Israel.7056
-
Posts
1,349 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Events
Articles
Gallery
Posts posted by Israel.7056
-
-
Yes please.
-
> @"Rysdude.3824" said:
> > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > @"cobbah.3102" said:
> > > > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > > > @"Rysdude.3824" said:
> > > > > > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > > > > > @"Rysdude.3824" said:
> > > > > > > > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > > > > > > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:
> > > > > > > > > > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > > > > > > > > > @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:
> > > > > > > > > > > I love this entitled, bully mentality of, "If you aren't big enough to defend it, you shouldn't have it!". Just like the school bully that walks down the hallway picking on whomever they feel like. "Hey kid, I'm gonna beat you up if you don't give me that jacket. You don't deserve it because you can't defend yourself against me.". Ever hear about the story of David vs. Goliath? Ever root for an underdog in a sports game? You are the problem if all you say is, "If you can't have enough people to play then you don't deserve to be where you are and maybe you should drop down to where you belong.". I'm sorry, but people worked hard to get where they are and to tell them they don't deserve it is belittling and demeaning. Get over yourself. There is more than one way to play this game, not just your way.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > They're not underdogs they're bad players abusing a broken tool to win fights they would otherwise lose. They don't deserve their stuff if they can't defend it legit and we will see who these people are more clearly if anet continues to tone down siege because they will not be able to abuse arrow carts to win fights anymore.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I can fully agree with you on this. Especially as it relates to SMC gates.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Here is my biggest issue with nerfing AC damage vs seige (which is my ONLY issue with it)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I have yet been able to find a tower that I can't hit with a cata that I can't hit it from out of range of both ballistas and ACs.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > And the wall will drop just as fast.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > With the exception of Counter trebs or catas and/or mortars, the opposing team has to come out to either disable or fight on My catas.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I wish they had made iron hide more effective vs ACs rather than hit the ACs this hard.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Placing catas against the wall is NOW good strategy, but was, prior to the change, a dumb masses idea...
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > True it's always an option to use trebs to open walls. It takes a lot of supply and a lot of time but it can be done, no doubt about it. As you said they're vulnerable to mortars and counter trebs but yeah it's doable. At some point you gotta actually push into the objective though and then you're in AC range. In some objectives, such at Hills you're basically in AC range everywhere you can stand and in all others you're in AC range once you start fighting over the lord.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What? Lol do they not clear siege once outer is broken and then again once inner is broken, in NA? Just straight to the lord John Rambo style?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There are build spots that can be flash built in 15 seconds so even if you clear all the siege going in it's pretty easy to rebuild it once the attackers are in lords room. In Bay for instance it's possible to flash build arrow carts on the outside landing that hit the lords room.
> > > > >
> > > > > I understand that but there should be part of the squad securing the perimeter and backline while another portion takes down the lord.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > That's a different problem you asked me if we clear siege on NA.
> > >
> > > Hmm dang you just gave him a clue to something they never thought about.
> >
> > He's just trying move the goalposts to win an internet argument. He asked me one question and then asked me a completely different question when he didn't get the answer he wanted to the first question.
>
> Actually, no I wasn't. It's surprising though tbh I thought it was just a common thing to do. Your answers says alot though.
Classic moving goalpost tactics but whatever.
It's common practice to try to clear siege on the way in although that isn't always easy if you're actually fighting a blob to get through outer and then again to get through inner because keeps can hold over a thousand supply so it's pretty easy to quickly rebuild anything that's taken down. I'm not even sure what you mean by "having part of the squad securing the perimeter and backline" or why you think that would prevent a 50 man defensive blob from flash building arrow carts in any objective in the game. In bay what happens is they close inner build acs to fire into lords and then push lords with a blob plus ac fire. Moreover I never saw a single group on eu do this on either side in any objective the entire time I was on eu. Eu in general didn't really seem to understand the siege game though I've been told there are some servers that do but I guess I didn't get to face them.
-
> @"cobbah.3102" said:
> > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > @"Rysdude.3824" said:
> > > > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > > > @"Rysdude.3824" said:
> > > > > > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > > > > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:
> > > > > > > > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > > > > > > > @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:
> > > > > > > > > I love this entitled, bully mentality of, "If you aren't big enough to defend it, you shouldn't have it!". Just like the school bully that walks down the hallway picking on whomever they feel like. "Hey kid, I'm gonna beat you up if you don't give me that jacket. You don't deserve it because you can't defend yourself against me.". Ever hear about the story of David vs. Goliath? Ever root for an underdog in a sports game? You are the problem if all you say is, "If you can't have enough people to play then you don't deserve to be where you are and maybe you should drop down to where you belong.". I'm sorry, but people worked hard to get where they are and to tell them they don't deserve it is belittling and demeaning. Get over yourself. There is more than one way to play this game, not just your way.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > They're not underdogs they're bad players abusing a broken tool to win fights they would otherwise lose. They don't deserve their stuff if they can't defend it legit and we will see who these people are more clearly if anet continues to tone down siege because they will not be able to abuse arrow carts to win fights anymore.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I can fully agree with you on this. Especially as it relates to SMC gates.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Here is my biggest issue with nerfing AC damage vs seige (which is my ONLY issue with it)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have yet been able to find a tower that I can't hit with a cata that I can't hit it from out of range of both ballistas and ACs.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > And the wall will drop just as fast.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > With the exception of Counter trebs or catas and/or mortars, the opposing team has to come out to either disable or fight on My catas.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I wish they had made iron hide more effective vs ACs rather than hit the ACs this hard.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Placing catas against the wall is NOW good strategy, but was, prior to the change, a dumb masses idea...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > True it's always an option to use trebs to open walls. It takes a lot of supply and a lot of time but it can be done, no doubt about it. As you said they're vulnerable to mortars and counter trebs but yeah it's doable. At some point you gotta actually push into the objective though and then you're in AC range. In some objectives, such at Hills you're basically in AC range everywhere you can stand and in all others you're in AC range once you start fighting over the lord.
> > > > >
> > > > > What? Lol do they not clear siege once outer is broken and then again once inner is broken, in NA? Just straight to the lord John Rambo style?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > There are build spots that can be flash built in 15 seconds so even if you clear all the siege going in it's pretty easy to rebuild it once the attackers are in lords room. In Bay for instance it's possible to flash build arrow carts on the outside landing that hit the lords room.
> > >
> > > I understand that but there should be part of the squad securing the perimeter and backline while another portion takes down the lord.
> > >
> >
> > That's a different problem you asked me if we clear siege on NA.
>
> Hmm dang you just gave him a clue to something they never thought about.
He's just trying move the goalposts to win an internet argument. He asked me one question and then asked me a completely different question when he didn't get the answer he wanted to the first question.
-
> @"cobbah.3102" said:
> > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > @"cobbah.3102" said:
> > > > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > > > @"Karnasis.6892" said:
> > > > > > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > > >
> > > > > > You can still sit on your siege all day no one's going to stop you from doing that.
> > > > >
> > > > > Your right, we could, if that was what was actually happening (it's not, but you stick to your blobs so you wouldn't know). Instead what he's bringing up is the fact that blobs run from fights they can't win and then those same blob minded people are complaining that people hide from them when they outnumber other smaller blobs 2-1, or 3-1, like it's their right to kill you for bags/war score. Siege gives a player a chance when they are outnumbered, but that's just it. A Chance.
> > > >
> > > > Yeah I get it everyone's a hypocrite except for the noble siege users who just want to have a chance against the big bad blobs.
> > > >
> > > > No one's going to stop all you noble siege users from being super dignified and sitting on arrow carts all day so you can have a chance of winning a fight you just might have a smaller chance of being successful in your noble endeavor now. I gotta say acs still seem plenty strong to me I don't think this change goes far enough.
> > >
> > > Change your build if your dumb enough to stand under ac fire duhh I mean who does that?? oh wait zerglings thats who
> >
> > There are build spots in almost every major objective I know of where i can build acs that hit every gate every wall and every choke and even lords rooms from relative safety with multiple overlapping circles of fire. I dont care what build you're running or what your comp is you stand in that for even a few seconds and people are gonna start dropping or at least have to use major cds just to stay alive. Then I can run in with my 40 people and easily win the fight. Anyone can learn these build spots they're very easy to abuse. I don't care how smart you think you are you would die too. You're trying to defend a tool that you abuse to win fights you wouldn't otherwise be able to win. I understand why you're doing it but it's intellectually dishonest to tell people to just change their build or don't stand in ac fire. Arrow carts are still too strong this nerf barely touched them I can still do the same stuff I could do before the patch I just might need 4acs overlapping fire instead of 3.
>
> Well there you go your mob of 40 that explains a lot as to why you hate AC ,it seems to be only the Bad Comms are complaining about AC because they cannot get easy entry into structures to "fight"the 5 defenders 40v5 hmm real tough to win huh , do you treasure the bag that much ?? it is not as if the bag holds significant treasure to warrant all the drama ,you may have to change your blob tactics if you have so much trouble. Ok While we are at it let us Delete Trebuchet as it serves no useful purpose other than to be used by the "fight" people safe in thier fortified SMC to bring down the walls hwy dont they come out to fight ?? oh dear the arguments are endless but it appears Anet favours the horde in relation to nerfs to siege
From the looks of things they favor the siege users because they barely even nerfed arrow carts after years of people complaining about them. I can't believe anyone is complaining about these nerfs they're so mild imo.
I dunno what server/time zone you are playing but in my server/time zone all sides have at least 40 people sometimes multiple map queues. You may be playing on some low pop eu server during your servers dead time zone which could explain why you seem so enamored with this idea of 5v50 but that's not how it is on na except for t4 perhaps.
-
> @"Rysdude.3824" said:
> > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > @"Rysdude.3824" said:
> > > > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:
> > > > > > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > > > > > @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:
> > > > > > > I love this entitled, bully mentality of, "If you aren't big enough to defend it, you shouldn't have it!". Just like the school bully that walks down the hallway picking on whomever they feel like. "Hey kid, I'm gonna beat you up if you don't give me that jacket. You don't deserve it because you can't defend yourself against me.". Ever hear about the story of David vs. Goliath? Ever root for an underdog in a sports game? You are the problem if all you say is, "If you can't have enough people to play then you don't deserve to be where you are and maybe you should drop down to where you belong.". I'm sorry, but people worked hard to get where they are and to tell them they don't deserve it is belittling and demeaning. Get over yourself. There is more than one way to play this game, not just your way.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > They're not underdogs they're bad players abusing a broken tool to win fights they would otherwise lose. They don't deserve their stuff if they can't defend it legit and we will see who these people are more clearly if anet continues to tone down siege because they will not be able to abuse arrow carts to win fights anymore.
> > > > >
> > > > > I can fully agree with you on this. Especially as it relates to SMC gates.
> > > > >
> > > > > Here is my biggest issue with nerfing AC damage vs seige (which is my ONLY issue with it)
> > > > >
> > > > > I have yet been able to find a tower that I can't hit with a cata that I can't hit it from out of range of both ballistas and ACs.
> > > > >
> > > > > And the wall will drop just as fast.
> > > > >
> > > > > With the exception of Counter trebs or catas and/or mortars, the opposing team has to come out to either disable or fight on My catas.
> > > > >
> > > > > I wish they had made iron hide more effective vs ACs rather than hit the ACs this hard.
> > > > >
> > > > > Placing catas against the wall is NOW good strategy, but was, prior to the change, a dumb masses idea...
> > > >
> > > > True it's always an option to use trebs to open walls. It takes a lot of supply and a lot of time but it can be done, no doubt about it. As you said they're vulnerable to mortars and counter trebs but yeah it's doable. At some point you gotta actually push into the objective though and then you're in AC range. In some objectives, such at Hills you're basically in AC range everywhere you can stand and in all others you're in AC range once you start fighting over the lord.
> > >
> > > What? Lol do they not clear siege once outer is broken and then again once inner is broken, in NA? Just straight to the lord John Rambo style?
> > >
> >
> > There are build spots that can be flash built in 15 seconds so even if you clear all the siege going in it's pretty easy to rebuild it once the attackers are in lords room. In Bay for instance it's possible to flash build arrow carts on the outside landing that hit the lords room.
>
> I understand that but there should be part of the squad securing the perimeter and backline while another portion takes down the lord.
>
That's a different problem you asked me if we clear siege on NA.
-
> @"Rysdude.3824" said:
> > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:
> > > > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > > > @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:
> > > > > I love this entitled, bully mentality of, "If you aren't big enough to defend it, you shouldn't have it!". Just like the school bully that walks down the hallway picking on whomever they feel like. "Hey kid, I'm gonna beat you up if you don't give me that jacket. You don't deserve it because you can't defend yourself against me.". Ever hear about the story of David vs. Goliath? Ever root for an underdog in a sports game? You are the problem if all you say is, "If you can't have enough people to play then you don't deserve to be where you are and maybe you should drop down to where you belong.". I'm sorry, but people worked hard to get where they are and to tell them they don't deserve it is belittling and demeaning. Get over yourself. There is more than one way to play this game, not just your way.
> > > >
> > > > They're not underdogs they're bad players abusing a broken tool to win fights they would otherwise lose. They don't deserve their stuff if they can't defend it legit and we will see who these people are more clearly if anet continues to tone down siege because they will not be able to abuse arrow carts to win fights anymore.
> > >
> > > I can fully agree with you on this. Especially as it relates to SMC gates.
> > >
> > > Here is my biggest issue with nerfing AC damage vs seige (which is my ONLY issue with it)
> > >
> > > I have yet been able to find a tower that I can't hit with a cata that I can't hit it from out of range of both ballistas and ACs.
> > >
> > > And the wall will drop just as fast.
> > >
> > > With the exception of Counter trebs or catas and/or mortars, the opposing team has to come out to either disable or fight on My catas.
> > >
> > > I wish they had made iron hide more effective vs ACs rather than hit the ACs this hard.
> > >
> > > Placing catas against the wall is NOW good strategy, but was, prior to the change, a dumb masses idea...
> >
> > True it's always an option to use trebs to open walls. It takes a lot of supply and a lot of time but it can be done, no doubt about it. As you said they're vulnerable to mortars and counter trebs but yeah it's doable. At some point you gotta actually push into the objective though and then you're in AC range. In some objectives, such at Hills you're basically in AC range everywhere you can stand and in all others you're in AC range once you start fighting over the lord.
>
> What? Lol do they not clear siege once outer is broken and then again once inner is broken, in NA? Just straight to the lord John Rambo style?
>
There are build spots that can be flash built in 15 seconds so even if you clear all the siege going in it's pretty easy to rebuild it once the attackers are in lords room. In Bay for instance it's possible to flash build arrow carts on the outside landing that hit the lords room.
-
> @"Strider Pj.2193" said:
> > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:
> > > I love this entitled, bully mentality of, "If you aren't big enough to defend it, you shouldn't have it!". Just like the school bully that walks down the hallway picking on whomever they feel like. "Hey kid, I'm gonna beat you up if you don't give me that jacket. You don't deserve it because you can't defend yourself against me.". Ever hear about the story of David vs. Goliath? Ever root for an underdog in a sports game? You are the problem if all you say is, "If you can't have enough people to play then you don't deserve to be where you are and maybe you should drop down to where you belong.". I'm sorry, but people worked hard to get where they are and to tell them they don't deserve it is belittling and demeaning. Get over yourself. There is more than one way to play this game, not just your way.
> >
> > They're not underdogs they're bad players abusing a broken tool to win fights they would otherwise lose. They don't deserve their stuff if they can't defend it legit and we will see who these people are more clearly if anet continues to tone down siege because they will not be able to abuse arrow carts to win fights anymore.
>
> I can fully agree with you on this. Especially as it relates to SMC gates.
>
> Here is my biggest issue with nerfing AC damage vs seige (which is my ONLY issue with it)
>
> I have yet been able to find a tower that I can't hit with a cata that I can't hit it from out of range of both ballistas and ACs.
>
> And the wall will drop just as fast.
>
> With the exception of Counter trebs or catas and/or mortars, the opposing team has to come out to either disable or fight on My catas.
>
> I wish they had made iron hide more effective vs ACs rather than hit the ACs this hard.
>
> Placing catas against the wall is NOW good strategy, but was, prior to the change, a dumb masses idea...
True it's always an option to use trebs to open walls. It takes a lot of supply and a lot of time but it can be done, no doubt about it. As you said they're vulnerable to mortars and counter trebs but yeah it's doable. At some point you gotta actually push into the objective though and then you're in AC range. In some objectives, such at Hills you're basically in AC range everywhere you can stand and in all others you're in AC range once you start fighting over the lord.
-
> @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:
> > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:
> > > I love this entitled, bully mentality of, "If you aren't big enough to defend it, you shouldn't have it!". Just like the school bully that walks down the hallway picking on whomever they feel like. "Hey kid, I'm gonna beat you up if you don't give me that jacket. You don't deserve it because you can't defend yourself against me.". Ever hear about the story of David vs. Goliath? Ever root for an underdog in a sports game? You are the problem if all you say is, "If you can't have enough people to play then you don't deserve to be where you are and maybe you should drop down to where you belong.". I'm sorry, but people worked hard to get where they are and to tell them they don't deserve it is belittling and demeaning. Get over yourself. There is more than one way to play this game, not just your way.
> >
> > They're not underdogs they're bad players abusing a broken tool to win fights they would otherwise lose. They don't deserve their stuff if they can't defend it legit and we will see who these people are more clearly if anet continues to tone down siege because they will not be able to abuse arrow carts to win fights anymore.
>
> Or they are good players that are completely outnumbered and are trying to do whatever they can to hold on to everything they have worked for because they know that 5 rushing out against 20 is not going to accomplish anything other than handing over 5 loot bags to the enemy. Stop telling me that they don't "Deserve" their stuff, that is a bunch of crap. Basically what you are saying is that the biggest server with the most amount of Scourges, Firebrands, and Spellbreakers should own everything in WvW and the rest of the Plebs can just shove off and go somewhere else. Mark my words, you guys keep defending this stupid idea that you keep spewing and pretty soon there will be nobody for you to bash your heads against anymore. Then how fun will it be?
The 'completely outnumbered' scenario is largely fictitious at least at the higher tiers in NA. It may be the case more often in the lower tiers but I don't think it makes sense to balance from the bottom so to speak. What I am saying is that if you can't fight you should lose all your stuff. This is a pvp game mode if you can't pvp you don't deserve to own anything. If that means some people have to learn to play a firebrand or a scourge or a spellbreaker and get off their ranger or thief or whatever then so be it.
I do not accept the proposition that any player at any skill level benefits from the use of a crutch like siege. Everyone starts out terrible and learns through practice and quiet reflection. Siege is an easy out that allows people to skip the process of learning and it keeps them bad forever. Mark my words, the game will get better and more populated the weaker siege becomes because people who previously relied on siege will have to learn to actually fight and find meaning in that struggle and the people who like to fight actual players will want to play more.
-
> @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:
> I love this entitled, bully mentality of, "If you aren't big enough to defend it, you shouldn't have it!". Just like the school bully that walks down the hallway picking on whomever they feel like. "Hey kid, I'm gonna beat you up if you don't give me that jacket. You don't deserve it because you can't defend yourself against me.". Ever hear about the story of David vs. Goliath? Ever root for an underdog in a sports game? You are the problem if all you say is, "If you can't have enough people to play then you don't deserve to be where you are and maybe you should drop down to where you belong.". I'm sorry, but people worked hard to get where they are and to tell them they don't deserve it is belittling and demeaning. Get over yourself. There is more than one way to play this game, not just your way.
They're not underdogs they're bad players abusing a broken tool to win fights they would otherwise lose. They don't deserve their stuff if they can't defend it legit and we will see who these people are more clearly if anet continues to tone down siege because they will not be able to abuse arrow carts to win fights anymore.
-
> @"Karnasis.6892" said:
> > @"Israel.7056" said:
>
>
> > Yeah I get it everyone's a hypocrite except for the noble siege users who just want to have a chance against the big bad blobs.
>
> > No one's going to stop all you noble siege users from being super dignified and sitting on arrow carts all day so you can have a chance of winning a fight you just might have a smaller chance of being successful in your noble endeavor now. I gotta say acs still seem plenty strong to me I don't think this change goes far enough.
>
> You have this notion that people sit on siege all day. You are wrong. Many players do go out to fight, myself included. But when they are OUTNUMBERED and their structures are under attack, they should use siege to even the odds. That's what it was designed to do. It might not mesh with your play style and you might hate it, but that was what it was designed to do. If you want to blob fight, I'm not stopping you, that's your preferred play style. As is many players preferred play style, but you also expect people to just let themselves be run over and not use walls/siege to their advantage because it doesn't give you a "good fight".
>
> And a good fight is what exactly? One where you die immediately? Or I know, one where you crush your enemies and get tonnes of loot bags... because every zerg fight I've been in wasn't good per say, it was one zerg just demolishing another zerg. There isn't even real counter play there, it boils down to how many scourge/spellbreakers and revs you have vs your opponent.
Right yes I've heard this before too. Fighting isn't stimulating enough the only real challenge is trying to upgrade and defend objectives because........
I don't build siege when I'm outnumbered. I can't stop others from doing it but I don't do it. If I cannot defend an objective through fighting then the objective is lost I don't care what the numbers look like.
More to the point you say you only use siege when you're outnumbered and I believe you but you must realize that there's no logical reason not to use siege all the time even if you're not outnumbered. You may not do this but I assure you there are people who do and there's technically no reason not to after all it's apparently supposed to be strong enough to give 5 a chance against 50.
-
> @"Karnasis.6892" said:
> > @"Israel.7056" said:
>
> > You can still sit on your siege all day no one's going to stop you from doing that.
>
> Your right, we could, if that was what was actually happening (it's not, but you stick to your blobs so you wouldn't know). Instead what he's bringing up is the fact that blobs run from fights they can't win and then those same blob minded people are complaining that people hide from them when they outnumber other smaller blobs 2-1, or 3-1, like it's their right to kill you for bags/war score. Siege gives a player a chance when they are outnumbered, but that's just it. A Chance.
Yeah I get it everyone's a hypocrite except for the noble siege users who just want to have a chance against the big bad blobs.
No one's going to stop all you noble siege users from being super dignified and sitting on arrow carts all day so you can have a chance of winning a fight you just might have a smaller chance of being successful in your noble endeavor now. I gotta say acs still seem plenty strong to me I don't think this change goes far enough.
-
> @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:
> Every person that says that siege needs to be nerfed more or removed all together and only fights need to be done in WvW, I guarantee you are the first ones to run from a fight once they know they won't win or just flat out avoid the fight if the numbers don't look good. Honestly, at this point, I'd kind of like to see all of these so-called fight servers get together and see how it goes. I'll bet that it doesn't play out the way they think it will. It's just pure ego from tryhards that are killing WvW slowly but surely. "Balance" isn't even balance at this point. It's just people crying that they can't win so something needs to be nerfed, not balanced. It makes me sick, but nothing I can do about it. You can't bring logic to this fight, it just doesn't matter when it comes to small minded thinking. Everybody has to start playing how other people want them to play, not how you want to play. That's just not fair.
You can still sit on your siege all day no one's going to stop you from doing that.
-
> @"Stormscar.5489" said:
>What's your expertise, a masters in AC camping? Don't let the door hit you on the way out, hope your ecto farm goes well ;).
Roasted.
-
> @"Karnasis.6892" said:
> And what strategy is "losing everything"? That's not strategy, that's rolling over for the enemy. Let's not use our siege to our advantage and just watch the enemy build siege, break in, kill us, and take our structures. If that's how you want to play, go for it. But I'm telling you that siege is a key part of defense, whether you like it or not.
You have to think long term. You go out and get rolled for a week or a month or a year and maybe you lose all your stuff or whatever but in time you improve as a player and as a server community because you're actually practicing skillful coordinated play and eventually you won't need siege anymore. Whereas your approach leaves you terrible at the game forever because you never try to improve as a player.
> But we're not being "cowards" for hiding in a keep heavily outnumbered using siege to kill you. We're thinking tactically, and if AC's bother you so much then when you want to break into structures don't build in AC range. Build away from the walls, and when the walls go down run past the ac fire.
You're thinking short term and worrying about the score when what you should be worried about are the long term effects of letting yourself off the hook and choosing not to fight over time. Over time your "tactics" make you a worse player because every chance you get where you could be trying to figure out how to beat people with your skills you're building siege instead. It's an easy out but the long term opportunity cost of excessive siege use is devastating. I see this all the time people who sit on siege all day are just miserably bad at the game and it's because they haven't practiced because they've been sitting on siege too much. We could all just use siege and never fight and everyone could just sit in towers and keeps and hug the siege all day but no one would ever get better at the game that way. You have to go out and fight and risk losing to ever get better as a player.
> And again, I'm not opposed to fighting, fight away, run me over if you want to (provided you are against me) but I'm going to use ALL of the tools available to me to defeat my enemies. If that means I'm using a "crutch" like AC's then so be it, but my way of playing is not wrong, just like your way isn't either, but you just have to think outside the box sometimes to get what you want, because I'm sure hell not going to "let you" do anything.
It's only wrong if your goal is to improve as a player. If you don't care about that then yeah you're right it's a perfectly valid way to play.
> But I feel you are one of those players that would rather have none of the parts of WvW that make it interesting and would much rather have an empty field with a few outcroppings, no walls, no siege, no objectives and constant fights. Sadly WvW is PvPvE whether you like it or not.
I'd be happy to just get rid of all the siege except for rams catas and trebs.
-
> @"Karnasis.6892" said:
> As far as I am concerned, AC's are just as valid a defense strategy as jumping out onto a zerg. Yes a smaller group should be able to hold off a zerg with AC's. If a 50 person zerg can't split up and use tactics instead of always using the same place over and over then they deserve to be stopped every time. You CAN split up and hit multiple walls... or build further back (using non broken shield gens at some point). WvW isn't ONLY a pvp mode mind you, there is pve involved too. But the "fighters" in this thread would much rather you forget about that.
>
> Am I against fighting or fights in general, no. Am I going to try to bum rush a zerg when my opponents outnumber me by a large percentage because my opponents are looking for fights... no again, that's ridiculous and not at all strategy. Yes sitting on AC's are a strategy(however most people aren't JUST sitting on ACs/Siege, they are typically doing more than that if they are scouting). However just like a zerg being countered by ac's, ac's can also be countered (aoe spam, ballis). Just look at a situation and say "How do I deal with or avoid those AC's?" before attacking a T3 structure.
>
> And saying a server should go down a tiers is stupid. Every server uses siege (and to think otherwise is asinine). Different servers use different levels of siege and as much as folks "hate siege" I find it interesting to see how to counter play each servers uses of it (and learn from it as well)
Fighting outnumbered is a strategy losing everything if you can't win a fight is a valid strategy stop making excuses. Building siege to avoid a fight you don't think you can win through skill and organization is cowardice plain and simple. Stop trying to act like being cowards in a video game is the right way to play. I spent the entire week against kaineng pinned up during sea and we lost everything every single day and lost most of the fights too but we fought with honor. This weak willed mentality is disgusting frankly man up take the beating that's coming to you.
-
> @"Ubi.4136" said:
> > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > Like I said this always hinges around the 5v50 canard. If you're honestly that outnumbered you should lose all your stuff and drop tiers until the numbers are more even because you've clearly pptd your server into a tier it doesn't belong in. But in my experience most fights are not 5v50 and it's usually 40v40 with one side building 20 acs and turtling objectives for hours.
>
> I'm on TC and in tier 4, and yes, there are a ton of fights, even this week, that were 5 maybe even up to 10 vs 40-60. On that same token, watching the map at different hours, I know that we have fielded the 40+ vs JQ's towers where they basically were in the same situation with 5 defenders (or on DBBL where red doesn't go cause no one likes desert). DB can summon at least a full raid 24 hours a day to defend smc or flip our entire third, like they have done nearly every night all week. We don't have anywhere else to go from T4. We are nearly tied on score "because" of PPT, but personally despite us likely winning this week we should NOT be in T3, at all. Sure we have small guild groups trying superhard to get us the win, but the numbers and coverage are just not there. Skill is also an issue for a lot of the new folks, but skill is irrelevant when it's the time of day for the 50 to flip your third and you have 10 people active and 10 afk. Even if the afk pip farmers moved, were not beating the 50 with 20.
>
> What wins at EVERY tier is numbers and coverage. And, with all the years of bandwagoning, some servers have better of both. Every "fight" server runs full comp'd squads, yet because of all the stacking, never has an equal force to face for most of their play time. So, you end up with wvw the way it is now. Large, ktraining blobs claiming they want fights, yet only "fight" when they can win 100% of the fights, and it's always vs smaller numbers. If one loses an equal fight, they get more or log. It's the reality of every tier in NA right now.
I believe you and I completely agree with you about numbers and coverage. I'm sympathetic to your situation honestly. The problem is that we can't have arrow cart rules that only apply to TC. If we could I'd be all for it but we all have to play by the same rules. You may legitimately be terribly outnumbered a great deal of the time in t4 and perhaps it does justify the use of copious amounts of ACs in your situation. The problem is that there are servers with plenty of people who will use them excessively despite having no real need for them they just use them because they can. You see what I'm saying?
-
> @"Rysdude.3824" said:
> > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > T3 stuff does pop out of thin air so to speak if the objectives are left alone long enough. Don't expect to be able to defend stuff if you don't know how to PvP this is supposed to be a PvP oriented game mode after all. If you're as tactically gifted as you think you are apply that to actual fighting instead of building siege and using it as a crutch.
>
> If you're as tactically gifted as you think you are then apply that to smart siege usage rather than using it as a crutch. See how that works?
Using what as a crutch?
I don't build siege I fight people even if it means we lose every objective we own.
-
T3 stuff does pop out of thin air so to speak if the objectives are left alone long enough. Don't expect to be able to defend stuff if you don't know how to PvP this is supposed to be a PvP oriented game mode after all. If you're as tactically gifted as you think you are apply that to actual fighting instead of building siege and using it as a crutch.
-
> @"cobbah.3102" said:
> > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > Well I'll tell you who definitely doesn't want to fight: people sitting on acs.
>
> So your actual fights you speak of are 40 v5 so you can get some little bags and feel good because of ?? some inane reason. They have sorted the fight part for these so called fight guilds didn't they just redo EOTM go look for your fights and you wont have to be concerned about seige
Actually I'm usually the one fighting outnumbered but I'm fine with losing everything that's the way it should be.
-
Like I said this always hinges around the 5v50 canard. If you're honestly that outnumbered you should lose all your stuff and drop tiers until the numbers are more even because you've clearly pptd your server into a tier it doesn't belong in. But in my experience most fights are not 5v50 and it's usually 40v40 with one side building 20 acs and turtling objectives for hours.
-
A hypothetical to hopefully illustrate the problem: Imagine there were a class (Class iWin) with a kit so powerful that it could, with some regularity, win or at least tie in a 10v1 against even similarly skilled players on any other class in the game. In 5v50s this class would be called "the great equalizer" **at first** and it would sound like a good thing because it would give outnumbered people a better chance of winning **at first**. But then what would happen? After a few days of this every guild in the game would simply start running 50 of class iWin because it would be the obviously superior strategy. There would no reason to use anything else. We already see this sort of behavior in the game with things like firebrands and scourges and with weavers when meteors were bugged. Humans don't take long to recognize a superior tool when it presents itself.
In these discussions we inevitably see it descend into madness with rationalizations like "well I'm fighting 5v50 surely I must be given some tool that can even those odds out." No you should not. Because if 5 can even have a chance of defending against 50 with arrow carts then there's no reason for any other sized group to use anything other than arrow carts in any scenario where it's possible to deploy arrow carts. Fighting would be the inferior strategy every single time unless it were impossible to deploy arrow carts. This is textbook terrible game design unless the goal is to make the game mode one big never ending siege war where players only fight each other when they absolutely have no other alternative which it presumably isn't. I hope.
The only equalizers that should exist in any competitive game are similar numbers and/or superior organization. If you cannot manage either or both of those you should always always always always lose and allow matchmaking to do its job. If it turns out that the server you're currently on is in fact the least populated and/or least organized server in the entire game then you should have to transfer to make new friends so you don't have to fight 5v50 anymore. This is, after all, a social game. If you cannot be bothered to transfer to a more populated server and make new friends and work together with those new people to try to win WvW matches then you shouldn't ever win. Period.
-
> @"Ubi.4136" said:
> > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > Well I'll tell you who definitely doesn't want to fight: people sitting on acs.
>
> We are on AC's because there are 5 of us and 50 of you outside the tower. What the kitten else are we supposed to do. That time on siege is after we managed to get IN the tower because the 30 by the gate couldn't kill us before we got in and the other 20 were chasing who knows what or goofing off. We get to pull invul (oh wait, nvm the blob troll already hit that 1 minute before the blob showed), than hop on ac's hoping to kill the few clueless pugs in full glass builds before the "fight blob" ktrain flips the tower. Maybe, on a good day, our 30-40 man appears (cause it's prime time and people are on) and chases off the "fight blob" because they really just wanted the tower, not a fight. Literally, as soon as swords appear anywhere else on the map, the blob reappears to quickly flip the tower.
>
> It's the same every time at every tier. I just rode a link all the way back in to T1 and back down to T4 again, and every blob is doing the same thing. Watch the fight guilds that stream, sure they skirmish some here and there, but stop the second the enemy fields an equal number and kills them, that's when "they have to call it, it's been a long day", regardless of whether that is 30 minutes or 4 hours in to their stream. My favorite is when the fight guild streamer says "you know I never do this" and drops AC's all over lord's room. Yet, I watch their stream often, and they do it just like every one else does...every time they "need" to win the fight, because at that moment they weren't.
If you really are fighting 5v50 then you are in the wrong tier and your server has pptd itself into a matchup it cannot handle. You should lose everything if the disparity is that great; there should be nothing in the game powerful enough to even have a chance of equalizing those odds. Surely you must see why.
-
Well I'll tell you who definitely doesn't want to fight: people sitting on acs.
-
> @"cobbah.3102" said:
> > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > @"cobbah.3102" said:
> > > All this call for nerfing AC I am sure everyone has noticed when SMC is held by the dominant server it is always loaded with AC and siege , waiting for fights?? ok if you want fights put no seige then you can defend with your superior forces , instead of talking the talk try walking the walk PUT up or shut up about siege time you lads grew a set. Make SMC a seige free zone remove cannons and mortars ,NO siege can be placed even on 3rd floor.
> >
> > I never build siege but I can't control what others do. Servers are not a hive mind.
>
> Always an easy out for some I guess ,well done.
Well when you figure out mind control let me know how it works thanks.
Nerf Winds of Disenchantment
in World vs. World
Posted
It's hard to establish a blanket standard for what is and what is not op. I have a list of things I like to think about here are some of them:
1. How many things does it do?
2. How consequential to a fight are those things?
3. What happens if you stack a lot of them? Are there any diminishing returns to stacking?
4. What is the cool down? What is the CD on similar skills?
To me the skill just does too many things those things are extremely consequential to the outcome of a fight if you stack a lot of spellbreakers it just gets better and the CD is kinda low for what it does compared to other elites.