Ferelwing.8463 Posted June 28, 2018 Share Posted June 28, 2018 > @"aspirine.5839" said: > > @"Israel.7056" said: > > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > > > @"aspirine.5839" said: > > > > > @"Israel.7056" said: > > > > > > @"Karnasis.6892" said: > > > > > > > @"Israel.7056" said: > > > > > > > > @"Karnasis.6892" said: > > > > > > > > Why shouldn't 7 people be able to defend objectives with siege? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sounds like you'll still be able to honestly. > > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe, but what I'm worried about is that instead of ac's encouraging thoughtful plays (i.e. not just building against the side of a keep wall or tower wall), we're just going to have more zergs building against the walls of objectives because ac's are less effective. > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps. But maybe we'll also see more actual fighting as a result if defenders can't rely as heavily on ACs to defend things. > > > > > > > > AC is used, well atleast by me when outnumbered. When help arrives you fight. But taking away siege effectiveness will not make my go outside and die a useless death. It's still 20 or 30 against 5, so you can say things like go out and fight. But we all know that this will not be much of a fight. > > > > > > > > > > So, how long should 5 be able to delay 30? What is too little time, and what is too long? > > > > And why ever fight to defend except as an absolute last resort when you're out of supply everywhere and all the siege is dead? > > > > So for example let's say I am defending a keep and I've got about 40 people and the attackers have about 40 people with rams or proxy catas shouldn't I just build ACs to counter that? And if they build further back shouldn't i just build ballis to counter that? And if they build shield gens for their further away catas shouldn't I just try to disable the shield gens and hit the catas with trebs or ballis to counter that? And if they build trebs shouldn't I just build shield gens to block the walls and then try to hit their trebs with mortars or counter trebs? Is there ever a point where the safer bet to defend an objective is to actually try to fight instead of just build more siege? > > I have never seen 40 inside a keep and not jumping out to attack the other 40. Hell even 20 go out on my servers to try and do it. Should the 40 defenders have it easier because of siege? Yes of course they have the advantage of owning the structure. Yeah same... All the servers I've been linked with will jump down into the mix and try to split the main group even if it's just to buy time. If the 40 defenders aren't coming out there's going to be no change in their behavior should the walls come down. They're still not going to fight even if the numbers are even. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferelwing.8463 Posted June 28, 2018 Share Posted June 28, 2018 > @"Shagaliscious.6281" said: > > @"aspirine.5839" said: > > > @"Israel.7056" said: > > > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > > > > @"aspirine.5839" said: > > > > > > @"Israel.7056" said: > > > > > > > @"Karnasis.6892" said: > > > > > > > > @"Israel.7056" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Karnasis.6892" said: > > > > > > > > > Why shouldn't 7 people be able to defend objectives with siege? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sounds like you'll still be able to honestly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe, but what I'm worried about is that instead of ac's encouraging thoughtful plays (i.e. not just building against the side of a keep wall or tower wall), we're just going to have more zergs building against the walls of objectives because ac's are less effective. > > > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps. But maybe we'll also see more actual fighting as a result if defenders can't rely as heavily on ACs to defend things. > > > > > > > > > > AC is used, well atleast by me when outnumbered. When help arrives you fight. But taking away siege effectiveness will not make my go outside and die a useless death. It's still 20 or 30 against 5, so you can say things like go out and fight. But we all know that this will not be much of a fight. > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, how long should 5 be able to delay 30? What is too little time, and what is too long? > > > > > > And why ever fight to defend except as an absolute last resort when you're out of supply everywhere and all the siege is dead? > > > > > > So for example let's say I am defending a keep and I've got about 40 people and the attackers have about 40 people with rams or proxy catas shouldn't I just build ACs to counter that? And if they build further back shouldn't i just build ballis to counter that? And if they build shield gens for their further away catas shouldn't I just try to disable the shield gens and hit the catas with trebs or ballis to counter that? And if they build trebs shouldn't I just build shield gens to block the walls and then try to hit their trebs with mortars or counter trebs? Is there ever a point where the safer bet to defend an objective is to actually try to fight instead of just build more siege? > > > > I have never seen 40 inside a keep and not jumping out to attack the other 40. Hell even 20 go out on my servers to try and do it. Should the 40 defenders have it easier because of siege? Yes of course they have the advantage of owning the structure. > > I lost count how many times I've watched YB have a bigger group compared to the group attacking a structure, and they still sit on siege and then /laugh when you inevitably pull off. > > I've also lost count how many times I have made a callout that a small group of like 6 are attacking a keep or tower, and I ask for a few roamers to help, and the response I get is "just build an arrow cart". It's amazing how many people don't want to help defend something because 1 piece of siege can do the job of 4 players. > > Like others have said, if all you can muster up is 5 people to try and defend a T3 structure against 20+, you should lose that structure. There should be no situation outside of the attacking group making bad siege placement decisions or just general laziness by not destroying cannons/oil/mortar, where 5 people can stop 20+ from taking anything. Build an AC and then tell them when the outer wall is down... Yes, that is because the AC is a stall tactic. It's not doing the same job as 4 people. In fact most commanders won't come to a tier 3 until the outer is already down and the enemy is working on the inner. Why? Because the outer wall is harder to defend then the inner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferelwing.8463 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 > @"Basharic.1654" said: > > @"babazhook.6805" said: > > > **_Where do you get that WvW should be about large scale PvP? That an opinion and one not supported by the fact that there arekeeps towers and castles in the first place. _**Added to that if you play on a server that always has the numbers your experience different then those that do not. Again there persons that drop down tiers just because they do not like the large Scale WvW fights and prefer fights where smaller numbers involved. > > > And there it is folks . . . apparently the only game mode designed for large scale PvP isn't about large scale PvP. ... Well you see Anet says it's not (at least that's what was explained to those who were told that they had to go into WvW for Gift of Battle.) I'm glad they made me play it but they did claim it wasn't really PvP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferelwing.8463 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 > @"Karnasis.6892" said: > > @"LetoII.3782" said: > > We're unlinked, massive hole in conspiracy > Yes, you are unlinked. I'm not disputing that. I'm saying MAG IS TANKING TO GET A LINK > > > @"LetoII.3782" said: > > We're unlinked, massive hole in conspiracy > Right, and again MAG IS UNLINKED, AND THEY ARE TRYING TO GET A LINK (this is something they have been trying to do for MONTHS). That is why they tank harder on the week of relinking. It's happened every time my server has faced off against Mag on the weeks of re linking since they tanked to t4-t3. > > I don't think you're spelling what you think you're spelling > Or you just can't read as I explained it very clearly. > > > @"Rampage.7145" said: > > WvW is literally PvP lol, if you do not think WvW is PvP u should stick to silverwastes, u can use your arrowcarts there!!!!! exciting combat!!!!! i am sure disabled and 60 year old people enjoy arrow carts a lot in silverwastes u should try too > > P.S I do not hide behind walls not even outnumbered that is for poosies, i play on the field, i fight if i die i die, no worries it is not real life death, i can run back and try again, rinse and repeat. > > Lol, I never said WvW isn't pvp, but again thinking is hard. I said that WvW is much more than just PvP. It has siege for a reason (to help defend or attack structures/players). Sitting on siege might not be fun to you, but is integral to the game mode. Nerfing AC's MAY and negatively impact WvW, or it could be less effective but still effective. My concerns have always been with nerfing AC's is that there won't be counterplay to 50 man blobs. Agreed. I don't like the constant blob/ktraining. I like strategy and it feels so much better to win when you've out-smarted the enemy and it feels less so when you just out-blobbed them. > > Also, if you are "defending" a integral structure like Hill/Air or Bay/Fire or Garri and you jump out to fight a zerg alone, you are in no way helping your server. Again, if you want to pvp that badly, go to sPvP. > > Yes, I feel defenders should have an advantage vs blobs, especially if they have AC's or any defensive seiges. The reason is simply that you shouldn't be able to break into a keep at anytime just because you have numbers. It should require tactical thinking. Having trouble taking air, hit it again right away from a different angle. Even if you don't actually get in you will force them to waste supply on repairs. If that doesn't work, hit it from multiple angles (or find a location that will hit two walls at once), like air for example, you could hit from south and from bull/eel wall at the same time. Yes you may not get in again but you are forcing the defenders to waste more supply. This is just all about strategy but most of the players I've been talking to or quoting want easy caps, and more fights, and I don't fully understand why, but then again I'm not fond of big 50 v 50 fights. > > I've seen many servers hit a target, get pushed off, and then ignore that target while the defenders resupply and repair the target. If you just keep hitting it eventually the enemy will run out of supply, and yes I realize that hitting targets also takes supply so maybe in some scenarios you can't hit it again right away.> This right here... If you want to take a keep, you just keep pressuring it. You cut off all of the supply lines, you surround it and you keep hitting it. Force the defenders to waste supply and force them to have to call in reinforcements. If you lose that first battle you can try again. Pulling off after the first lost fight just gives the defenders time to replenish their supplies. As a defender the hardest times for me are when supplies are cut off, walls are under constant attack and all of the tactics have had to be used. At that point it makes defending harder and harder. Add in that cutting off reinforcements (don't let the reinforcements make it back into the keep) and you take the keep. @"GDchiaScrub.3241" said: > > > OP starts topic about siege changes (admittedly leaving out that _goal_ again or thought process behind the changes), but then players somehow manage to involve servers as they continue to come up with hypothetical scenarios. Never seen that happen before... > > > > Anyway to resolve this issue? > Sorry about that, I was just using my server as more of an example of why I think AC's shouldn't be nerfed (and maybe I'm blowing it out of proportion, and it might be fine). But my main point is this game shouldn't be reduced to Blob v Blob fights because people don't like they can't get towers/keeps in one shot becuase a small group are stopping them (you know, except those pesky walls and siege in the way ) > > Yeah, exactly. I like stalling and if I can't hold long enough for reinforcements sure that is fair but I should be at least given the same ability, line of sight is still a problem and ac's at least made me feel like the playing field was level. I have to stand in aoe range to even attempt to hit someone with my abilities but the enemy can just hide under the walls and yank me off the walls if I'm dumb enough to try it. I'll just throw siege disables. I used to pop 1 or 2 ac's in certain locations as a stall tactic as well but I'm generally on in off hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferelwing.8463 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 > @"Karnasis.6892" said: > > @"LetoII.3782" said: > > We're unlinked, massive hole in conspiracy > Yes, you are unlinked. I'm not disputing that. I'm saying MAG IS TANKING TO GET A LINK > > > @"LetoII.3782" said: > > We're unlinked, massive hole in conspiracy > Right, and again MAG IS UNLINKED, AND THEY ARE TRYING TO GET A LINK (this is something they have been trying to do for MONTHS). That is why they tank harder on the week of relinking. It's happened every time my server has faced off against Mag on the weeks of re linking since they tanked to t4-t3. > > I don't think you're spelling what you think you're spelling > Or you just can't read as I explained it very clearly. > > > @"Rampage.7145" said: > > WvW is literally PvP lol, if you do not think WvW is PvP u should stick to silverwastes, u can use your arrowcarts there!!!!! exciting combat!!!!! i am sure disabled and 60 year old people enjoy arrow carts a lot in silverwastes u should try too > > P.S I do not hide behind walls not even outnumbered that is for poosies, i play on the field, i fight if i die i die, no worries it is not real life death, i can run back and try again, rinse and repeat. > > Lol, I never said WvW isn't pvp, but again thinking is hard. I said that WvW is much more than just PvP. It has siege for a reason (to help defend or attack structures/players). Sitting on siege might not be fun to you, but is integral to the game mode. Nerfing AC's MAY and negatively impact WvW, or it could be less effective but still effective. My concerns have always been with nerfing AC's is that there won't be counterplay to 50 man blobs. Agreed. I don't like the constant blob/ktraining. I like strategy and it feels so much better to win when you've out-smarted the enemy and it feels less so when you just out-blobbed them. > > Also, if you are "defending" a integral structure like Hill/Air or Bay/Fire or Garri and you jump out to fight a zerg alone, you are in no way helping your server. Again, if you want to pvp that badly, go to sPvP. > > Yes, I feel defenders should have an advantage vs blobs, especially if they have AC's or any defensive seiges. The reason is simply that you shouldn't be able to break into a keep at anytime just because you have numbers. It should require tactical thinking. Having trouble taking air, hit it again right away from a different angle. Even if you don't actually get in you will force them to waste supply on repairs. If that doesn't work, hit it from multiple angles (or find a location that will hit two walls at once), like air for example, you could hit from south and from bull/eel wall at the same time. Yes you may not get in again but you are forcing the defenders to waste more supply. This is just all about strategy but most of the players I've been talking to or quoting want easy caps, and more fights, and I don't fully understand why, but then again I'm not fond of big 50 v 50 fights. > > I've seen many servers hit a target, get pushed off, and then ignore that target while the defenders resupply and repair the target. If you just keep hitting it eventually the enemy will run out of supply, and yes I realize that hitting targets also takes supply so maybe in some scenarios you can't hit it again right away.> This right here... If you want to take a keep, you just keep pressuring it. You cut off all of the supply lines, you surround it and you keep hitting it. Force the defenders to waste supply and force them to have to call in reinforcements. If you lose that first battle you can try again. Pulling off after the first lost fight just gives the defenders time to replenish their supplies. As a defender the hardest times for me are when supplies are cut off, walls are under constant attack and all of the tactics have had to be used. At that point it makes defending harder and harder. Add in that cutting off reinforcements (don't let the reinforcements make it back into the keep) and you take the keep. @"GDchiaScrub.3241" said: > > > OP starts topic about siege changes (admittedly leaving out that _goal_ again or thought process behind the changes), but then players somehow manage to involve servers as they continue to come up with hypothetical scenarios. Never seen that happen before... > > > > Anyway to resolve this issue? > Sorry about that, I was just using my server as more of an example of why I think AC's shouldn't be nerfed (and maybe I'm blowing it out of proportion, and it might be fine). But my main point is this game shouldn't be reduced to Blob v Blob fights because people don't like they can't get towers/keeps in one shot becuase a small group are stopping them (you know, except those pesky walls and siege in the way ) > > Yeah, exactly. I like stalling and if I can't hold long enough for reinforcements sure that is fair but I should be at least given the same ability, line of sight is still a problem and ac's at least made me feel like the playing field was level. I have to stand in aoe range to even attempt to hit someone with my abilities but the enemy can just hide under the walls and yank me off the walls if I'm dumb enough to try it. I'll just throw siege disables. I used to pop 1 or 2 ac's in certain locations as a stall tactic as well but I'm generally on in off hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferelwing.8463 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 > @"Karnasis.6892" said: > > @"LetoII.3782" said: > > We're unlinked, massive hole in conspiracy > Yes, you are unlinked. I'm not disputing that. I'm saying MAG IS TANKING TO GET A LINK > > > @"LetoII.3782" said: > > We're unlinked, massive hole in conspiracy > Right, and again MAG IS UNLINKED, AND THEY ARE TRYING TO GET A LINK (this is something they have been trying to do for MONTHS). That is why they tank harder on the week of relinking. It's happened every time my server has faced off against Mag on the weeks of re linking since they tanked to t4-t3. > > I don't think you're spelling what you think you're spelling > Or you just can't read as I explained it very clearly. > > > @"Rampage.7145" said: > > WvW is literally PvP lol, if you do not think WvW is PvP u should stick to silverwastes, u can use your arrowcarts there!!!!! exciting combat!!!!! i am sure disabled and 60 year old people enjoy arrow carts a lot in silverwastes u should try too > > P.S I do not hide behind walls not even outnumbered that is for poosies, i play on the field, i fight if i die i die, no worries it is not real life death, i can run back and try again, rinse and repeat. > > Lol, I never said WvW isn't pvp, but again thinking is hard. I said that WvW is much more than just PvP. It has siege for a reason (to help defend or attack structures/players). Sitting on siege might not be fun to you, but is integral to the game mode. Nerfing AC's MAY and negatively impact WvW, or it could be less effective but still effective. My concerns have always been with nerfing AC's is that there won't be counterplay to 50 man blobs. Agreed. I don't like the constant blob/ktraining. I like strategy and it feels so much better to win when you've out-smarted the enemy and it feels less so when you just out-blobbed them. > > Also, if you are "defending" a integral structure like Hill/Air or Bay/Fire or Garri and you jump out to fight a zerg alone, you are in no way helping your server. Again, if you want to pvp that badly, go to sPvP. > > Yes, I feel defenders should have an advantage vs blobs, especially if they have AC's or any defensive seiges. The reason is simply that you shouldn't be able to break into a keep at anytime just because you have numbers. It should require tactical thinking. Having trouble taking air, hit it again right away from a different angle. Even if you don't actually get in you will force them to waste supply on repairs. If that doesn't work, hit it from multiple angles (or find a location that will hit two walls at once), like air for example, you could hit from south and from bull/eel wall at the same time. Yes you may not get in again but you are forcing the defenders to waste more supply. This is just all about strategy but most of the players I've been talking to or quoting want easy caps, and more fights, and I don't fully understand why, but then again I'm not fond of big 50 v 50 fights. > > I've seen many servers hit a target, get pushed off, and then ignore that target while the defenders resupply and repair the target. If you just keep hitting it eventually the enemy will run out of supply, and yes I realize that hitting targets also takes supply so maybe in some scenarios you can't hit it again right away.> This right here... If you want to take a keep, you just keep pressuring it. You cut off all of the supply lines, you surround it and you keep hitting it. Force the defenders to waste supply and force them to have to call in reinforcements. If you lose that first battle you can try again. Pulling off after the first lost fight just gives the defenders time to replenish their supplies. As a defender the hardest times for me are when supplies are cut off, walls are under constant attack and all of the tactics have had to be used. At that point it makes defending harder and harder. Add in that cutting off reinforcements (don't let the reinforcements make it back into the keep) and you take the keep. @"GDchiaScrub.3241" said: > > > OP starts topic about siege changes (admittedly leaving out that _goal_ again or thought process behind the changes), but then players somehow manage to involve servers as they continue to come up with hypothetical scenarios. Never seen that happen before... > > > > Anyway to resolve this issue? > Sorry about that, I was just using my server as more of an example of why I think AC's shouldn't be nerfed (and maybe I'm blowing it out of proportion, and it might be fine). But my main point is this game shouldn't be reduced to Blob v Blob fights because people don't like they can't get towers/keeps in one shot becuase a small group are stopping them (you know, except those pesky walls and siege in the way ) > > Yeah, exactly. I like stalling and if I can't hold long enough for reinforcements sure that is fair but I should be at least given the same ability, line of sight is still a problem and ac's at least made me feel like the playing field was level. I have to stand in aoe range to even attempt to hit someone with my abilities but the enemy can just hide under the walls and yank me off the walls if I'm dumb enough to try it. I'll just throw siege disables. I used to pop 1 or 2 ac's in certain locations as a stall tactic as well but I'm generally on in off hours. > @"Shagaliscious.6281" said: > > @"aspirine.5839" said: > > > @"Israel.7056" said: > > > > > > > > If you're a defender you apparently need every conceivable advantage in the game in order to be able to succeed but if you're an attacker you better be fast and sneaky because that's the only way you're taking stuff!! God bless. > > Ehh yes that is kinda the point of the object defense and offense right? Attack and be fast enough before the zone blob comes to deal with you? And the other way around, defend enough so the help is on time to well help you out. > > You keep saying that it is so easy to defend, but let's hear it then. Let's take any T3 tower, QL as example. Zone blob is there. Only a few scouts and defenders. What options do you have in that case? AC? No impossible and useless. Ballista? pfff, useless. Canons perhaps you say? Nope also useless. But then for sure the Oil right? Nope also useless. > > Only option left is treb, yes this usually works, but is 100% countered by shield gens. So..... What do we do now? > > > > You lose the tower, plain a simple. A handful of people should not be able to defend against 20+ attackers. Use tactics to buy time to get adequate backup, or lose the tower. I have to admit, I rarely defend towers, unless they're tier 3. If they're tier 3 then I will defend the tower and try to hold as long as I can. However I've never found AC's to be that op when it comes to defending, I might have 2 up and a treb/cata combo. I don't bother with Bali's on a tower because they rarely ever hit the catas. Plus tactics (Dragon Banner, Invuln and usually I will have something that destroys supply if we lose the tower). However a handful of people should be able to stall a large group long enough for reinforcements if it's a tier 3... I agree you should be able to melt a paper tower but a tier 3 shouldn't be blobbed without extra effort. (Especially because of how long it takes to get them to tier 3). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferelwing.8463 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 > @"Karnasis.6892" said: > > @"LetoII.3782" said: > > We're unlinked, massive hole in conspiracy > Yes, you are unlinked. I'm not disputing that. I'm saying MAG IS TANKING TO GET A LINK > > > @"LetoII.3782" said: > > We're unlinked, massive hole in conspiracy > Right, and again MAG IS UNLINKED, AND THEY ARE TRYING TO GET A LINK (this is something they have been trying to do for MONTHS). That is why they tank harder on the week of relinking. It's happened every time my server has faced off against Mag on the weeks of re linking since they tanked to t4-t3. > > I don't think you're spelling what you think you're spelling > Or you just can't read as I explained it very clearly. > > > @"Rampage.7145" said: > > WvW is literally PvP lol, if you do not think WvW is PvP u should stick to silverwastes, u can use your arrowcarts there!!!!! exciting combat!!!!! i am sure disabled and 60 year old people enjoy arrow carts a lot in silverwastes u should try too > > P.S I do not hide behind walls not even outnumbered that is for poosies, i play on the field, i fight if i die i die, no worries it is not real life death, i can run back and try again, rinse and repeat. > > Lol, I never said WvW isn't pvp, but again thinking is hard. I said that WvW is much more than just PvP. It has siege for a reason (to help defend or attack structures/players). Sitting on siege might not be fun to you, but is integral to the game mode. Nerfing AC's MAY and negatively impact WvW, or it could be less effective but still effective. My concerns have always been with nerfing AC's is that there won't be counterplay to 50 man blobs. Agreed. I don't like the constant blob/ktraining. I like strategy and it feels so much better to win when you've out-smarted the enemy and it feels less so when you just out-blobbed them. > > Also, if you are "defending" a integral structure like Hill/Air or Bay/Fire or Garri and you jump out to fight a zerg alone, you are in no way helping your server. Again, if you want to pvp that badly, go to sPvP. > > Yes, I feel defenders should have an advantage vs blobs, especially if they have AC's or any defensive seiges. The reason is simply that you shouldn't be able to break into a keep at anytime just because you have numbers. It should require tactical thinking. Having trouble taking air, hit it again right away from a different angle. Even if you don't actually get in you will force them to waste supply on repairs. If that doesn't work, hit it from multiple angles (or find a location that will hit two walls at once), like air for example, you could hit from south and from bull/eel wall at the same time. Yes you may not get in again but you are forcing the defenders to waste more supply. This is just all about strategy but most of the players I've been talking to or quoting want easy caps, and more fights, and I don't fully understand why, but then again I'm not fond of big 50 v 50 fights. > > I've seen many servers hit a target, get pushed off, and then ignore that target while the defenders resupply and repair the target. If you just keep hitting it eventually the enemy will run out of supply, and yes I realize that hitting targets also takes supply so maybe in some scenarios you can't hit it again right away.> This right here... If you want to take a keep, you just keep pressuring it. You cut off all of the supply lines, you surround it and you keep hitting it. Force the defenders to waste supply and force them to have to call in reinforcements. If you lose that first battle you can try again. Pulling off after the first lost fight just gives the defenders time to replenish their supplies. As a defender the hardest times for me are when supplies are cut off, walls are under constant attack and all of the tactics have had to be used. At that point it makes defending harder and harder. Add in that cutting off reinforcements (don't let the reinforcements make it back into the keep) and you take the keep. @"GDchiaScrub.3241" said: > > > OP starts topic about siege changes (admittedly leaving out that _goal_ again or thought process behind the changes), but then players somehow manage to involve servers as they continue to come up with hypothetical scenarios. Never seen that happen before... > > > > Anyway to resolve this issue? > Sorry about that, I was just using my server as more of an example of why I think AC's shouldn't be nerfed (and maybe I'm blowing it out of proportion, and it might be fine). But my main point is this game shouldn't be reduced to Blob v Blob fights because people don't like they can't get towers/keeps in one shot becuase a small group are stopping them (you know, except those pesky walls and siege in the way ) > > Yeah, exactly. I like stalling and if I can't hold long enough for reinforcements sure that is fair but I should be at least given the same ability, line of sight is still a problem and ac's at least made me feel like the playing field was level. I have to stand in aoe range to even attempt to hit someone with my abilities but the enemy can just hide under the walls and yank me off the walls if I'm dumb enough to try it. I'll just throw siege disables. I used to pop 1 or 2 ac's in certain locations as a stall tactic as well but I'm generally on in off hours. > @"Shagaliscious.6281" said: > > @"aspirine.5839" said: > > > @"Israel.7056" said: > > > > > > > > If you're a defender you apparently need every conceivable advantage in the game in order to be able to succeed but if you're an attacker you better be fast and sneaky because that's the only way you're taking stuff!! God bless. > > Ehh yes that is kinda the point of the object defense and offense right? Attack and be fast enough before the zone blob comes to deal with you? And the other way around, defend enough so the help is on time to well help you out. > > You keep saying that it is so easy to defend, but let's hear it then. Let's take any T3 tower, QL as example. Zone blob is there. Only a few scouts and defenders. What options do you have in that case? AC? No impossible and useless. Ballista? pfff, useless. Canons perhaps you say? Nope also useless. But then for sure the Oil right? Nope also useless. > > Only option left is treb, yes this usually works, but is 100% countered by shield gens. So..... What do we do now? > > > > You lose the tower, plain a simple. A handful of people should not be able to defend against 20+ attackers. Use tactics to buy time to get adequate backup, or lose the tower. I have to admit, I rarely defend towers, unless they're tier 3. If they're tier 3 then I will defend the tower and try to hold as long as I can. However I've never found AC's to be that op when it comes to defending, I might have 2 up and a treb/cata combo. I don't bother with Bali's on a tower because they rarely ever hit the catas. Plus tactics (Dragon Banner, Invuln and usually I will have something that destroys supply if we lose the tower). However a handful of people should be able to stall a large group long enough for reinforcements if it's a tier 3... Though that usually involves the group not being very good at killing the roamers as they run to the tower and also involves them not stopping the siege disables. It has very little to do with the AC's. I agree you should be able to melt a paper tower but a tier 3 shouldn't be blobbed without a little extra effort. (Especially because of how long it takes to get them to tier 3). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferelwing.8463 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 > @"babazhook.6805" said: > > @"XenesisII.1540" said: > > Why would they build an ac while attacking? to hold off the 20 players on the wall that apparently already get pulled and bombed on every single time anyways? to kill the siege that it is going to be less effective to kill with? Only times an attacking zerg will need to set up acs is to fight in a choke or lords. > > Oh it can work quite well. As example they are often build when there too few to take a towr and there a Treb in that tower taking out a wall on bay. Attackers can also set up an AC in the lords room aimed at the entries so as to kill reinforcements that might arrive. or they could just go take a bali to the ruins and put a whole stop to that treb mess in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferelwing.8463 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 > @"XenesisII.1540" said: > Thought we were talking about it's use on offense... why not just use a balista in the ruins for that treb? you just need 2 people for a quick build. Yeah, that was my thought. You just take 2 or 3 people up with a bali to ruins and kill the treb. If there's an enemy blob at that point it could suck but it's worth trying as a tactic to stall out long enough for reinforcements (if you're lucky). Some enemy blobs will just give up at that point (which I never understood) others will just build another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferelwing.8463 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 > @"Meetshield.1756" said: > Removing Arrow Carts from the game would improve the average pug's skills. They would learn that they can't just sit on the cart and wait for someone else to kill the Siege. However, Removing them is an unfair advantage to the attacker, so reducing effectiveness is actually the right move. Maybe this is enough of a nerf. > > I play on GOM we are always outnumbered, and I'm always frustrated by the 20 dudes I have dieing on the walls running arrow carts, when I need them to just jump off bomb and get back inside. If we did that instead of arrow carts we could kill the siege and save the keep. I end up having to switch to ele and do it myself over and over... ... Or it would make it so that people wouldn't bother defending. Not everyone wants to zerg fight or blob fight. Some of us like skirmishes and hate the lag that comes with full on blobs. As for the 20 on the walls not jumping into the AOE spam. They might just die anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferelwing.8463 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 > @"Ubi.4136" said: > I feel like these changes, plus the alliance changes (if they happen), is just going to turn wvw into even more of an eotm tower swap/ktrain. Sure, some people may defend, but they will eventually learn better, join the roaming, unstoppable blob on it's grand ktrain adventure. Alliances can just coordinate and take turns flipping borderlands and EB, so they don't see each other. All offense, very little to no chance at defense = fast ktrain flipping. I'm really hoping that's not what will end up happening... If it becomes nothing but a ktrain/blob fest I'm less likely to be interested in playing. I like strategy, and figuring out fun ways to break into a keep is exciting for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferelwing.8463 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > @"LetoII.3782" said: > > > @"babazhook.6805" said: > > > > @"LetoII.3782" said: > > > > > @"babazhook.6805" said: > > > > > > > > > Going to an enemy tower and taking out a treb is offense. It faster using an AC then a balli. > > > > > > > > Completely false > > > > Just like the hammer weilding burn guardians. Why do you keep making these rediculous claims? > > > > > > > > > > What are you on about? Taking out a treb at swt takes all of one AC and two people to build. It next to impossible for the enemy player to take it out from that tower. when you get one down below unless he comes down to get you. > > > > You didn't mention swt in your first post but so be it. > > It's faster to eliminate that treb from the arena with a ballista. > > > > > > > Why do you suggest otherwise if you have not tried it > > > > Did you think this was a new discovery? It's a 5 year old tactic. > > > > and what does this have to do with a Guardian? > > > > That was about you giving hairbrained build advice to new players about a class you hadn't even played. I don't forget, apparently you do. I also recall you advocating no endure pain on warrior.. A veritible wellspring of bad ideas and common knowledge. > > > > > You can build a balli in those ruins but if the enemy is throwing one up as well he can get it up faster while staying IN The tower and take your balli out. A Balli is harder to place so as to be able to hit an AC below . > > > > An AC by the trebs counters your AC below in addition to player skills which can hit it, the ballista is successful more often. Also 5 year old knowledge. > > > > > Another tip, some people put up Trebs in SWC etc to hit bay. If there no countertreb able to reach you can take it out , very often with a Mortar while using the incendiary component while the Damage component does not work because the damage bit has to be dead on and the treb can be just out of range. This works remarkabley well when the enemy using Shield gens as well. I have seen people pull off a mortar using the blast version because "they can not hit the target" and swapped to incendiary and taken the target down. This also helps to flush the enemy out of the area of their trebs/gens allowing others to get in closer and wreck them. > > > > > > This also works with Cows. A slow process to be sure but if you do have a counter treb up on the wall in Bay you very often can not reach the Treb in SWT. Switch to cow and the AOE can catch it. > > > > A VERITIBLE WELLSPRING > > Added to this, if the ballista by the arena isn't an option because of a counter one in the tower, I've built a guild cata where the ballista can't hit because of line of sight and been able to hit both the ballista and the treb. Much simpler as the AC, Cata, and the ballista all need at least two people. > > And if you are running small groups without Guild catas, you're doing it wrong. Not everyone is in a Guild that has them (just saying). I generally just build some superior ones when I can't get a bali up there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karnasis.6892 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 > @"Ferelwing.8463" said: I'm glad someone has FINALLY saw my point of view, so thank you for that. Also, you posted this post 5 times XD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferelwing.8463 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 > @"XenesisII.1540" said: > Arrow carts were always meant to be anti personnel not anti siege weapon, that's why it's siege damage has been nerfed twice already. > Yes it can be used on offense, not that it was used much in that way other than what we both already mentioned chokes and lords room. > > Then they should fix the Bali's issue with Line of Sight, otherwise the best tactic will be to always place the catas next to the walls. AC's should be anti-personnel I agree but when you're options for anti-siege aren't things that can actually hit what it's designed to hit then you've got a bigger problem. Cata's have problems, Trebs (unless you're good and there are some who are amazing) are also not very helpful either especially if they can't see where they need to be hitting. Bali's can't get the line of sight etc. It'd be nicer if they would fix some of these issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XenesisII.1540 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 Guys... ac range have not changed either, and they can be placed in some areas where they can't be touched, like some can hit over a wall without actually targeting the ground... I'll just name mendons and net, as a couple examples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XenesisII.1540 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 Guys... ac range have not changed either, and they can be placed in some areas where they can't be touched, like some can hit over a wall without actually targeting the ground... I'll just name mendons and net, as a couple examples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferelwing.8463 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 > @"XenesisII.1540" said: > > @"Ferelwing.8463" said: > > Nah, I'd just like to be able to fight back on equal footing... > > Then get reinforcements, that's the point a lot of us are trying to make, siege is one of many other things to help delay an attack, but you still need people to counter an attack, and if you cannot muster enough people off of 4 maps then you lose whatever it is you're holding. Once the walls or gates eventually go down, your "5" isn't going to hold back that zerg anyways, your own zerg should be waiting by the time that happens or if not already pushed them out before the last thing opens. I usually play on the off hours of my server. It's very light coverage and the majority of us are roamers. Then again I also avoid EBG like the plague so that might also be part of it. I have zero problem with using siege disables and being that annoying nuisance that keeps pestering the bigger group while I stall for the reinforcements. However, I refuse to be a free bag just because someone can hang out directly under the wall and AOE me down or cc me into their zerg. I used the AC's as intended, as an anti-personnel weapon. Something that didn't require me to become a free bag for the oncoming horde. > > You guys just want to safely fire your acs on the walls to hold off entire zergs so you can hold your ppt. The 5 people that hold back small groups with siege is the reason why it escalates to zergs or blobs trying to take t3 keeps, and yet you still want to be able to out right hold off those zergs and blobs, let's not even mention how much worse it gets with an actual zerg defending and kittening out siege everywhere. Don't have the coverage? it's the way it is until alliances come in and help balance out time zones. If you cannot field enough players to fight your enemy then eventually you lose your stuff until you are able to, simple. No, I want to be able to hit the incoming AOE/CC pain train that can hit me without me being able to do the same. I have to stand at the tiny edge of the wall to do the same thing and it's far more dangerous for me to do it then it is for the person directly below me to do it. Which makes the walls a hindrance rather than a "help". It should be the opposite. It should provide me with cover and make it difficult for the incoming siegers. (Kinda the point of walls after all). But I digress. I know how to use disablers and I know how to use bali's and I use disablers just as often as AC's. Though generally speaking I'm also one of the people who as soon as reinforcements start trickling in will jump down and try to help split the blob in half and burst the squishies. I don't spend all my time on the AC's but I'm not going to become a free bag by standing out on the exposed part of the wall just to be AOE'd/CC chained to death either. I'm also not going to just let the blob take the keep nor am I going to ignore when the siegers have a bigger advantage than the defenders. Outer walls are easy to breach. Inners are not and most Commanders aren't coming till the Outer is down/ nearly down. I also get really irritated by the people who assume that just because I know how to put up siege and where to put it that I am automatically not someone who joins into the fight or tries to use strategy. I don't like blobs or ktrains, because more often then not they're not using a strategy, it's have more people then enemy, kill enemy= win. I've taken tier 3 keeps with 5 people before by doing obnoxious things like 4 hours of dropping paper siege at the doors every time the timer was up till the enemy was convinced it was just me doing that again and they didn't bother to check it anymore. We didn't encounter a single person, till after we'd already killed Lord, It was a strategy that worked when it probably shouldn't have (I doubt I'll ever get to pull it off again but who knows). I've helped kill supply lines going to keeps while a Commander is trying to take a keep. (Constantly killing every yak/taking the camp etc) Or I'll tap the closest keeps to prevent reinforcements from getting to the keep the commander is going after THEN keep killing the supplies to said keep. What I won't do is mindlessly run at another group over and over again "for the fights". If there's a strategy involved I might, but otherwise? Forget it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferelwing.8463 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 > @"Karnasis.6892" said: > > @"Ferelwing.8463" said: > I'm glad someone has FINALLY saw my point of view, so thank you for that. > > Also, you posted this post 5 times XD > I keep having it tell me the post failed... GRRR this is so irritating. I'd delete it but it only lets me edit it. No problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XenesisII.1540 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 > @"Ferelwing.8463" said: > > @"XenesisII.1540" said: > > Arrow carts were always meant to be anti personnel not anti siege weapon, that's why it's siege damage has been nerfed twice already. > > Yes it can be used on offense, not that it was used much in that way other than what we both already mentioned chokes and lords room. > > > > > > Then they should fix the Bali's issue with Line of Sight, otherwise the best tactic will be to always place the catas next to the walls. AC's should be anti-personnel I agree but when you're options for anti-siege aren't things that can actually hit what it's designed to hit then you've got a bigger problem. Cata's have problems, Trebs (unless you're good and there are some who are amazing) are also not very helpful either especially if they can't see where they need to be hitting. Bali's can't get the line of sight etc. It'd be nicer if they would fix some of these issues. I agree with better counter play which is what I outlined in my post in the siege suggestion thread, which I won't rehash here, just a reminder the dev said this was the first pass and that these were the easiest things for them to do right away without having to do extra ui stuff, so we have to wait and see what else they may change including structure siege which we all know is next to useless. https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/40496/siege-revisions/p1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferelwing.8463 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 > @"XenesisII.1540" said: > > @"Ferelwing.8463" said: > > > @"XenesisII.1540" said: > > > Arrow carts were always meant to be anti personnel not anti siege weapon, that's why it's siege damage has been nerfed twice already. > > > Yes it can be used on offense, not that it was used much in that way other than what we both already mentioned chokes and lords room. > > > > > > > > > > Then they should fix the Bali's issue with Line of Sight, otherwise the best tactic will be to always place the catas next to the walls. AC's should be anti-personnel I agree but when you're options for anti-siege aren't things that can actually hit what it's designed to hit then you've got a bigger problem. Cata's have problems, Trebs (unless you're good and there are some who are amazing) are also not very helpful either especially if they can't see where they need to be hitting. Bali's can't get the line of sight etc. It'd be nicer if they would fix some of these issues. > > I agree with better counter play which is what I outlined in my post in the siege suggestion thread, which I won't rehash here, just a reminder the dev said this was the first pass and that these were the easiest things for them to do right away without having to do extra ui stuff, so we have to wait and see what else they may change including structure siege which we all know is next to useless. Yeah, I get that but I wish they'd have saved the AC nerf till after they fixed the bigger problem of the anti-siege weapons not doing their jobs correctly. Defending outer has always been a pain point in general but AC's at least gave me options. Now I feel like I'm left with three bad ones and I have to decide which of the bad options to attempt. Bali's can be used in some locations but they're very hit or miss, plus with the line of sight issue if the cata's are directly below the Bali it can't see it.. Cata's have the same problem in that positioning is key and difficult minus the line of sight issue and trebs you have to position them correctly as well and have a treb God on them (those people usually end up playing on EBG rather than playing in Home BBL and I don't really enjoy EBG). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferelwing.8463 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 > @"XenesisII.1540" said: > > @"Ferelwing.8463" said: > > > @"XenesisII.1540" said: > > > Arrow carts were always meant to be anti personnel not anti siege weapon, that's why it's siege damage has been nerfed twice already. > > > Yes it can be used on offense, not that it was used much in that way other than what we both already mentioned chokes and lords room. > > > > > > > > > > Then they should fix the Bali's issue with Line of Sight, otherwise the best tactic will be to always place the catas next to the walls. AC's should be anti-personnel I agree but when you're options for anti-siege aren't things that can actually hit what it's designed to hit then you've got a bigger problem. Cata's have problems, Trebs (unless you're good and there are some who are amazing) are also not very helpful either especially if they can't see where they need to be hitting. Bali's can't get the line of sight etc. It'd be nicer if they would fix some of these issues. > > I agree with better counter play which is what I outlined in my post in the siege suggestion thread, which I won't rehash here, just a reminder the dev said this was the first pass and that these were the easiest things for them to do right away without having to do extra ui stuff, so we have to wait and see what else they may change including structure siege which we all know is next to useless. > > > https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/40496/siege-revisions/p1 Thanks, I'll check out that thread too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XenesisII.1540 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 Just went with a zerg hitting a t3 garrison from the nw side, the cannon and mortars and 1 ac on the wall were taken out. Defenders started responding, some we killed on the way some made it through. 3 catas 1 shield gen. Defenders built a treb at their spawn cliff, mortar from inner was hitting close to catas, eventually a disable made it through twice and catas were killed. Zerg now resorting to treb from nwt, we're all sitting in tower twiddling thumbs making jokes. 20 mins of boredom because have to babysit tower incase defender zerg decides to come, they did once and got drove off. Ac's are not THAT important, it's a matter of using all your tools available, knowing your surroundings, and catching the gaps to break the siege especially on catas where most times it seems like people don't have mastery and don't get the shield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strider Pj.2193 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 > @"Ferelwing.8463" said: > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > > @"LetoII.3782" said: > > > > @"babazhook.6805" said: > > > > > @"LetoII.3782" said: > > > > > > @"babazhook.6805" said: > > > > > > > > > > > Going to an enemy tower and taking out a treb is offense. It faster using an AC then a balli. > > > > > > > > > > Completely false > > > > > Just like the hammer weilding burn guardians. Why do you keep making these rediculous claims? > > > > > > > > > > > > > What are you on about? Taking out a treb at swt takes all of one AC and two people to build. It next to impossible for the enemy player to take it out from that tower. when you get one down below unless he comes down to get you. > > > > > > You didn't mention swt in your first post but so be it. > > > It's faster to eliminate that treb from the arena with a ballista. > > > > > > > > > > Why do you suggest otherwise if you have not tried it > > > > > > Did you think this was a new discovery? It's a 5 year old tactic. > > > > > > and what does this have to do with a Guardian? > > > > > > That was about you giving hairbrained build advice to new players about a class you hadn't even played. I don't forget, apparently you do. I also recall you advocating no endure pain on warrior.. A veritible wellspring of bad ideas and common knowledge. > > > > > > > You can build a balli in those ruins but if the enemy is throwing one up as well he can get it up faster while staying IN The tower and take your balli out. A Balli is harder to place so as to be able to hit an AC below . > > > > > > An AC by the trebs counters your AC below in addition to player skills which can hit it, the ballista is successful more often. Also 5 year old knowledge. > > > > > > > Another tip, some people put up Trebs in SWC etc to hit bay. If there no countertreb able to reach you can take it out , very often with a Mortar while using the incendiary component while the Damage component does not work because the damage bit has to be dead on and the treb can be just out of range. This works remarkabley well when the enemy using Shield gens as well. I have seen people pull off a mortar using the blast version because "they can not hit the target" and swapped to incendiary and taken the target down. This also helps to flush the enemy out of the area of their trebs/gens allowing others to get in closer and wreck them. > > > > > > > > This also works with Cows. A slow process to be sure but if you do have a counter treb up on the wall in Bay you very often can not reach the Treb in SWT. Switch to cow and the AOE can catch it. > > > > > > A VERITIBLE WELLSPRING > > > > Added to this, if the ballista by the arena isn't an option because of a counter one in the tower, I've built a guild cata where the ballista can't hit because of line of sight and been able to hit both the ballista and the treb. Much simpler as the AC, Cata, and the ballista all need at least two people. > > > > And if you are running small groups without Guild catas, you're doing it wrong. > > Not everyone is in a Guild that has them (just saying). I generally just build some superior ones when I can't get a bali up there. They are cheap to build. But need a scribe. It's worth it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferelwing.8463 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > @"Ferelwing.8463" said: > > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > > > @"LetoII.3782" said: > > > > > @"babazhook.6805" said: > > > > > > @"LetoII.3782" said: > > > > > > > @"babazhook.6805" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Going to an enemy tower and taking out a treb is offense. It faster using an AC then a balli. > > > > > > > > > > > > Completely false > > > > > > Just like the hammer weilding burn guardians. Why do you keep making these rediculous claims? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What are you on about? Taking out a treb at swt takes all of one AC and two people to build. It next to impossible for the enemy player to take it out from that tower. when you get one down below unless he comes down to get you. > > > > > > > > You didn't mention swt in your first post but so be it. > > > > It's faster to eliminate that treb from the arena with a ballista. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why do you suggest otherwise if you have not tried it > > > > > > > > Did you think this was a new discovery? It's a 5 year old tactic. > > > > > > > > and what does this have to do with a Guardian? > > > > > > > > That was about you giving hairbrained build advice to new players about a class you hadn't even played. I don't forget, apparently you do. I also recall you advocating no endure pain on warrior.. A veritible wellspring of bad ideas and common knowledge. > > > > > > > > > You can build a balli in those ruins but if the enemy is throwing one up as well he can get it up faster while staying IN The tower and take your balli out. A Balli is harder to place so as to be able to hit an AC below . > > > > > > > > An AC by the trebs counters your AC below in addition to player skills which can hit it, the ballista is successful more often. Also 5 year old knowledge. > > > > > > > > > Another tip, some people put up Trebs in SWC etc to hit bay. If there no countertreb able to reach you can take it out , very often with a Mortar while using the incendiary component while the Damage component does not work because the damage bit has to be dead on and the treb can be just out of range. This works remarkabley well when the enemy using Shield gens as well. I have seen people pull off a mortar using the blast version because "they can not hit the target" and swapped to incendiary and taken the target down. This also helps to flush the enemy out of the area of their trebs/gens allowing others to get in closer and wreck them. > > > > > > > > > > This also works with Cows. A slow process to be sure but if you do have a counter treb up on the wall in Bay you very often can not reach the Treb in SWT. Switch to cow and the AOE can catch it. > > > > > > > > A VERITIBLE WELLSPRING > > > > > > Added to this, if the ballista by the arena isn't an option because of a counter one in the tower, I've built a guild cata where the ballista can't hit because of line of sight and been able to hit both the ballista and the treb. Much simpler as the AC, Cata, and the ballista all need at least two people. > > > > > > And if you are running small groups without Guild catas, you're doing it wrong. > > > > Not everyone is in a Guild that has them (just saying). I generally just build some superior ones when I can't get a bali up there. > > They are cheap to build. But need a scribe. It's worth it. Exactly, having a scribe is costly unfortunately (It's probably the most expensive of the different skills. I've yet to finish leveling mine up). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strider Pj.2193 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 > @"Ferelwing.8463" said: > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > > @"Ferelwing.8463" said: > > > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > > > > @"LetoII.3782" said: > > > > > > @"babazhook.6805" said: > > > > > > > @"LetoII.3782" said: > > > > > > > > @"babazhook.6805" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Going to an enemy tower and taking out a treb is offense. It faster using an AC then a balli. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Completely false > > > > > > > Just like the hammer weilding burn guardians. Why do you keep making these rediculous claims? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What are you on about? Taking out a treb at swt takes all of one AC and two people to build. It next to impossible for the enemy player to take it out from that tower. when you get one down below unless he comes down to get you. > > > > > > > > > > You didn't mention swt in your first post but so be it. > > > > > It's faster to eliminate that treb from the arena with a ballista. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why do you suggest otherwise if you have not tried it > > > > > > > > > > Did you think this was a new discovery? It's a 5 year old tactic. > > > > > > > > > > and what does this have to do with a Guardian? > > > > > > > > > > That was about you giving hairbrained build advice to new players about a class you hadn't even played. I don't forget, apparently you do. I also recall you advocating no endure pain on warrior.. A veritible wellspring of bad ideas and common knowledge. > > > > > > > > > > > You can build a balli in those ruins but if the enemy is throwing one up as well he can get it up faster while staying IN The tower and take your balli out. A Balli is harder to place so as to be able to hit an AC below . > > > > > > > > > > An AC by the trebs counters your AC below in addition to player skills which can hit it, the ballista is successful more often. Also 5 year old knowledge. > > > > > > > > > > > Another tip, some people put up Trebs in SWC etc to hit bay. If there no countertreb able to reach you can take it out , very often with a Mortar while using the incendiary component while the Damage component does not work because the damage bit has to be dead on and the treb can be just out of range. This works remarkabley well when the enemy using Shield gens as well. I have seen people pull off a mortar using the blast version because "they can not hit the target" and swapped to incendiary and taken the target down. This also helps to flush the enemy out of the area of their trebs/gens allowing others to get in closer and wreck them. > > > > > > > > > > > > This also works with Cows. A slow process to be sure but if you do have a counter treb up on the wall in Bay you very often can not reach the Treb in SWT. Switch to cow and the AOE can catch it. > > > > > > > > > > A VERITIBLE WELLSPRING > > > > > > > > Added to this, if the ballista by the arena isn't an option because of a counter one in the tower, I've built a guild cata where the ballista can't hit because of line of sight and been able to hit both the ballista and the treb. Much simpler as the AC, Cata, and the ballista all need at least two people. > > > > > > > > And if you are running small groups without Guild catas, you're doing it wrong. > > > > > > Not everyone is in a Guild that has them (just saying). I generally just build some superior ones when I can't get a bali up there. > > > > They are cheap to build. But need a scribe. It's worth it. > > Exactly, having a scribe is costly unfortunately (It's probably the most expensive of the different skills. I've yet to finish leveling mine up). Yeah.... I bit the bullet with help from the guild. If you are small, it's harder. We have 5-7 active which made it ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now