Contesting Capture Points

TheGrimm.5624 · September 1, 2019

So it was determined that mounted players should not be able to contest or capture while mounted. Under that same thought should people in siege be able to? Should a golem be able to block a capture or contest a point? Curious what direction the forum takes currently.

Doug.4930 · September 1, 2019

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

Stand The Wall.6987 · September 1, 2019

waste of a golem, unless theres a couple of em that go in one by one and there is actually some good back up coming to protect your keep. doesn't seem like that would be a common occurrence tho.

Doug.4930 · September 1, 2019

@"Stand The Wall.6987" said:doesn't seem like that would be a common occurrence tho.

A certain T1 server that shall remain nameless would like a word with you about that "rare occurrence"

Stand The Wall.6987 · September 1, 2019

@Doug.4930 said:snips

if they're going to waste all that supply to defend a single camp then that's a total waste.

Iozeph.5617 · September 1, 2019

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

Dawdler.8521 · September 1, 2019

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

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

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

Chaba.5410 · September 1, 2019

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

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

Doug.4930 · September 2, 2019

@Chaba.5410 said:
@Doug.4930 said:Personally no they shouldn't. The tactic of building 5 omega's in a single camp to prevent capture is a little silly. Players should need to fight and actively defend their camp. Not sit in golems screaming in map chat for the cavalry to arrive.

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

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

Chaba.5410 · September 2, 2019

@Doug.4930 said:
@Chaba.5410 said:
@Doug.4930 said:Personally no they shouldn't. The tactic of building 5 omega's in a single camp to prevent capture is a little silly. Players should need to fight and actively defend their camp. Not sit in golems screaming in map chat for the cavalry to arrive.

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

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

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

Gop.8713 · September 2, 2019

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

TheGrimm.5624 · September 2, 2019

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

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

Chaba.5410 · September 2, 2019

@TheGrimm.5624 said:
@Gop.8713 said:It's not really something I could ever see myself doing but I'm fine with ppl being able to do it if they want. I was fine with mounts contesting too though, so I'm maybe the wrong person to ask . . .

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

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

b k.1648 · September 2, 2019

I'm fine with siege golems being able to hold a camp for as long as they can stay alive. To prevent them being chained I'd just make it impossible to enter a new one while in combat.

Korgov.7645 · September 2, 2019

@Ben K.6238 said:I'm fine with siege golems being able to hold a camp for as long as they can stay alive. To prevent them being chained I'd just make it impossible to enter a new one while in combat.

The commander is wondering why nobody uses the siege he just built. :P

Gorani.7205 · September 2, 2019

@Chaba.5410 said:
@TheGrimm.5624 said:
@"Gop.8713" said:It's not really something I could ever see myself doing but I'm fine with ppl being able to do it if they want. I was fine with mounts contesting too though, so I'm maybe the wrong person to ask . . .

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

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

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

Caedmon.6798 · September 3, 2019

@Chaba.5410 said:
@TheGrimm.5624 said:
@Gop.8713 said:It's not really something I could ever see myself doing but I'm fine with ppl being able to do it if they want. I was fine with mounts contesting too though, so I'm maybe the wrong person to ask . . .

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

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

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

Chaba.5410 · September 3, 2019

@Caedmon.6798 said:
@Chaba.5410 said:
@TheGrimm.5624 said:
@Gop.8713 said:It's not really something I could ever see myself doing but I'm fine with ppl being able to do it if they want. I was fine with mounts contesting too though, so I'm maybe the wrong person to ask . . .

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

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

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

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

Caedmon.6798 · September 3, 2019

@Chaba.5410 said:
@Caedmon.6798 said:
@Chaba.5410 said:
@TheGrimm.5624 said:
@Gop.8713 said:It's not really something I could ever see myself doing but I'm fine with ppl being able to do it if they want. I was fine with mounts contesting too though, so I'm maybe the wrong person to ask . . .

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

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

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

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

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

Chaba.5410 · September 3, 2019

@Caedmon.6798 said:
@Chaba.5410 said:
@Caedmon.6798 said:
@Chaba.5410 said:
@TheGrimm.5624 said:
@Gop.8713 said:It's not really something I could ever see myself doing but I'm fine with ppl being able to do it if they want. I was fine with mounts contesting too though, so I'm maybe the wrong person to ask . . .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Caedmon.6798 · September 3, 2019

@Chaba.5410 said:
@Caedmon.6798 said:
@Chaba.5410 said:
@Caedmon.6798 said:
@Chaba.5410 said:
@TheGrimm.5624 said:
@Gop.8713 said:It's not really something I could ever see myself doing but I'm fine with ppl being able to do it if they want. I was fine with mounts contesting too though, so I'm maybe the wrong person to ask . . .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Chaba.5410 · September 3, 2019

@Caedmon.6798 said:
@Chaba.5410 said:
@Caedmon.6798 said:
@Chaba.5410 said:
@Caedmon.6798 said:
@Chaba.5410 said:
@TheGrimm.5624 said:
@Gop.8713 said:It's not really something I could ever see myself doing but I'm fine with ppl being able to do it if they want. I was fine with mounts contesting too though, so I'm maybe the wrong person to ask . . .