Israel.7056

> @"aspirine.6852" said:

> Not all of them of course. But picture a reset night on the alpine or even desert borderlands without siege. Your own map will be impossible to defend because your team cannot be in Bay, hills or garri at the same time. So all that will happen is it flipping over and over again.

> Doesnt sound right to me.

Everything already does flip constantly on reset nights and it's glorious. I personally think that's when the game is the most fun because I get to spend hours just running around doing fight after fight not having to worry about siege too much. Siege isn't as much of an issue when the map is fresh and nothing is upgraded. It's still annoying but there's not enough supply accumulated within the first few hours of reset to allow anyone to do any serious turtling. The really soulcrushingly tedious turtleplay stuff comes usually a day or two into a matchup when a large force has had hours of uninterrupted time to upgrade and siege everything up so their blob can sit behind a wall and build siege against attackers for several hours at every major objective. The game slows to a crawl and it's mostly time spent dealing with siege instead of fighting players which isn't fun for anyone except siege monkeys.

The real question I think everyone has to ask themselves seriously is: WHY DOES ANYONE FIGHT TO DEFEND AT ALL ANYMORE? Why doesn't everyone just build siege and never fight anyone even when they've got a 50 man squad? Wouldn't it be a totally viable strategy to only ever defend with siege regardless of numbers??? There's nothing in this game that actually treats fighting to defend preferentially over turtling objectives with siege.

Siege requires relatively little practice or experience, no time invested in learning a class or refining a build or playing with a team. Even the worst players can understand that you just aim the circle over as many people as possible and press the buttons. It's pathetically easy to be effective on an arrow cart or a ballista or a cannon and that's why so many terrible players defend it whenever this conversation comes up and they use the canard of '5v25' to justify it. But if it can be used to help 5 defend against 25 it can also be used by 50 to defend against another 50.

Siege is the ultimate crutch for bad players and it kills the pacing and fun of this gamemode for everyone except people who lack the skills and organization necessary to kill other players in an actual fight. These devs have consistently catered to the lowest common denominator player and that's why we've lost so many good guilds and players over time to other games that actually reward fighting to one degree or another even if they're not MMOs.

Siege needs to be drastically tuned down. If a defending force, regardless of numbers, cannot defend an objective by actually fighting for it then they should lose it 100 percent of the time.

> @"aspirine.6852" said:

> > @"morrolan.9608" said:

> > My reaction is please finish alliances as a priority before making other changes.

> >

> > Having said that in answer to the query, nerf ACs. Siege should primarily be about be obtaining access to objectives not killing other players. Someone else has suggested restricting the number of players an AC hits like most aoes in the game this is a good suggestion..

>

> Nope, siege is also there for defence and slowing the blob a bit for reinforcements to arrive. If they are not strong enough you can literally take any keep on the map without problems if your blob is big enough. I assume that this is the case on your server.

Are you implying that people only sit on siege when they don't have an equal sized force?

> @"cobbah.3102" said:

> > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > Here is what I would like to see:

> >

> > 1.) Remove all siege except rams and catas and arrow carts. Make catas only do damage to walls. Make ACs only do damage to siege. Game instantly becomes more fighting oriented instead of sit on a wall and build siege oriented.

> >

> > 2.) Let players do normal damage to gates and walls so it's possible for a large group to plow through without having to build a bunch of siege.

> >

> > 3.) No more auto upgrades, go back to making people pay for them if they really want them.

> >

> > These three changes by themselves would speed up the game so much and force these siege monkeys to actually get off a wall and fight if they really want to protect their objectives. They will lose a lot because most of them have spent way way too much time afking on trebs but over time they will remember the glory of combat.

>

> Hmmm sounds like a blob server request go figure

Every server is a blob server what game are you playing?

Here is what I would like to see:

1.) Remove all siege except rams and catas and arrow carts. Make catas only do damage to walls. Make ACs only do damage to siege. Game instantly becomes more fighting oriented instead of sit on a wall and build siege oriented.

2.) Let players do normal damage to gates and walls so it's possible for a large group to plow through without having to build a bunch of siege.

3.) No more auto upgrades, go back to making people pay for them if they really want them.

These three changes by themselves would speed up the game so much and force these siege monkeys to actually get off a wall and fight if they really want to protect their objectives. They will lose a lot because most of them have spent way way too much time afking on trebs but over time they will remember the glory of combat.

> @"Swagger.1459" said:

> Players need to improve their “game”, and realize there is more to wvw than blobbing up and spamming skills without thinking.

You mean like fighting other players?

> @"Last Crysis.1934" said:

> I don't understand why some people are against a VIP area.

I don't understand people who are so obsessed with squeezing every point of participation out of every play session that they would literally sit there and let their participation time out. I also don't understand the whales who will buy seemingly anything Anet puts into their little gem store. But to each their own I suppose.

> @"Shining One.1635" said:

> > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > You'd pay gems for a redundant item that would give you the ability to do something you can already do for free?

> I can't currently run down my participation clock in Mistlock Sanctuary. It would be worth some gems to me (not the full 1000 I already paid though) to be able to run down the clock there. There are various crafting tasks and purchases I do daily. I would be able to do those while waiting for the clock to run down.

Mind boggling but ok.

> @"Shadowcat.2680" said:

> > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > > @"Shadowcat.2680" said:

> > > > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > > > Where does the ten stacks of burning come from?

> > >

> > > https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/The_Prestige plus https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Phantasmal_Mage with https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/The_Pledge traited will do ten stacks of burning.

> >

> > Ook so this is like perfect conditions everything lands kind of scenario

>

> More a matter of timing it so that both skills apply their burning at the same time.

Sure but there's a lot of wombo combos in the game if we assume everything lands at the same time and nothing gets cleansed.

I think mesmer is just more annoying to play against because it often seems to come out of nowhere and if they miss they just peace out until their cds are back up so it feels cheap.

> @"Shadowcat.2680" said:

> > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > Where does the ten stacks of burning come from?

>

> https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/The_Prestige plus https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Phantasmal_Mage with https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/The_Pledge traited will do ten stacks of burning.

Ook so this is like perfect conditions everything lands kind of scenario

Where does the ten stacks of burning come from?

> @"Shining One.1635" said:

> > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > But this would be a WvW oriented presumably cash shop item. It doesn't matter if a glider skin flops with the WvW crowd because the PvErs will buy it cuz gotta have em all. If something like this flops with the WvW crowd then that's pretty much it. So yeah there's overlap but this is presumably a riskier proposition.

> Anet can just copy Mistlock Sanctuary. I already have it, but I'd pay some extra gems to be able to run down my pips there at the end of the night.

You'd pay gems for a redundant item that would give you the ability to do something you can already do for free?

> @"Offair.2563" said:

> Stupid reasoning to say wvw players are not a reliable source of purchases.

He says while citing anecdotal evidence.

I think the badges and heroics should be tradeable for stuff like obsidian shards or, even better, larger portions of map completes in the regular maps, hot map and pof maps so I could farm a large portion of the legendary grind via wvw without ever having to do pve or map completions.

No game's dead.

> @"FASTCAR.7831" said:

> This was proof of concept. last night I played 8 hours,zero deaths, 304 kills VS every rank possible. often killing 3-5 at the same time

You should make a video of that.

Rev because I love the look and feel of the class even though they've taken a lot of the toys away since HoT released.

> @"ChronosCosmos.9450" said:

>Mag ran as soon as they faced adversity. Enjoy your 3 months of victory. We'll take our 5 years. Including 2 WvW Leagues. Bunch of Pansies mate.

>

The enjoyment doesn't come from winning the stupid matches, don't you understand that? 3 months of boredom meant absolutely nothing, it was a complete waste of time for everyone who went to Mag to get a real fight out of BG and for many it was so disappointing that they either quit or went to EU. The only fun part was the first three weeks when BG actually tried to fight us. The rest was absolutely terrible. There's no honor in beating an opponent who doesn't even try. Someday maybe you will realize that and transfer off BG like I did.

God bless dude

Zapp still has the MGR and Kazo tags. Hasan is probably playing Fortnite and Zudo is on EU.

Lol I bet it was Zapp

> @"mindcircus.1506" said:

> Unfortunately what you are learning is that any thread about KDR is typically started by a Maguuma player, salty about losing with an inflated sense of their own abilities. They start these threads here and on reddit to ease their egos.

> Nothing to see here, just business as usual.

They guy who started this thread isn't on Mag.

> @"ChronosCosmos.9450" said:

> > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > > @"ChronosCosmos.9450" said:

> > > > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > > > > @"ChronosCosmos.9450" said:

> > > > > I said that MAG was good 3-5 months and topping. You're acting like that I never admitted it. What are you smoking?

> > > >

> > > > Yet you're bragging about fighting a Mag that has almost none of the people who made it good back then thanks to BG being total cowards when it mattered and Mag still has a better KDR against BG than any other server BG goes against and often a higher kill count than BG despite having almost no OCX or SEA or EU and a couple NA guilds that run twice a week at best. If BG had really wanted a challenge they would've fought Mag at its strongest not bored the server into mostly disbanding just to win the stupid PPT game.

> > >

> > > MAG still has their people. They don't have their sister server linked to them (their coverage). Were you even in MAG? Jesus. Now you're spewing nonsense too.

> >

> > Ofcourse I was on Mag.

> >

> > Which people? Almost all of Mag's guilds are gone. You're just fighting whatever pugs are left for the most part. You clearly have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

>

> I just added you and you're not even on MAG. If you're not in MAG don't speak for them because you just keep on lying. You didn't even know that they were linked. You post this right after I added you to my party to see what server you were in. What's up with these liars today on this forum? At least I admit that MAG was better than BG at a time. You guys are just talking as outsiders and spewing senseless facts based on what you see in Matchup selection.

Rushing to conclusions. I'm not on Mag right now because I went to EU for a week to play with some of the people who left Mag and it was cheaper to transfer back to the link than go to Mag and then Mag went full and got delinked so I can't get back on.

> @"ChronosCosmos.9450" said:

> > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > > @"ChronosCosmos.9450" said:

> > > I said that MAG was good 3-5 months and topping. You're acting like that I never admitted it. What are you smoking?

> >

> > Yet you're bragging about fighting a Mag that has almost none of the people who made it good back then thanks to BG being total cowards when it mattered and Mag still has a better KDR against BG than any other server BG goes against and often a higher kill count than BG despite having almost no OCX or SEA or EU and a couple NA guilds that run twice a week at best. If BG had really wanted a challenge they would've fought Mag at its strongest not bored the server into mostly disbanding just to win the stupid PPT game.

>

> MAG still has their people. They don't have their sister server linked to them (their coverage). Were you even in MAG? Jesus. Now you're spewing nonsense too.

Ofcourse I was on Mag.

Which people? Almost all of Mag's guilds are gone. You're just fighting whatever pugs are left for the most part. You clearly have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

> @"ChronosCosmos.9450" said:

> I said that MAG was good 3-5 months and topping. You're acting like that I never admitted it. What are you smoking?

Yet you're bragging about fighting a Mag that has almost none of the people who made it good back then thanks to BG being total cowards when it mattered and Mag still has a better KDR against BG than any other server BG goes against and often a higher kill count than BG despite having almost no OCX or SEA or EU and a couple NA guilds that run twice a week at best. If BG had really wanted a challenge they would've fought Mag at its strongest not bored the server into mostly disbanding just to win the stupid PPT game.

> @"ChronosCosmos.9450" said:

> > @"MadBomber.3719" said:

> > > @"ChronosCosmos.9450" said:

> >

> > > You're using a site that doesn't even use correct stats please. Go check the official GW2 leaderboards. You don't stand correct. You're just in denial. Look at the server ratings. They're all wrong on that site alongside the history of scores.

> >

> >

> > i said i stand corrected which means you were right that we matched up in march. what does the leaderboards tell me? BG #1 i knew that already. congrats on having more people than any other NA server. no one is denying BG is #1.

> >

> > and that site isnt wrong. it just happened to skip that week idk why.

>

> You beat us one time where we got second and make such a big deal out of it just to lose for the next 8 months. Come to T1 again please. I don't know why that site doesn't show our March matchup. It was a farm. Your Guilds left your server because they couldn't handle losing. Man up and stick through the fight. Don't be kitten and leave your server.

>

Mag won 10 straight weeks after completely dominating BG in fights the two weeks prior

http://gw2stats.com/na/matchups/history/458

http://gw2stats.com/na/matchups/history/460

http://gw2stats.com/na/matchups/history/462

http://gw2stats.com/na/matchups/history/464

http://gw2stats.com/na/matchups/history/466

http://gw2stats.com/na/matchups/history/468

http://gw2stats.com/na/matchups/history/470

http://gw2stats.com/na/matchups/history/472

http://gw2stats.com/na/matchups/history/474

http://gw2stats.com/na/matchups/history/476

Eventually almost all of BG's guilds stopped raiding entirely and most of their pugs stopped playing too except for the ones who just backcap stuff all day which is what kept BG in second. So with nothing left to do or fight all our fight guilds either left back to EU or quit the game entirely. The main losses were all our OCX/SEA. We also lost Kazo to EU, Rekz because Wok quit and some others I'm drawing a blank on at the moment. At that point BG's OCX/SEA guilds miraculously started playing again and then BG was able to grind away PPTwise at what was left of Mag with an outrageous coverage advantage. What was left of Mag decided it was way too much work to try to PPT to stay in t1 so Mag tanked out. That doesn't happen anymore though Mag legit doesn't have the coverage to stay in the higher tiers anymore.

Worth noting that BG has also lost to JQ, YB and even DB a few times in the past few years. No one seems to remember YB beating BG for like 20+ weeks straight but it happened.

BG wins when coverage is on their side and BG loses when it isn't. This is why BG has done so much paid guild recruiting and blackouts to try to continually overstack a full server. Anyone who's fought against BG knows that there's nothing incredibly special about BG in terms of its guilds or overall pug fighting ability, particularly during EU/NA. BG just has consistently been able to keep all four major timezones covered and run insane OCX/SEA back to back k train blobs. BG is also really really really siege heavy which makes attacking BG a tedious nightmare. No one wants to deal with all the siege. The t1 NA overall kills are never amazing. T2-T4 matchups almost always have more overall fight activity than t1. Why work hard to PPT just to stay in t1 and have almost nothing to fight most of the time when you can just log in and fight people t2-t4?