[Suggestion] Stop Golems from contesting points.

[Turkeyspit.3965]

> @"Caedmon.6798" said:

> > @"Blockhead Magee.3092" said:

> > I think a change to your strategy would be in order instead of requesting a change in the game mode.

>

>

> My strategy ? As in going to a camp where 3 people sit inside golems and me moving off again because we wont kill them before a blob arrives ? Ok then.

>

> I dont quite think you understand the issue,unless you think "strategy" is calling for 20 others to help me cap a camp.

 

Not trying to be antagonistic, but yes, that is a strategy. By building 3 golems and having 3 players defend the camp, they are denying you the ability to flip it solo, but instead would require you to bring a sizeable force. The defenders will then try to delay you until reinforcements come.

 

They are taking extra measures to defend an objective because, I'm assuming, they are trying to run supply and level up towers/keeps.

 

That is 100% pure, organic, sustainable, responsibly farmed, environmentally friendly strategy.

 

That you don't "like it" isn't an indication that something is wrong or changes need to be made, especially since you already know a solution, and that is to bring more people with you.

 

Odd how many people complain that WvW is just a mindless karma train, and yet here we have an example of players coordinating to hold and defend objectives, and still complaints are raised. :expressionless:

 

[Cuks.8241]

> @"Caedmon.6798" said:

> > @"Blockhead Magee.3092" said:

> > I think a change to your strategy would be in order instead of requesting a change in the game mode.

>

>

> My strategy ? As in going to a camp where 3 people sit inside golems and me moving off again because we wont kill them before a blob arrives ? Ok then.

>

> I dont quite think you understand the issue,unless you think "strategy" is calling for 20 others to help me cap a camp.

 

Actually yes, that is strategy and a good one. It is what WvW should be, server working together for the win. There is nothing better than multiple groups; blobs, roamers, havoc groups, scouts, working together on a map.

If you want to beat them your server will have to employ some strategic game play. And that is how it should be.

[Strider Pj.2193]

> @"Caedmon.6798" said:

> > @"Blockhead Magee.3092" said:

> > I think a change to your strategy would be in order instead of requesting a change in the game mode.

>

>

> My strategy ? As in going to a camp where 3 people sit inside golems and me moving off again because we wont kill them before a blob arrives ? Ok then.

>

> I dont quite think you understand the issue,unless you think "strategy" is calling for 20 others to help me cap a camp.

 

What is your ‘blob’ doing when theirs is showing up to wreck you?

 

This happens to me all the time. We run a small group, and the best thing to me, is when we pull a Zerg from another border to come deal with us. It means we are controlling them.

 

There are a couple celebrity PUG commanders that likely don’t like us...

[Caedmon.6798]

> @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> > @"Caedmon.6798" said:

> > > @"Blockhead Magee.3092" said:

> > > I think a change to your strategy would be in order instead of requesting a change in the game mode.

> >

> >

> > My strategy ? As in going to a camp where 3 people sit inside golems and me moving off again because we wont kill them before a blob arrives ? Ok then.

> >

> > I dont quite think you understand the issue,unless you think "strategy" is calling for 20 others to help me cap a camp.

>

> What is your ‘blob’ doing when theirs is showing up to wreck you?

>

> This happens to me all the time. We run a small group, and the best thing to me, is when we pull a Zerg from another border to come deal with us. It means we are controlling them.

>

> There are a couple celebrity PUG commanders that likely don’t like us...

 

I dont mind pulling a blob to my loc,at all.Its about having to burn through 300k hp which equals around having to burn through 15 ppl's hp when youre just with 3 or so.

[Caedmon.6798]

> @"Cuks.8241" said:

> > @"Caedmon.6798" said:

> > > @"Blockhead Magee.3092" said:

> > > I think a change to your strategy would be in order instead of requesting a change in the game mode.

> >

> >

> > My strategy ? As in going to a camp where 3 people sit inside golems and me moving off again because we wont kill them before a blob arrives ? Ok then.

> >

> > I dont quite think you understand the issue,unless you think "strategy" is calling for 20 others to help me cap a camp.

>

> Actually yes, that is strategy and a good one. It is what WvW should be, server working together for the win. There is nothing better than multiple groups; blobs, roamers, havoc groups, scouts, working together on a map.

> If you want to beat them your server will have to employ some strategic game play. And that is how it should be.

 

If you think calling 20 people for 3 while we also have our own blob or other guild raids on the map is a "strategy" than i dont know what to tell you tbh.

[foxof.8752]

If you are long time wvwer, you should have known there are multiple roles in wvw, the most basic is offensive and defensive. I have more respect on players that willing to spend time and much less reward to guard a camp, upgrade objectives, scout, asking help to defend objs etc than a pure offensive players.

And you know what, most defensive players do not have fighting skills as offensive players, the golems, balis, mounts are good to help them.

[DeadlySynz.3471]

I see your point, but mounts themselves are more a plague on contesting than actual golems. Most points are large so it only takes 1 knucklhead to bounce around on the mount, leave the circle, then the next yahoo comes in on their mount doing the same thing.

 

A better option is, the only way a circle gets contested is if there are more players/guards in the circle than enemies. No more of 1 warrior jumping in, running around, invulnerable this, block that, 0 here and there with each hit, contesting a point with an entire zerg. That premise is beyond ridiculous. Just make it so whoever has more bodies in the circle starts ticking that color. Done, this is no longer a problem. So that 1 or 2 people sitting in 1-2 golems at a point with 3 attackers no longer matters; 3 > 2, so the camp will flip unless more defenders come.

[Skotlex.7580]

How does the OP's situation even happens? I've never bothered with golems before, but the wiki States it takes 100 supply to build one golem (or 50 if it's a guild blueprint), so I don't see how a few players can even afford to build multiple golems onsite in order to use this tactic.

 

I am guessing they are using mounts + mesmer portals to get a golem on the camps?

 

Sounds like an organized strategy for defending. If ANet doesn't like them being used this way, then perhaps the above comment's suggestion could be in place (so a single player can't keep a circle from being capped just because it's immortal, even if outnumbered). Otherwise, it'll remain a valid strategy to defend camps.

[Strider Pj.2193]

> @"Skotlex.7580" said:

> How does the OP's situation even happens? I've never bothered with golems before, but the wiki States it takes 100 supply to build one golem (or 50 if it's a guild blueprint), so I don't see how a few players can even afford to build multiple golems onsite in order to use this tactic.

>

> I am guessing they are using mounts + mesmer portals to get a golem on the camps?

>

> Sounds like an organized strategy for defending. If ANet doesn't like them being used this way, then perhaps the above comment's suggestion could be in place (so a single player can't keep a circle from being capped just because it's immortal, even if outnumbered). Otherwise, it'll remain a valid strategy to defend camps.

 

100 supply in a base camp.

Upgraded eventually gets 300. Doesn’t take long to replenish either amount either.

 

It’s easy to build a golem.

[HazyDaisy.4107]

> @"DeadlySynz.3471" said:

> Just make it so whoever has more bodies in the circle starts ticking that color. Done, this is no longer a problem.

 

Except there would be with the other side of the scenario, which is 2nd and 3rd server camp flippers. You've seen it, a 2 man blue team comes in smashes guards and then the 6 man green team comes along for the steal.

 

The way it is now, the 2 man blue team could put up a bit of a fight against 6 green without the circle ticking either color and about a minute before guards start respawning, but with your solution, the minute 3 green step into the circle blue would be better off running.

 

 

[Dawdler.8521]

> @"Caedmon.6798" said:

> > @"Cuks.8241" said:

> > > @"Caedmon.6798" said:

> > > > @"Blockhead Magee.3092" said:

> > > > I think a change to your strategy would be in order instead of requesting a change in the game mode.

> > >

> > >

> > > My strategy ? As in going to a camp where 3 people sit inside golems and me moving off again because we wont kill them before a blob arrives ? Ok then.

> > >

> > > I dont quite think you understand the issue,unless you think "strategy" is calling for 20 others to help me cap a camp.

> >

> > Actually yes, that is strategy and a good one. It is what WvW should be, server working together for the win. There is nothing better than multiple groups; blobs, roamers, havoc groups, scouts, working together on a map.

> > If you want to beat them your server will have to employ some strategic game play. And that is how it should be.

>

> If you think calling 20 people for 3 while we also have our own blob or other guild raids on the map is a "strategy" than i dont know what to tell you tbh.

If its a good or bad strategy is irrelevant, but it *is* strategy. Its quite literally bringing forces where they are needed.

 

Good lord I cant even begin to count the times when our zerg do just fine in fights but the commander totally fails at overall border strategy by ignoring calls to take an enemy camp thats about to upgrade a keep. Roamers cant take it, its defended. If you bring 1 roamer, they bring 5 defenders. If you bring 5 roamers, they bring 15 defenders. If you bring 10 roamers, they bring the entire zerg.

 

And then when its T3, the elite fight commander thats been standing in the open field for the last 5 minutes waiting for the enemy zerg to arrive and give them honorable battle will moan and complain about it being T3 now, why are roamers so useless you only needed 1 to cap that defended T3 camp.

[Drastic.8920]

> @"Dawdler.8521" said:

> Good lord I cant even begin to count the times when our zerg do just fine in fights but the commander totally fails at overall border strategy by ignoring calls to take an enemy camp thats about to upgrade a keep. Roamers cant take it, its defended. If you bring 1 roamer, they bring 5 defenders. If you bring 5 roamers, they bring 15 defenders. If you bring 10 roamers, they bring the entire zerg.

 

And on top of the players, there are probably 2-4 omegas, 2-3 ballistas, 2-3 ACs and a flame ram or two for good measure lol

[cgMatt.5162]

This is a good example of conflicting PPT vs fight play styles where a cheese mechanic is used to keep the point contested longer than what should be possible. The players doing it are usually low skill, and that's the only way they can fight to rationalize it's usefulness.

 

It does make for some good fights if people keep pouring in. That part I don't have a problem with, but the way siege interacts with the capture point should go.

[Strider Pj.2193]

> @"cgMatt.5162" said:

> This is a good example of conflicting PPT vs fight play styles where a cheese mechanic is used to keep the point contested longer than what should be possible. The players doing it are usually low skill, and that's the only way they can fight to rationalize it's usefulness.

>

> It does make for some good fights if people keep pouring in. That part I don't have a problem with, but the way siege interacts with the capture point should go.

 

If you are willing to give up the mount counting as well, then I can see it as a possibility.

[gebrechen.5643]

1) Bring a disabler for the golem

2) Don't try to 1v3 a camp - you'd lose even without the people being in golems

3) Go condi or Soulbeast to kill the mounted player

4) make some friends and maybe you don't need to be forever alone.

 

[Caedmon.6798]

> @"gebrechen.5643" said:

> 1) Bring a disabler for the golem

> 2) Don't try to 1v3 a camp - you'd lose even without the people being in golems

> 3) Go condi or Soulbeast to kill the mounted player

> 4) make some friends and maybe you don't need to be forever alone.

>

 

1) Learn to read

2) Dont tell me what ill win and what i wont win,i like outmanned fights and am actively looking for them,ive won 5on1's myself.Thats Not the freaking point.

3) Nope,and What mounted player are you talking about ? ITS ABOUT GOLEMS.

4) Already have those and i roam with 2 - 4 Max because thats the playstyle i enjoy without having 15 others behind me carrying me making it seem im good while they did all the work in reality.

 

 

 

[Stand The Wall.6987]

I think if someone uses a golem to contest a point, then it is a serious waste of that golem. it also costs a ton of supply that isn't being used to take an objective. also a skill group of 5 can do essentially the same thing.

[Strider Pj.2193]

> @"Stand The Wall.6987" said:

> I think if someone uses a golem to contest a point, then it is a serious waste of that golem. it also costs a ton of supply that isn't being used to take an objective. also a skill group of 5 can do essentially the same thing.

 

It’s really not much in an upgraded camp. 50 for a guild suit, 100 for an alpha and 150 for an omega.

Mid stalling is the intent, more than likely they are going to use an alpha or guild.

 

At MOST it’s all of a tier 0 camp. Which replenishes within a tick....

 

And let’s not forget, if they are trying to upgrade a tower or keep, keeping the camp is more important than the supply.

[Blockhead Magee.3092]

I wish to play the way I want. Other players playing the way they want are preventing me from achieving my goals. Therefore, A-net must change the game mode to prevent them from doing what they want and assist me in doing what I want. Seems legit.

 

 

[Caedmon.6798]

> @"Blockhead Magee.3092" said:

> I wish to play the way I want. Other players playing the way they want are preventing me from achieving my goals. Therefore, A-net must change the game mode to prevent them from doing what they want and assist me in doing what I want. Seems legit.

>

>

 

Its about adjusting a mechanic that will only be healthy for the game mode.

[Pelto.9364]

Camps flips too fast. Golems are needed so that help can arrive. This way even less skilled players can guard camps. I cannot solo 1 vs 3 more skilled players, and I don't think our most skilled players want guard camps.

[Solaris.2489]

Not this topic again. Golem strat is fine and always has been.

[Caedmon.6798]

> @"Pelto.9364" said:

> Camps flips too fast. Golems are needed so that help can arrive. This way even less skilled players can guard camps. I cannot solo 1 vs 3 more skilled players, and I don't think our most skilled players want guard camps.

 

"Less skilled players need golems"

 

Ok,Gotcha !

[Sleepwalker.1398]

No one is going to give you a T3 camp on a platter.

 

Also, say a server just got k-trained and their NA or EU players are starting to login. Do you think they will fine with you taking their camp with no resistance?

[juno.1840]

It's a legit strategy.

Someone on the opposing team spent supply to make the golem and dedicated their play time to defend the camp... arguably a super boring job with little reward.

You got outplayed son.