X T D.6458 Posted December 25, 2017 Share Posted December 25, 2017 > @"DKRathalos.9625" said: > This happen to BG and SoS they made pact not to attack each other big objective as keep/garri. This is total nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKRathalos.9625 Posted December 25, 2017 Share Posted December 25, 2017 > @"X T D.6458" said: > > @"DKRathalos.9625" said: > > This happen to BG and SoS they made pact not to attack each other big objective as keep/garri. > > This is total nonsense. Then why the almighty BG can't take their keep/garri, I know BG can do it but seems don't want to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sovereign.1093 Posted December 25, 2017 Share Posted December 25, 2017 you dont do what you dont need to Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nighteyess.2149 Posted December 25, 2017 Share Posted December 25, 2017 > @"DKRathalos.9625" said: > > @"X T D.6458" said: > > > @"DKRathalos.9625" said: > > > This happen to BG and SoS they made pact not to attack each other big objective as keep/garri. > > > > This is total nonsense. > > Then why the almighty BG can't take their keep/garri, I know BG can do it but seems don't want to? Because SoS actively defends their objectives Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman.5829 Posted December 25, 2017 Share Posted December 25, 2017 2 words: MORE BAGS! I personally engage in attacking the red team in tier 1 because read team is filled with noobs and the rewards are great, I get more bags because I can easily fight them 1 vs 5 and kill all 5 by myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X T D.6458 Posted December 25, 2017 Share Posted December 25, 2017 > @"DKRathalos.9625" said: > > @"X T D.6458" said: > > > @"DKRathalos.9625" said: > > > This happen to BG and SoS they made pact not to attack each other big objective as keep/garri. > > > > This is total nonsense. > > Then why the almighty BG can't take their keep/garri, I know BG can do it but seems don't want to? What would we gain from doing that? On blue bl we typically just stay on our corner and go for hills. On eb we prefer to have fights in and around SMC. Taking red/blues corner in EB would just break the flow of fights and force them to spend hours recapping and upgrading, not to mention demoralizing them. Sometimes we will tap a keep and hit some cannons just to wake them up. Personally speaking, I like SoS. They give us good fights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArchonWing.9480 Posted December 26, 2017 Share Posted December 26, 2017 Probably nothing. The pug blob demands pips and while they may accept brief delays to accommodate you, anything like assaulting the biggest server's keep for prolonged periods of time is going to have people walking out on it faster than a Tommy Wiseau film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sephiroth.4217 Posted December 26, 2017 Share Posted December 26, 2017 Remove all the doors from towers then remove all siege from the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sovereign.1093 Posted December 26, 2017 Share Posted December 26, 2017 whisper enemy server coms and say 2x stronger enemy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Svarty.8019 Posted December 26, 2017 Share Posted December 26, 2017 > @"sephiroth.4217" said: > Remove all the doors from towers then remove all siege from the game. The giant laser more-or-less did this, but players complained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sovereign.1093 Posted December 26, 2017 Share Posted December 26, 2017 > @"Svarty.8019" said: > > @"sephiroth.4217" said: > > Remove all the doors from towers then remove all siege from the game. > > The giant laser more-or-less did this, but players complained. players complain because they lazy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sovereign.1093 Posted December 26, 2017 Share Posted December 26, 2017 anti ac? have 5 man block burn guard team. Minstrel fb on sigil of energy transference and mercy runes. DIRE fb block burn on burst sigil and guardian runes Sciurge scourge spell breaker. party x 10. No ac siege can stop you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeolus.3615 Posted December 26, 2017 Share Posted December 26, 2017 > @"ThunderPanda.1872" said: > > @"X T D.6458" said: > > > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > > Yeah sure, I know of one such mechanic. You dont even need to add it. Quite the opposite. > > > > > > Delete the kitten tier based PPT. > > > > Why should a tier 3 keep keep that takes hours to upgrade, be worth the same as a paper keep? > > It doesn’t, t3 keeps give more ppt. People who only backcaps and pick up the scraps are just karma trainers. wich is what happens 90% of the time..... some blobs even cant take t1 stuff and then 2 server5s apear to take it by turns from the outmaned server... > @"ArchonWing.9480" said: > Probably nothing. The pug blob demands pips and while they may accept brief delays to accommodate you, anything like assaulting the biggest server's keep for prolonged periods of time is going to have people walking out on it faster than a Tommy Wiseau film. That's because Anet brainwashed alot of players into lame mode, expect low effort with rewards.. or full stack/blob to hit a smaller group, wit h lots if not all aoe spamable classes... It's the design and "mentality" in the game itself that made players behave like that... I do remember a post in the older forum where Anet stated what was hapening was the weakest population servers were picking up the bigger ones..lol and this was 2 years ago, this guys are ok with lame behaviors its like a game from lamers to lamers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XenesisII.1540 Posted December 26, 2017 Share Posted December 26, 2017 > @"Sovereign.1093" said: > > @"Svarty.8019" said: > > > @"sephiroth.4217" said: > > > Remove all the doors from towers then remove all siege from the game. > > > > The giant laser more-or-less did this, but players complained. > > players complain because they lazy Or the event lagged up the map for a lot of people... and obviously anet couldn't fix the lag so it was removed. /shrug As to the suggestion to remove doors... might as well not even have structures then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThunderPanda.1872 Posted December 26, 2017 Share Posted December 26, 2017 > @"Rayya.2591" said: > > @"grifflyman.8102" said: > > Does anyone ells find this to be true? There's no incentive to flip a well populatedT3 BL when you can easily go back to the weakest server's BL and flip all their objectives. When fighting higher tier servers it's not unusual to see a T3 objective held for days on end. The score continues to run away for the leading server, even with the skirmish changes, it's rare to have a match come down to the last day and even rarer to for all 3 servers to have a close battle score at the end of the week. > > > > Is there any kind of game mechanic that could be implemented to keep matches closer for the losing servers? > > nobody want to attack tier 3 because is a waste of time. > Best way to take a tier 3 is 20 guild golems, , rush undefended keeps and hope you take it under 3 minutes. But who will pay 15 gold to take a keep ? > Now considering you go for normal way: 5 supperior rams /gate , outer /inner 2/ shield generators /gate +supply drain you will need 1000 supply . 2 minutes /gates if your sieges won;t be disabled and no defenders. Even if you succed to open outer and inner gate, in current meta if a defending zerg with siege wait you behind inner gate, they will win 95% of the time. So you waste 20 minutes to gather supply and attempt 1 attack ? > Tier 3 objectives are stupid and imbalanced. Current meta " 80% scourge /revs/eles / will lack any sustain under constant arrrow cart / mortar cannon - damage . > So that's why almost nobody care to attack tier 3. 5+ minutes is more than enough time for defenders to reach at objective > Before POF, on melee train meta, decent blobs could sustain under siege, now nobody care > > If you try to attack with lower ammount of siege, you will get borred before outer gate is down > also upgrading objectives require nothing. So if you flip a tier 3 and leave map , will be tier 3 in 2 hours again . So really no reason to take them > All I see is disable after disable after disable after disable, and shield gen. Even if you build like 40 omegas, it's still hard as kitten to take a t3 keep with minimal defenders. The easiest way nowadays is just have a huge overpowering blob, time and inifinite patience. Sad to say it's no longer 2013/2014, back when you defend keeps mainly by fighting with a good waypoint system and arguably warrior banners that funnels people back in and keep us in the fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sovereign.1093 Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 omegas meet my scourge. gg rams? meet my firebrand.gg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trajan.4953 Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 Until "balance" is dealt with... BAHAHAHAHAHAHA... Sorry... Had to laugh, Balance will never be dealt with... Heading to the bar, anyone need a drink? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feanor.2358 Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 > @"grifflyman.8102" said: > Does anyone ells find this to be true? There's no incentive to flip a well populatedT3 BL when you can easily go back to the weakest server's BL and flip all their objectives. When fighting higher tier servers it's not unusual to see a T3 objective held for days on end. The score continues to run away for the leading server, even with the skirmish changes, it's rare to have a match come down to the last day and even rarer to for all 3 servers to have a close battle score at the end of the week. > > Is there any kind of game mechanic that could be implemented to keep matches closer for the losing servers? What you describe is a situation with a dominating server when both of the other servers have no realistic hopes of winning the match. For both of them, it is only normal to focus on one another in a fight for the second place. Instead of going on a desperate missions against the well supplied and highly defended t3 objectives of the leader, they choose to do something actually productive in getting some points. This creates the feeling of "double-teaming" for both of them while in fact one is legitimately fighting them for second and the other is just looking for some fun/karma/xp. In the end, it's mostly up to participation. You can't have a close score between a server that plays actively with high numbers and one that doesn't. Of course you can design a mechanic that counters that, but it would be missing the whole point of the game mode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry.5713 Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 I'd call it choosing your battles wisely. Simple as that. It is a war simulation after all. Something that is not supposed to be truely balanced or fair. Do what is needed to win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diamondgirl.6315 Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 I've found, in T1 at least, that the 2nd server tries to fight BG, and the 3rd server sneaks around backcapping things, hoping the other two zergs won't notice them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forum Moderator.5907 Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 We are closing this thread because Match Up threads are not allowed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts