad for you...

The scenario I created is pretty much you venturing into enemy territory when roaming and the enemy not being willing to give up his advantage or objective. If you are not going to an objective because someone's following you... nothing happens. Unless someone dismounts and engages, or waits for backup and then does so... If you go to claim an objective my scenario happens. If you assume players to be defensive and staying in the territory they are already controlling well... we're back to nothing happening. And one having to concede the advantage of higher speed by being the one entering enemy territory if they want any action at all. The only case where Warclaw is balanced is between 2 servers moving within a territory controlled by the 3rd one. And that, again, is 2 parties willing to move within a territory where another has the advantage.

@zengara.8301 said:And the last part.......I usually un-mount, if they do not attack. I leave. If they still are on their mount, it is not stalemate, they clearly just do not want to fight you....At the very least, alone.

Yeah, that can happen, but I don't see the point of enemy encounters in a PvP mode having 0 impact on the map and having no interactivity between you and the enemy to speak of. I get that some people don't want to fight certain other people under certain circumstances but let there be something happening between those anyway. E.g. an interesting chase to the next objective where the fleeing players can try to get to... This was happening before the mount was introduced, if you're on a zerg build you moved carefully, close to your objectives, waited for more people to move with you, made use of all of your skills to disengage from a fight etc. Sometimes you succeeded and sometimes not. And while a zerg build usually doesn't do well vs roaming specs it used to be an accomplishment for them to get away or to their zerg. Or they could outplay them with the build anyway. With the mount such encounters are uninteresting and unfun. You basically press forward and dodge if something big's flying at you. That's it, 2 buttons. Most of the time enemies can literally move through you when they haven't wasted their dodges, they don't even need to curve from your position more than the slightest bit. You don't even slow them. You're encountering enemies but other than them having to time 2-3 button presses your presence has zero impact.

Due to this getting somewhere on the map is barely a challenge anymore. Making it to north camp on alpine borders when there were a couple of enemy roamers around in itself was a little win, because you probably had to win a few fights or do some successful jukes when disengaging to get there. Now you just ride there.

Enemy encounters should matter, they should be a challenge and have an impact. Not "Eh, just run by each other if just one doesn't feel like it".Warclaw doesn't make WvW unplayable but it is a wrong direction and indicates a lack of understanding (or at least the unwillingness to finish the mechanic and proper counter play options before introducing it) for the game mode by the developers. And the track record of ANet isn't good when it comes to making new stuff work well in WvW, because they always seem to disregard some of the playstyles it contains.

-As I explained several times, that is about speed of the mount, or people defending objectives (I still do not have anything against defenders advantage, but seems like you do?) or any 100 of other things that creates this stalemate for some people (I still jump in, if only 1 opponent in camp). Not actually un-mounting=dis-advantage....That is exactly why it is weird, obviously 1 party want to fight, at least alone the other obviously do not, so they have to have 100000 guards before un-mounting becomes a dis-advantage? Sorry, but it is straight up weird, and the stalemate requires way more than just un-mounting (1 party not wanting to fight, NPC's, gankers), and has nothing to do with actual dis-mounting first gives a dis-advantage. I am basically trying to Isolate un-mounting, where the main focus is not 50 gankers or 10 npc's inside a keep because you want to solo it, but 2 people who want to fight each other.

No, my point is that being or remaining on the mount longer than the enemy is pretty much always an advantage. And if no one wants to give up that advantage no one fights. This is the stalemate: 2 players meeting and none getting of the mount. If the enemy doesn't want to fight, and you move on to cap a camp, the process of doing so again puts you at a disadvantage because the enemy can follow and then add to the fight while you're busy fighting NPCs. And you can't force a fight with the enemy before attacking the camp because he can keep mounted and jump away, just to come back again.But yes, I don't like the "defenders advantage" when it comes to open field fights because it discourages starting them, and I like to fight in WvW.

@zengara.8301 said:To put it simply, since I could literally rotate the scenario (gankers, NPC's) and based on your theory, it suddenly becomes a dis-advantage to un-mount last? (It really just seems like you are against mounts/defenders advantage and speed of the mount. If you jump of first with the mount, it does simply not create a dis-advantage, unless if you see positioning as a major dis-advantage which I can grant you with specifically rangers, but even then you should be able to walk to them while they run away until 5 seconds is up?

I don't really get how that rotated scenario is supposed to look like, can you try to describe that in more detail?

@zengara.8301 said:-Because their build is created for blobs while yours is for 1v1? I got 2 builds, 1 staff build, around top DPS, but literally die in any 1v1. And a 1v1 build, where I win a lot of 1v1 and sometimes 1v2 (rarely 1v3+). There is no direct method behind which PvP fight mode WvW was created for. But morally it is simply hard to value yours over the idea of roamers fight roamers, because they created the ultimate build for that and blob builds fight blob builds. I mean, it is the same to jump a person who do not want to fight you, as ganking a lvl 30 in WoW while being 80 (Do not really play WoW, but I guess that is how it works) As a pvp'er, I guess you want to fight fair fights, and not just gank people who are build for blobbing or got green gear on (Obviously you can say that you do want to jump green gear, but then it becomes more about you not being able to fight people on your own level kind of thing). Or at the very least, it is very hard to argue that it is fair fight to jump a person, who is not build for it and wants to do something else, even if you have the chance to do so and they understand the rules in WvW.
Again, obviously you can say that it is a open pvp field, and just because they want to be optimal for a blob fights, it does not mean that it is wrong to jump them. But then it would just jump straight back to the "not being able to fight vs people who are build for 1v1"
You just seem to mangle together people who just defend their territories with actual roamers who wants to fight, and pull out the idea that you should be able to fight everyone, even people who is build for blobbing (which goes back to unfair fight, not the right build, lvl 80vs30, not being able to fight vs other roamers etc)

I get that there are zerg and roaming builds. And yes, I think roamers should be able to interfere with people running back to the zerg to some extent. While taking down one zergling running to his zerg isn't an interesting fight, they usually tend to stack up and become more, until at some point you have to retreat or die. And if they know some roamers are there, they could always just wait for a couple people more to show up. I get that getting picked off isn't funny, as a roamer you get rolled over by a zergs too. Both these things are part of WvW. You're not supposed to have a safety net that prevents any situation in which your build isn't 100% effective. At least that's not what I think open world(-ish) PvP is about. That's why I don't like the mount, it's a tool for avoiding any uncomfortable situation in which you might have to deal with a disadvantage. It takes a lot of danger & excitement out of WvW. While Warclaw can be used to avoid unfair fights stacked against you, it can also be used to avoid any fair fights and force unfair fights stacked in your favor. E.g. some zerglings just skip you with mount to turn around and come back to gank you when they notice some more people from their server are showing up.

If you look exclusively at roamer vs roamer fights (without making the scenario complicated), it just encourages skipping any encounter you aren't sure is a favorable matchup for you. Some people will only participate in fights they know they'll win. Imagine there'd be a q for sPvP where plat players could choose to only get matches against silver or bronze. That's what roaming feels like from time to time now. Some gang up and chase unprepared and outnumbered players, dismount them with specialized range builds, and gank them. If you and / or a couple of other players go after them and would actually put up a fight, they mount and run because you aren't free kills.

zengara.8301 · May 31, 2019

@Silinsar.6298 said:
@zengara.8301 said:
@Silinsar.6298 said:
@zengara.8301 said:-What I mean about weird, is that you create a huge scenario that heavily favours 1 side, you do not create a fair scenario were both sides are equal. And then it becomes more about ganking/NPC's helping out, you having to use all attacks or other weird stuff that heavily favours the one on mount instead of the person not on mount. you instinctively created a sceneraio were you un-mount on opponents side of the map (only way they can keep up) them having gankers or NPC's, while it could be on your side of the map, while you defending and decided to un-mount first or have gankers. That is why it is simply weird, it has nothing to do with actually un-mounting, but more to do with everything else that is going bad for you...

The scenario I created is pretty much you venturing into enemy territory when roaming and the enemy not being willing to give up his advantage or objective. If you are not going to an objective because someone's following you... nothing happens. Unless someone dismounts and engages, or waits for backup and then does so... If you go to claim an objective my scenario happens. If you assume players to be defensive and staying in the territory they are already controlling well... we're back to nothing happening. And one having to concede the advantage of higher speed by being the one entering enemy territory if they want any action at all. The only case where Warclaw is balanced is between 2 servers moving within a territory controlled by the 3rd one. And that, again, is 2 parties willing to move within a territory where another has the advantage.

@zengara.8301 said:And the last part.......I usually un-mount, if they do not attack. I leave. If they still are on their mount, it is not stalemate, they clearly just do not want to fight you....At the very least, alone.

Yeah, that can happen, but I don't see the point of enemy encounters in a PvP mode having 0 impact on the map and having no interactivity between you and the enemy to speak of. I get that some people don't want to fight certain other people under certain circumstances but let there be something happening between those anyway. E.g. an interesting chase to the next objective where the fleeing players can try to get to... This was happening before the mount was introduced, if you're on a zerg build you moved carefully, close to your objectives, waited for more people to move with you, made use of all of your skills to disengage from a fight etc. Sometimes you succeeded and sometimes not. And while a zerg build usually doesn't do well vs roaming specs it used to be an accomplishment for them to get away or to their zerg. Or they could outplay them with the build anyway. With the mount such encounters are uninteresting and unfun. You basically press forward and dodge if something big's flying at you. That's it, 2 buttons. Most of the time enemies can literally move through you when they haven't wasted their dodges, they don't even need to curve from your position more than the slightest bit. You don't even slow them. You're encountering enemies but other than them having to time 2-3 button presses your presence has zero impact.

Due to this getting somewhere on the map is barely a challenge anymore. Making it to north camp on alpine borders when there were a couple of enemy roamers around in itself was a little win, because you probably had to win a few fights or do some successful jukes when disengaging to get there. Now you just ride there.

Enemy encounters should matter, they should be a challenge and have an impact. Not "Eh, just run by each other if just one doesn't feel like it".Warclaw doesn't make WvW unplayable but it is a wrong direction and indicates a lack of understanding (or at least the unwillingness to finish the mechanic and proper counter play options before introducing it) for the game mode by the developers. And the track record of ANet isn't good when it comes to making new stuff work well in WvW, because they always seem to disregard some of the playstyles it contains.

-As I explained several times, that is about speed of the mount, or people defending objectives (I still do not have anything against defenders advantage, but seems like you do?) or any 100 of other things that creates this stalemate for some people (I still jump in, if only 1 opponent in camp). Not actually un-mounting=dis-advantage....That is exactly why it is weird, obviously 1 party want to fight, at least alone the other obviously do not, so they have to have 100000 guards before un-mounting becomes a dis-advantage? Sorry, but it is straight up weird, and the stalemate requires way more than just un-mounting (1 party not wanting to fight, NPC's, gankers), and has nothing to do with actual dis-mounting first gives a dis-advantage. I am basically trying to Isolate un-mounting, where the main focus is not 50 gankers or 10 npc's inside a keep because you want to solo it, but 2 people who want to fight each other.

No, my point is that being or remaining on the mount longer than the enemy is pretty much always an advantage. And if no one wants to give up that advantage no one fights. This is the stalemate: 2 players meeting and none getting of the mount. If the enemy doesn't want to fight, and you move on to cap a camp, the process of doing so again puts you at a disadvantage because the enemy can follow and then add to the fight while you're busy fighting NPCs. And you can't force a fight with the enemy before attacking the camp because he can keep mounted and jump away, just to come back again.But yes, I don't like the "defenders advantage" when it comes to open field fights because it discourages starting them, and I like to fight in WvW.

@zengara.8301 said:To put it simply, since I could literally rotate the scenario (gankers, NPC's) and based on your theory, it suddenly becomes a dis-advantage to un-mount last? (It really just seems like you are against mounts/defenders advantage and speed of the mount. If you jump of first with the mount, it does simply not create a dis-advantage, unless if you see positioning as a major dis-advantage which I can grant you with specifically rangers, but even then you should be able to walk to them while they run away until 5 seconds is up?

I don't really get how that rotated scenario is supposed to look like, can you try to describe that in more detail?

@zengara.8301 said:-Because their build is created for blobs while yours is for 1v1? I got 2 builds, 1 staff build, around top DPS, but literally die in any 1v1. And a 1v1 build, where I win a lot of 1v1 and sometimes 1v2 (rarely 1v3+). There is no direct method behind which PvP fight mode WvW was created for. But morally it is simply hard to value yours over the idea of roamers fight roamers, because they created the ultimate build for that and blob builds fight blob builds. I mean, it is the same to jump a person who do not want to fight you, as ganking a lvl 30 in WoW while being 80 (Do not really play WoW, but I guess that is how it works) As a pvp'er, I guess you want to fight fair fights, and not just gank people who are build for blobbing or got green gear on (Obviously you can say that you do want to jump green gear, but then it becomes more about you not being able to fight people on your own level kind of thing). Or at the very least, it is very hard to argue that it is fair fight to jump a person, who is not build for it and wants to do something else, even if you have the chance to do so and they understand the rules in WvW.
Again, obviously you can say that it is a open pvp field, and just because they want to be optimal for a blob fights, it does not mean that it is wrong to jump them. But then it would just jump straight back to the "not being able to fight vs people who are build for 1v1"
You just seem to mangle together people who just defend their territories with actual roamers who wants to fight, and pull out the idea that you should be able to fight everyone, even people who is build for blobbing (which goes back to unfair fight, not the right build, lvl 80vs30, not being able to fight vs other roamers etc)

I get that there are zerg and roaming builds. And yes, I think roamers should be able to interfere with people running back to the zerg to some extent. While taking down one zergling running to his zerg isn't an interesting fight, they usually tend to stack up and become more, until at some point you have to retreat or die. And if they know some roamers are there, they could always just wait for a couple people more to show up. I get that getting picked off isn't funny, as a roamer you get rolled over by a zergs too. Both these things are part of WvW. You're not supposed to have a safety net that prevents any situation in which your build isn't 100% effective. At least that's not what I think open world(-ish) PvP is about. That's why I don't like the mount, it's a tool for avoiding any uncomfortable situation in which you might have to deal with a disadvantage. It takes a lot of danger & excitement out of WvW.

While Warclaw can be used to avoid unfair fights stacked against you, it can also be used to avoid any fair fights and force unfair fights stacked in your favor.

E.g. some zerglings just skip you with mount to turn around and come back to gank you when they notice some more people from their server are showing up.

If you look exclusively at roamer vs roamer fights (without making the scenario complicated), it just encourages skipping any encounter you aren't sure is a favorable matchup for you. Some people will only participate in fights they know they'll win. Imagine there'd be a q for sPvP where plat players could choose to only get matches against silver or bronze. That's what roaming feels like from time to time now. Some gang up and chase unprepared and outnumbered players, dismount them with specialized range builds, and gank them. If you and / or a couple of other players go after them and would actually put up a fight, they mount and run because you aren't free kills.

-I will just jump to the second point, since that answers your first one as well:If you un-mount first in your own camp and wait for the opponent to dismount secondly, or if you un-mount first but call for gankers to come to your field.....In the same respect, it creates directly the same "dis-advantages" as you provide with the idea if you dis-mount first... Beside, the only way there is a disadvantage, is if at least 1 of them do not want to fight, since you can not attack if on the mount, and if you do, you are in a animation as written previously. There is no inherent dis-advantage from just dismounting in a open field beside positioning to some respect, but that happens in a 1v1 anyways.....All your disadvantages just require everything but the actual dismounting to be in focus, which can happen either way if you dismount first or last, in any field, I dont know how much more I need to explain this, but this should suffice why I called the scenarios weird (favours heavily the person that dismount last, to give the idea that they got a dis-advantage.....even though you can flip it, and it would be literally same disadvantage to the one dismounting last).

-Ok, I stated that above. I personally just believe that roamers should fight others who wants to fight, since it does create the whole lvl 80 vs lvl 30 scenario. "Again, obviously you can say that it is a open pvp field, and just because they want to be optimal for a blob fights, it does not mean that it is wrong to jump them. But then it would just jump straight back to the "not being able to fight vs people who are build for 1v1""

After that you go into the idea that mounts should not be a thing in WvW, and kinda contradict yourself a few times, almost creating this scewed picture of mounts only being beneficial to the opponent. Being able to avoid fights, but also handpicking them when want to....Ehmmm about the whole remove mounts, I simply just disagree with it. I like zerglings more than gankers to be completely honest. But that is subjective

Well I did try to simplify it by saying what I usually encounter vs what I don't (people stalking me with mounts). And the idea that gankers only jump people they want to jump, that is very true, but people did that anyways before. They just used to do it a lot more, since it was almost impossible to get away if alone. But then you kinda have to focus on who is a ganker, is it the people in enemy territories, trying to jump ppl between garri/bay/sm in front of other keeps, or people who defend their own territories

Silinsar.6298 · May 31, 2019

@zengara.8301 said:
@Silinsar.6298 said:
@zengara.8301 said:
@Silinsar.6298 said:
@zengara.8301 said:-What I mean about weird, is that you create a huge scenario that heavily favours 1 side, you do not create a fair scenario were both sides are equal. And then it becomes more about ganking/NPC's helping out, you having to use all attacks or other weird stuff that heavily favours the one on mount instead of the person not on mount. you instinctively created a sceneraio were you un-mount on opponents side of the map (only way they can keep up) them having gankers or NPC's, while it could be on your side of the map, while you defending and decided to un-mount first or have gankers. That is why it is simply weird, it has nothing to do with actually un-mounting, but more to do with everything else that is going bad for you...

The scenario I created is pretty much you venturing into enemy territory when roaming and the enemy not being willing to give up his advantage or objective. If you are not going to an objective because someone's following you... nothing happens. Unless someone dismounts and engages, or waits for backup and then does so... If you go to claim an objective my scenario happens. If you assume players to be defensive and staying in the territory they are already controlling well... we're back to nothing happening. And one having to concede the advantage of higher speed by being the one entering enemy territory if they want any action at all. The only case where Warclaw is balanced is between 2 servers moving within a territory controlled by the 3rd one. And that, again, is 2 parties willing to move within a territory where another has the advantage.

@zengara.8301 said:And the last part.......I usually un-mount, if they do not attack. I leave. If they still are on their mount, it is not stalemate, they clearly just do not want to fight you....At the very least, alone.

Yeah, that can happen, but I don't see the point of enemy encounters in a PvP mode having 0 impact on the map and having no interactivity between you and the enemy to speak of. I get that some people don't want to fight certain other people under certain circumstances but let there be something happening between those anyway. E.g. an interesting chase to the next objective where the fleeing players can try to get to... This was happening before the mount was introduced, if you're on a zerg build you moved carefully, close to your objectives, waited for more people to move with you, made use of all of your skills to disengage from a fight etc. Sometimes you succeeded and sometimes not. And while a zerg build usually doesn't do well vs roaming specs it used to be an accomplishment for them to get away or to their zerg. Or they could outplay them with the build anyway. With the mount such encounters are uninteresting and unfun. You basically press forward and dodge if something big's flying at you. That's it, 2 buttons. Most of the time enemies can literally move through you when they haven't wasted their dodges, they don't even need to curve from your position more than the slightest bit. You don't even slow them. You're encountering enemies but other than them having to time 2-3 button presses your presence has zero impact.

Due to this getting somewhere on the map is barely a challenge anymore. Making it to north camp on alpine borders when there were a couple of enemy roamers around in itself was a little win, because you probably had to win a few fights or do some successful jukes when disengaging to get there. Now you just ride there.

Enemy encounters should matter, they should be a challenge and have an impact. Not "Eh, just run by each other if just one doesn't feel like it".Warclaw doesn't make WvW unplayable but it is a wrong direction and indicates a lack of understanding (or at least the unwillingness to finish the mechanic and proper counter play options before introducing it) for the game mode by the developers. And the track record of ANet isn't good when it comes to making new stuff work well in WvW, because they always seem to disregard some of the playstyles it contains.

-As I explained several times, that is about speed of the mount, or people defending objectives (I still do not have anything against defenders advantage, but seems like you do?) or any 100 of other things that creates this stalemate for some people (I still jump in, if only 1 opponent in camp). Not actually un-mounting=dis-advantage....That is exactly why it is weird, obviously 1 party want to fight, at least alone the other obviously do not, so they have to have 100000 guards before un-mounting becomes a dis-advantage? Sorry, but it is straight up weird, and the stalemate requires way more than just un-mounting (1 party not wanting to fight, NPC's, gankers), and has nothing to do with actual dis-mounting first gives a dis-advantage. I am basically trying to Isolate un-mounting, where the main focus is not 50 gankers or 10 npc's inside a keep because you want to solo it, but 2 people who want to fight each other.

No, my point is that being or remaining on the mount longer than the enemy is pretty much always an advantage. And if no one wants to give up that advantage no one fights. This is the stalemate: 2 players meeting and none getting of the mount. If the enemy doesn't want to fight, and you move on to cap a camp, the process of doing so again puts you at a disadvantage because the enemy can follow and then add to the fight while you're busy fighting NPCs. And you can't force a fight with the enemy before attacking the camp because he can keep mounted and jump away, just to come back again.But yes, I don't like the "defenders advantage" when it comes to open field fights because it discourages starting them, and I like to fight in WvW.

@zengara.8301 said:To put it simply, since I could literally rotate the scenario (gankers, NPC's) and based on your theory, it suddenly becomes a dis-advantage to un-mount last? (It really just seems like you are against mounts/defenders advantage and speed of the mount. If you jump of first with the mount, it does simply not create a dis-advantage, unless if you see positioning as a major dis-advantage which I can grant you with specifically rangers, but even then you should be able to walk to them while they run away until 5 seconds is up?

I don't really get how that rotated scenario is supposed to look like, can you try to describe that in more detail?

@zengara.8301 said:-Because their build is created for blobs while yours is for 1v1? I got 2 builds, 1 staff build, around top DPS, but literally die in any 1v1. And a 1v1 build, where I win a lot of 1v1 and sometimes 1v2 (rarely 1v3+). There is no direct method behind which PvP fight mode WvW was created for. But morally it is simply hard to value yours over the idea of roamers fight roamers, because they created the ultimate build for that and blob builds fight blob builds. I mean, it is the same to jump a person who do not want to fight you, as ganking a lvl 30 in WoW while being 80 (Do not really play WoW, but I guess that is how it works) As a pvp'er, I guess you want to fight fair fights, and not just gank people who are build for blobbing or got green gear on (Obviously you can say that you do want to jump green gear, but then it becomes more about you not being able to fight people on your own level kind of thing). Or at the very least, it is very hard to argue that it is fair fight to jump a person, who is not build for it and wants to do something else, even if you have the chance to do so and they understand the rules in WvW.
Again, obviously you can say that it is a open pvp field, and just because they want to be optimal for a blob fights, it does not mean that it is wrong to jump them. But then it would just jump straight back to the "not being able to fight vs people who are build for 1v1"
You just seem to mangle together people who just defend their territories with actual roamers who wants to fight, and pull out the idea that you should be able to fight everyone, even people who is build for blobbing (which goes back to unfair fight, not the right build, lvl 80vs30, not being able to fight vs other roamers etc)

I get that there are zerg and roaming builds. And yes, I think roamers should be able to interfere with people running back to the zerg to some extent. While taking down one zergling running to his zerg isn't an interesting fight, they usually tend to stack up and become more, until at some point you have to retreat or die. And if they know some roamers are there, they could always just wait for a couple people more to show up. I get that getting picked off isn't funny, as a roamer you get rolled over by a zergs too. Both these things are part of WvW. You're not supposed to have a safety net that prevents any situation in which your build isn't 100% effective. At least that's not what I think open world(-ish) PvP is about. That's why I don't like the mount, it's a tool for avoiding any uncomfortable situation in which you might have to deal with a disadvantage. It takes a lot of danger & excitement out of WvW.

While Warclaw can be used to avoid unfair fights stacked against you, it can also be used to avoid any fair fights and force unfair fights stacked in your favor.

E.g. some zerglings just skip you with mount to turn around and come back to gank you when they notice some more people from their server are showing up.

If you look exclusively at roamer vs roamer fights (without making the scenario complicated), it just encourages skipping any encounter you aren't sure is a favorable matchup for you. Some people will only participate in fights they know they'll win. Imagine there'd be a q for sPvP where plat players could choose to only get matches against silver or bronze. That's what roaming feels like from time to time now. Some gang up and chase unprepared and outnumbered players, dismount them with specialized range builds, and gank them. If you and / or a couple of other players go after them and would actually put up a fight, they mount and run because you aren't free kills.

[...]

Honestly, at this point I think we just fail to understand each other. I don't really get the point of your arguments and it seems to me you're not grasping what I'm trying to say either. Maybe we're just stuck looking at this from different angles. If someone out there reading through this gets both our views and can think up a way to summarize it in a comprehensible way I'd appreciate it. Otherwise, I probably said everything I wanted to say and going further would just be an argument for the sake of it.

SoV.5139 · May 31, 2019

@sephiroth.4217 said:
@SoV.5139 said:
@sephiroth.4217 said:
@SoV.5139 said:
@sephiroth.4217 said:
@SoV.5139 said:
@coro.3176 said:
@"zengara.8301" said:2: Maybe I am the only one not playing a full on burst zerker build, but I don't understand how people believe that the first one jumping off mount is at an disadvantage, I almost always dis-mount first rather than using number 1 skill, since it creates an easy way to locate where to CC the person or put an AOE, the animation is so amazingly long and damage so low that I always get ahead from first attacks (CC, damage for a while, person basically uses all form for stab/teleport utilities=Gg)