Warclaw Praise Thread - Yes, It Is Healthy For WvW

[oOStaticOo.9467]

> @"L A T I O N.8923" said:

> > @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:

> > > @"L A T I O N.8923" said:

> > > > @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:

> > > > > @"Frozen.1347" said:

> > > > > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I know it's hard to understand my good bro, but the very large majority of players who have chosen to not participate so much in wvw, had made that choice because of (A) Maps take too long to traverse = boring, and (B) Trying to get back to the commander or anywhere in general, without getting jumped was for most people = boring and rage inducing.

> > > > > >

> > > > > Most players who don't participate in WvW do so, because they have no interest in PvP. Which is totally fine ofc. But this doesn't justify taking PvP away from WvW, because there is already plenty of content for PvE only players. But there is no alternative for WvW as an open world PvP game mode (no, sPvP isn't!). Getting some players to swap from one game mode to another at the cost of others leaving the game entirely is hardly "healthy" for the game.

> > > >

> > > > It's not taking PvP away from WvW, it's giving those players who do not wish to PvP 1v1 the option to not PvP 1v1. You seem to think that it is taking away PvP when it simply isn't. If people WANT to 1v1 PvP, they will do so. There are dueling grounds in WvW that many people go to in order to 1v1 each other. Forcing somebody to PvP 1v1 is not going to give you the satisfaction you are looking for, unless you are simply just looking to kill somebody with the least amount of resistance possible and just grief people as much as you can. Most people who end up being ganked by a 1v1 PvP'er just stand there and let the other person kill them. I know that is exactly what I do. I have no desire to try to take on 1 person individually in open field combat. I will defend towers, keeps, and camps. I will try to take towers, keeps, and camps. I do not want to open field fight. That is boring to me, and yes I know that is my opinion that others do not share. To me WvW is trying to take as much of your enemies territory as you can and hold it while holding your own territories as well, not just running around in open fields looking for other people to fight. If I want to JUST fight people I will go to a game mode more designed for that such as sPvP.

> > >

> > > Bullocks, dueling is something else then 1v1 same as pvp

> > >

> > > Map movement and mobility is bullocks now

> > > Same as most classes cant dismount An enemy

> > >

> > > If you wish to flip objectives without players trying to kill you, maybe go eotm OR silverwastes

> >

> > If you wish to PvP, maybe go to Obsidian Sanctum or sPvP.

>

> Naah wvw is a good place to fight people of all numbers and with numbers. Too bad some feel more of a thrill when they cap a paper tower with 20, over a 2v2 they won after trying a couple of Times

 

Yeah, it's a real shame people enjoy actually playing WORLD vs. WORLD the way it should be instead of trying to force other people to play it as PLAYER vs. PLAYER which it isn't.

[Natar.3671]

> @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:

 

> Yeah, it's a real shame people enjoy actually playing WORLD vs. WORLD the way it should be instead of trying to force other people to play it as PLAYER vs. PLAYER which it isn't.

 

Sounds like we shld rename wvw to Players vs Doors since u hate fighting players so much. Actually why stop there? Change the game mode such that there are no enemy players, so ppl can just go around taking objectives without any opposition ya???

 

/s mode off

[oOStaticOo.9467]

> @"Natar.3671" said:

> > @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:

>

> > Yeah, it's a real shame people enjoy actually playing WORLD vs. WORLD the way it should be instead of trying to force other people to play it as PLAYER vs. PLAYER which it isn't.

>

> Sounds like we shld rename wvw to Players vs Doors since u hate fighting players so much. Actually why stop there? Change the game mode such that there are no enemy players, so ppl can just go around taking objectives without any opposition ya???

>

> /s mode off

 

Never said I hated fighting against other players. I stated that I like to go capture Towers, Keeps, and Camps and defend them as well. It takes fighting against other players to do so. I just said I do not like to fight against other players in open field 1 on 1 combat. WvW has been twisted from what it originally was and should be by PvP'ers that got tired of the constraints of PvP and wanted more open concept builds to fight with. WvW should be large groups of people running around trying to capture and defend objectives and while doing so run into each other and fight, not just random people standing in an open field going toe to toe. WvW has points based off of how many structures you have and what level they are. The server who holds the most of those wins, not the server who has the most individual kills.

[subversiontwo.7501]

> @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:

> > @"Natar.3671" said:

> > > @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:

> >

> > > Yeah, it's a real shame people enjoy actually playing WORLD vs. WORLD the way it should be instead of trying to force other people to play it as PLAYER vs. PLAYER which it isn't.

> >

> > Sounds like we shld rename wvw to Players vs Doors since u hate fighting players so much. Actually why stop there? Change the game mode such that there are no enemy players, so ppl can just go around taking objectives without any opposition ya???

> >

> > /s mode off

>

> Never said I hated fighting against other players. I stated that I like to go capture Towers, Keeps, and Camps and defend them as well. It takes fighting against other players to do so. I just said I do not like to fight against other players in open field 1 on 1 combat. WvW has been twisted from what it originally was and should be by PvP'ers that got tired of the constraints of PvP and wanted more open concept builds to fight with. WvW should be large groups of people running around trying to capture and defend objectives and while doing so run into each other and fight, not just random people standing in an open field going toe to toe. WvW has points based off of how many structures you have and what level they are. The server who holds the most of those wins, not the server who has the most individual kills.

The age-old problem of WvW however is that **IF** those structures were claimed when no one was there to defend them or fight you for them open field, then owning them is absolutely pointless in the greater perspective of the community, no matter what the (broken-) scoring system says. That is why people want to change the scoring system. Structures claimed when no one is around are supposed to be as trivial as it was to take them. As always, I'm not pointing fingers now, but most structures that are defended were not claimed from defenders (or taken with competition). Most structures that are defended and upgraded were taken without a fight and upgraded overnight when people with jobs and schools are asleep. If someone claims, holds and upgrades an objective when people are actually playing, good job. That is not the issue here.

 

As far the the OP of the thread goes. I guess point three makes sense. The other points mostly seem to be incoherent ramblings about the OP chasing veteran NPC. He seems to be quite the wurmslayer.

 

[Psycoprophet.8107]

I dont get this whole wvw isnt pvp its wvw mentality, it clearly makes no sense and is literally players deluding themselves regarding the game mode to match their prefered playstyle. Irl wars over territories which wvw basically is were lone soldiers ignored by scouting parties etc when they were discovered en route? Was there some rule that only large groups were to engage with the enemies large groups?no that sounds rediculous. Large zergs also chase down and gank solo players often so that's better than a solo player engaging a solo player? Like seriously. Small groups on mounts also troll and gank solo players so gankers are not the only players with reasons to feel that mounts have no place in the game mode.

[Trevor Boyer.6524]

A couple things to comment on, regarding recurring statements against Warclaw:

 

1. "I can't dismount people on Warclaw. It rides circles around me and it is invincible." Ok, it has 10k health pool and no protection buff. I run a Bunker Druid setup in spvp that lays down 10k damage spikes in about 2s, consistently. Now we're talking wvw with pve gear stats and food/utility buffs. What builds are these people running that cannot dismount a target with 10k health pool and no protection buff, in a high dps patching nonetheless? Are these people running Minstrel Tempest while trying take supply camps alone? Maybe those are builds that players shouldn't be roaming on? Is the mobility too great for these players and they cannot keep up to hit the Warclaw with melee? I hardly see how this is any different than chasing a Thief or a Mesmer or a Ranger with 2x Swoops. The only difference that Warclaw is making here, is that something like a Core Guard now has mobility like a Thief while mounted. I hardly see this is a vice, but rather a boon to balance issues, considering the incredibly dominant positioning that Thief/Mesmer/Warrior/Ranger mobility had in roaming before Warclaw. <- This was a problem with class viability in roaming, which is something that people don't seem to be identifying because they were conditioned for years to think this was normal, and that creates bias.

2. Upon all of this, why are these players trying to chase Warclaws around if it's just running from them and allowing them to take important objectives such as a supply camp? That's great! if he wants to run let him do it! Take the supply camp! WvW isn't about 1v1 pvp in a field. It has mechanics designed for actually trying to win the WvW Skrimish, which are all about taking objectives. Those objectives by the way, can be completed by never touching an opposing player. So if a player is running away on his Warclaw because he is afraid to engage, let him do it. Maybe players who complain about this should try the same tactics? Maybe they would notice that it's nice for everyone to be able to disengage and avoid bad situations for regroups, spending much less time in the respawn while doing it. Is the Warclaw rider riding in circles on a supply camp and stopping someone's cap of the supply camp? Look I don't know how else to say this, but if a player cannot catch and down a Warclaw with 10k health pool, no protection buff & no heal skill, with literally ANY of the builds in GW2 that provide numerous teleports/gap closers/ranged attacks, maybe that player ought to reevaluate what they are doing wrong. And that player should be thankful that the Warclaw rider is staying mounted instead of dismounting on purpose to come at him.

 

Even if a player gets 2v1d by two Warclaw riders while roaming, let's take a look at the facts of the matter:

* First of all, why is that player even being caught in the 2v1 if he also possesses a Warclaw? Just run man, that's the purpose of it. Disengage and regroup with other players before heading back. If the player gets caught in a Warclaw meta that is his own fault.

* If the player is caught and the two Warclaw riders are being very aggressive, 1 of 2 things is going to happen. Either both riders will dismount for attack immediately, or maybe 1 will dismount for attack and the other will ride around I guess? The point being here is that worst case scenario is that both riders dismount for attack immediately. The better case scenario is that 1 of the riders stays mounted, because he cannot attack while mounted without dismounting. This gives the player who is being attacked, an advantage to only be essentially 1v1 for a time. It gives him a moment to actually down that player first, before the other dismounts. So I have no idea where the arguments are coming from about "Oh some of them stay on the Warclaw and it's so OP." <- That's one of the more blindly stupid things I've ever heard said in this forum. There is no advantage for a group that is trying to kill someone, to stay mounted so they can't attack. All that does is allow the defender a moment to actually kill the player who dismounts for combat. This is especially true if the group of Warclaws is trying to engage some 1vX legend.

* Looking at these situations in terms of a player who is actually capable of winning 1vX situations, I'm telling you right now that nothing is more favorable than a group of 10 idiots riding around him on Warclaws as they individually take turns dismounting to attempt to 1v1 him. That's just classic kung fu movie villain mistakes right there. "Let's take turns 1v1ing the main character instead of jumping him 10v1." So stop even bringing this stuff up or pointing it out at all, because it's ignorant to do so. Seriously boys, the only thing the Warclaw is doing is allowing players to keep up or get to you if you are dismounted, and is that really any different than the way it was before? If my memory serves me correctly, if I was in combat and slowed due to it, but enemies were approaching me who were ooc, the same exact thing would happen. In fact, some classes are still faster than the Warclaw when they have a target to teleport at. THE ONLY THING THE WARCLAW IS DOING, is allowing slower classes to keep up.

 

**The only thing that has changed in terms of dynamic in wvw, is that slower builds can now contest the mobility & disengage of some of the faster builds, with a 10k protectionless no heal value shield in front of them. And even still, we all know something like a D/P Shortbow Thief, can still outrun or easily catch a Warclaw, and dismount it in a single backstab. So stop crying and acting like that isn't true. It's disgusting, get over the bias of new dynamic ^^**

 

[Lincolnbeard.1735]

> @"everyman.4375" said:

> To be fair the warclaw must be a fun addition if you're playing Sic'em Soulbeast.

 

This.

Apart from ranger, no other profession can dismount players if the mounted player doesn't want to be dismounted.

 

All these people complaining about roamers are the same ones that jump on the solo roamer 5+vs1, so it's kind of ironic. :)

[subversiontwo.7501]

> @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:

> The only thing that has changed in terms of dynamic in wvw, is that slower builds can now contest the mobility & disengage of some of the faster builds, with a 10k protectionless no heal value shield in front of them. And even still, we all know something like a D/P Shortbow Thief, can still outrun or easily catch a Warclaw, and dismount it in a single backstab. So stop crying and acting like that isn't true. It's disgusting, get over the bias of new dynamic ^^

This is true, I agree with it. There are some other perks to it at other scales in the game mode too. I'm not sure how it makes the mount healthy for WvW overall though or should be praised. It has afterall taken time and resources to develop, came with exploitative issues (structure leaps etc.) and has other drawbacks (the stomp etc.). It is very much a plus-minus nothing ordeal that could have been a plus instead. Then the thread title would have made sense.

 

 

[Fat Disgrace.4275]

> @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:

 

>

> **The only thing that has changed in terms of dynamic in wvw, is that slower builds can now contest the mobility & disengage of some of the faster builds, with a 10k protectionless no heal value shield in front of them. And even still, we all know something like a D/P Shortbow Thief, can still outrun or easily catch a Warclaw, and dismount it in a single backstab. So stop crying and acting like that isn't true. It's disgusting, get over the bias of new dynamic ^^**

>

 

No, not really. I guess you could get lucky and stealth up before the mount user sees you and then burst hard with assassins signet, but thats rarely go8ng to happen, about the catch up? May be with shadow step and steal, then what? 9/10 shadow shot will miss with out the mount user dodging because that alone moves too fast and the projectile fails to land, try it your self with projectile attacks (not including read the winds) and if said d/p actually does succeed in dis-mounting he has probably used up all iniaitve, burnt steal and shadow step. That thief is in no position to do anything else. Surprised at you even mentioning this being high plat, or apparently so.

 

Edit. What I mean is, that it can be done yes but it fails a lot of times too. I actually have better chance in using warrior vs them troll mount people who dance around you lol.

[Trevor Boyer.6524]

@"Fat Disgrace.4275"

 

I dunno man, all the Thieves I play with in wvw run ultra high instagib dps builds. Chewing through 10k Warclaw bar happens like immediately.

 

 

 

[Frozen.1347]

> @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:

> > @"L A T I O N.8923" said:

> > > @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:

> > > > @"L A T I O N.8923" said:

> > > > > @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:

> > > > > > @"Frozen.1347" said:

> > > > > > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I know it's hard to understand my good bro, but the very large majority of players who have chosen to not participate so much in wvw, had made that choice because of (A) Maps take too long to traverse = boring, and (B) Trying to get back to the commander or anywhere in general, without getting jumped was for most people = boring and rage inducing.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > Most players who don't participate in WvW do so, because they have no interest in PvP. Which is totally fine ofc. But this doesn't justify taking PvP away from WvW, because there is already plenty of content for PvE only players. But there is no alternative for WvW as an open world PvP game mode (no, sPvP isn't!). Getting some players to swap from one game mode to another at the cost of others leaving the game entirely is hardly "healthy" for the game.

> > > > >

> > > > > It's not taking PvP away from WvW, it's giving those players who do not wish to PvP 1v1 the option to not PvP 1v1. You seem to think that it is taking away PvP when it simply isn't. If people WANT to 1v1 PvP, they will do so. There are dueling grounds in WvW that many people go to in order to 1v1 each other. Forcing somebody to PvP 1v1 is not going to give you the satisfaction you are looking for, unless you are simply just looking to kill somebody with the least amount of resistance possible and just grief people as much as you can. Most people who end up being ganked by a 1v1 PvP'er just stand there and let the other person kill them. I know that is exactly what I do. I have no desire to try to take on 1 person individually in open field combat. I will defend towers, keeps, and camps. I will try to take towers, keeps, and camps. I do not want to open field fight. That is boring to me, and yes I know that is my opinion that others do not share. To me WvW is trying to take as much of your enemies territory as you can and hold it while holding your own territories as well, not just running around in open fields looking for other people to fight. If I want to JUST fight people I will go to a game mode more designed for that such as sPvP.

> > > >

> > > > Bullocks, dueling is something else then 1v1 same as pvp

> > > >

> > > > Map movement and mobility is bullocks now

> > > > Same as most classes cant dismount An enemy

> > > >

> > > > If you wish to flip objectives without players trying to kill you, maybe go eotm OR silverwastes

> > >

> > > If you wish to PvP, maybe go to Obsidian Sanctum or sPvP.

> >

> > Naah wvw is a good place to fight people of all numbers and with numbers. Too bad some feel more of a thrill when they cap a paper tower with 20, over a 2v2 they won after trying a couple of Times

>

> Yeah, it's a real shame people enjoy actually playing WORLD vs. WORLD the way it should be instead of trying to force other people to play it as PLAYER vs. PLAYER which it isn't.

 

Worlds are build up of players. Therefore world vs world = player(s) vs player(s).

And while the mount doesn't take away PvP entirely, it definitely is a step away from player vs player interaction.

[Sneakytail.5783]

I love this mount. It's made WvW much easier and we no longer have to waypoint away from WvW fight guilds like DOC, gods, and PB, who zerg us down nightly. I can get my daily done and all the nodes collected in record time as well.

[UmbraNoctis.1907]

> @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:

>

> 1. "I can't dismount people on Warclaw. It rides circles around me and it is invincible." Ok, it has 10k health pool and no protection buff. [...]

 

You forgot to mention the 3 evades, high movement speed and complete immunity to any kind of cc ...

And many players run durability or earth rune, which proc while mounted.

 

>The only difference that Warclaw is making here, is that something like a Core Guard now has mobility like a Thief while mounted. I hardly see this is a vice, but rather a boon to balance issues, considering the incredibly dominant positioning that Thief/Mesmer/Warrior/Ranger mobility had in roaming before Warclaw. <- This was a problem with class viability in roaming, which is something that people don't seem to be identifying because they were conditioned for years to think this was normal, and that creates bias.

 

Some classes were better for roaming, others were better for zerging. While that might not be optimal (i'd love to have a good necro solo roaming build) it was sort of balanced. The warclaw takes away from the "roamer classes" without giving anything in return. Instead it gives the advantage to the "zerg classes" whithout any downsides for them. That's hardly an increase in balance, unless you want to tell me, that wvw was completey dominated by roamers previously ...

 

> 2. Upon all of this, why are these players trying to chase Warclaws around if it's just running from them and allowing them to take important objectives such as a supply camp? That's great! if he wants to run let him do it! Take the supply camp! WvW isn't about 1v1 pvp in a field. It has mechanics designed for actually trying to win the WvW Skrimish, which are all about taking objectives. Those objectives by the way, can be completed by never touching an opposing player. [...]

 

Killing a player open field prevents him from taking any objective or killing other players and it grants score for the kill itself. Letting him run away (or rather being forced to do so), allows him to go elsewhere and score for his team. It just leads to undefended stuff getting capped back and forth. That's neither efficient from a scoring point of view, nor is it fun and engaging gameplay (imo). It is basically like EOTM, which was never considered to be "real" WvW. Guess why ...

 

> Even if a player gets 2v1d by two Warclaw riders while roaming, let's take a look at the facts of the matter:

> * First of all, why is that player even being caught in the 2v1 if he also possesses a Warclaw? Just run man, that's the purpose of it. Disengage and regroup with other players before heading back. If the player gets caught in a Warclaw meta that is his own fault.[...]

 

Can't do anything other than running arround while mounted, so ofc roamers are going to spend some time unmounted. And if you consider engaging in combat solo or with a small grp a "fault", it just shows how detrimental the mount is for said playstyles.

 

>[...]THE ONLY THING THE WARCLAW IS DOING, is allowing slower classes to keep up.

 

And that's an issue. Mobility is only worth something if it gives an advantage over others. Certain classes weren't dominating the solo roaming scene because they were fast. It was because they were faster. Which allowed them to disengage, kite and eventually split up chasing enemies into more manageable "portions".

The mount takes away the tool of solo/small scale players to handle outnumbered fights, while at the same time giving zerglings a free pass.

 

And even when i can get on the mount and run away from others, it is just incredibly boring. Kiting on foot was much more fun, because even with a mobility advantage i had to be very careful to not get caught. Now escaping/kiting unmounted is close to impossible to do (feels even worse than solo roaming on reaper), while getting away on the mount is trivial. It is completely dumbed down gameplay.

 

 

[Hitman.5829]

> @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:

> > @"L A T I O N.8923" said:

> > > @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:

> > > > @"L A T I O N.8923" said:

> > > > > @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:

> > > > > > @"Frozen.1347" said:

> > > > > > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I know it's hard to understand my good bro, but the very large majority of players who have chosen to not participate so much in wvw, had made that choice because of (A) Maps take too long to traverse = boring, and (B) Trying to get back to the commander or anywhere in general, without getting jumped was for most people = boring and rage inducing.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > Most players who don't participate in WvW do so, because they have no interest in PvP. Which is totally fine ofc. But this doesn't justify taking PvP away from WvW, because there is already plenty of content for PvE only players. But there is no alternative for WvW as an open world PvP game mode (no, sPvP isn't!). Getting some players to swap from one game mode to another at the cost of others leaving the game entirely is hardly "healthy" for the game.

> > > > >

> > > > > It's not taking PvP away from WvW, it's giving those players who do not wish to PvP 1v1 the option to not PvP 1v1. You seem to think that it is taking away PvP when it simply isn't. If people WANT to 1v1 PvP, they will do so. There are dueling grounds in WvW that many people go to in order to 1v1 each other. Forcing somebody to PvP 1v1 is not going to give you the satisfaction you are looking for, unless you are simply just looking to kill somebody with the least amount of resistance possible and just grief people as much as you can. Most people who end up being ganked by a 1v1 PvP'er just stand there and let the other person kill them. I know that is exactly what I do. I have no desire to try to take on 1 person individually in open field combat. I will defend towers, keeps, and camps. I will try to take towers, keeps, and camps. I do not want to open field fight. That is boring to me, and yes I know that is my opinion that others do not share. To me WvW is trying to take as much of your enemies territory as you can and hold it while holding your own territories as well, not just running around in open fields looking for other people to fight. If I want to JUST fight people I will go to a game mode more designed for that such as sPvP.

> > > >

> > > > Bullocks, dueling is something else then 1v1 same as pvp

> > > >

> > > > Map movement and mobility is bullocks now

> > > > Same as most classes cant dismount An enemy

> > > >

> > > > If you wish to flip objectives without players trying to kill you, maybe go eotm OR silverwastes

> > >

> > > If you wish to PvP, maybe go to Obsidian Sanctum or sPvP.

> >

> > Naah wvw is a good place to fight people of all numbers and with numbers. Too bad some feel more of a thrill when they cap a paper tower with 20, over a 2v2 they won after trying a couple of Times

>

> Yeah, it's a real shame people enjoy actually playing WORLD vs. WORLD the way it should be instead of trying to force other people to play it as PLAYER vs. PLAYER which it isn't.

 

WHAT?

Mathematically speaking, the bigger the map gets, the lower the player density it gets. Thus making it a 1 vs 1 mode!

What I mean by this, is that it is more likely to encounter few players while you are roaming.

If you had a map the size of PvP maps with 50 people in it, then the player density will be so big that it will be GvG.

 

If you want to GvG then go to obsidian sanctum.

WvW is for adventures trying to pick a 1 vs 1 fight.

 

It is IMPOSSIBLE for a serg of 50+ to defend every single place.

It is so blatantly obvious that WvW is for a 1 vs 1 player not GvG. The tag makes it possible for everyone to gather when there is an imminent treat to your world or if you want to attack the heavily guarded objectives of the enemy.

[Spartacus.3192]

> @"Grim West.3194" said:

> Warclaw is fun.

>

> The people who don't like it are the same short sighted players who yell at newbs for playing "THEIR" game mode. If the elitists had their way, nobody would play WvW.

>

> This isn't YOUR game mode, it is for everyone. And anything that can bring in new players, even for a short while, is a plus.

>

>

This is so illogical. It brought a whole set of new players (PVE players) for a short while because all they wanted was the mount and then "most" of them left. Meanwhile it alienated a whole chunk of "existing" wvw players. You didnt suddenly get a whole lot more zerg players, but you lost roamers. Net effect is a drop in population.

 

How on earth can a short term boost in population but a longer term drop in population be considered a plus?

 

 

[oOStaticOo.9467]

> @"Hitman.5829" said:

> > @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:

> > > @"L A T I O N.8923" said:

> > > > @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:

> > > > > @"L A T I O N.8923" said:

> > > > > > @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:

> > > > > > > @"Frozen.1347" said:

> > > > > > > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > I know it's hard to understand my good bro, but the very large majority of players who have chosen to not participate so much in wvw, had made that choice because of (A) Maps take too long to traverse = boring, and (B) Trying to get back to the commander or anywhere in general, without getting jumped was for most people = boring and rage inducing.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Most players who don't participate in WvW do so, because they have no interest in PvP. Which is totally fine ofc. But this doesn't justify taking PvP away from WvW, because there is already plenty of content for PvE only players. But there is no alternative for WvW as an open world PvP game mode (no, sPvP isn't!). Getting some players to swap from one game mode to another at the cost of others leaving the game entirely is hardly "healthy" for the game.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > It's not taking PvP away from WvW, it's giving those players who do not wish to PvP 1v1 the option to not PvP 1v1. You seem to think that it is taking away PvP when it simply isn't. If people WANT to 1v1 PvP, they will do so. There are dueling grounds in WvW that many people go to in order to 1v1 each other. Forcing somebody to PvP 1v1 is not going to give you the satisfaction you are looking for, unless you are simply just looking to kill somebody with the least amount of resistance possible and just grief people as much as you can. Most people who end up being ganked by a 1v1 PvP'er just stand there and let the other person kill them. I know that is exactly what I do. I have no desire to try to take on 1 person individually in open field combat. I will defend towers, keeps, and camps. I will try to take towers, keeps, and camps. I do not want to open field fight. That is boring to me, and yes I know that is my opinion that others do not share. To me WvW is trying to take as much of your enemies territory as you can and hold it while holding your own territories as well, not just running around in open fields looking for other people to fight. If I want to JUST fight people I will go to a game mode more designed for that such as sPvP.

> > > > >

> > > > > Bullocks, dueling is something else then 1v1 same as pvp

> > > > >

> > > > > Map movement and mobility is bullocks now

> > > > > Same as most classes cant dismount An enemy

> > > > >

> > > > > If you wish to flip objectives without players trying to kill you, maybe go eotm OR silverwastes

> > > >

> > > > If you wish to PvP, maybe go to Obsidian Sanctum or sPvP.

> > >

> > > Naah wvw is a good place to fight people of all numbers and with numbers. Too bad some feel more of a thrill when they cap a paper tower with 20, over a 2v2 they won after trying a couple of Times

> >

> > Yeah, it's a real shame people enjoy actually playing WORLD vs. WORLD the way it should be instead of trying to force other people to play it as PLAYER vs. PLAYER which it isn't.

>

> WHAT?

> Mathematically speaking, the bigger the map gets, the lower the player density it gets. Thus making it a 1 vs 1 mode!

> What I mean by this, is that it is more likely to encounter few players while you are roaming.

> If you had a map the size of PvP maps with 50 people in it, then the player density will be so big that it will be GvG.

>

> If you want to GvG then go to obsidian sanctum.

> WvW is for adventures trying to pick a 1 vs 1 fight.

>

> It is IMPOSSIBLE for a serg of 50+ to defend every single place.

> It is so blatantly obvious that WvW is for a 1 vs 1 player not GvG. The tag makes it possible for everyone to gather when there is an imminent treat to your world or if you want to attack the heavily guarded objectives of the enemy.

 

LOL, you are too funny.

[Trevor Boyer.6524]

> @"UmbraNoctis.1907" said:

> > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:

> >

> > 1. "I can't dismount people on Warclaw. It rides circles around me and it is invincible." Ok, it has 10k health pool and no protection buff. [...]

>

> You forgot to mention the 3 evades, high movement speed and complete immunity to any kind of cc ...

> And many players run durability or earth rune, which proc while mounted.

>

> >The only difference that Warclaw is making here, is that something like a Core Guard now has mobility like a Thief while mounted. I hardly see this is a vice, but rather a boon to balance issues, considering the incredibly dominant positioning that Thief/Mesmer/Warrior/Ranger mobility had in roaming before Warclaw. <- This was a problem with class viability in roaming, which is something that people don't seem to be identifying because they were conditioned for years to think this was normal, and that creates bias.

>

> Some classes were better for roaming, others were better for zerging. While that might not be optimal (i'd love to have a good necro solo roaming build) it was sort of balanced. The warclaw takes away from the "roamer classes" without giving anything in return. Instead it gives the advantage to the "zerg classes" whithout any downsides for them. That's hardly an increase in balance, unless you want to tell me, that wvw was completey dominated by roamers previously ...

>

> > 2. Upon all of this, why are these players trying to chase Warclaws around if it's just running from them and allowing them to take important objectives such as a supply camp? That's great! if he wants to run let him do it! Take the supply camp! WvW isn't about 1v1 pvp in a field. It has mechanics designed for actually trying to win the WvW Skrimish, which are all about taking objectives. Those objectives by the way, can be completed by never touching an opposing player. [...]

>

> Killing a player open field prevents him from taking any objective or killing other players and it grants score for the kill itself. Letting him run away (or rather being forced to do so), allows him to go elsewhere and score for his team. It just leads to undefended stuff getting capped back and forth. That's neither efficient from a scoring point of view, nor is it fun and engaging gameplay (imo). It is basically like EOTM, which was never considered to be "real" WvW. Guess why ...

>

> > Even if a player gets 2v1d by two Warclaw riders while roaming, let's take a look at the facts of the matter:

> > * First of all, why is that player even being caught in the 2v1 if he also possesses a Warclaw? Just run man, that's the purpose of it. Disengage and regroup with other players before heading back. If the player gets caught in a Warclaw meta that is his own fault.[...]

>

> Can't do anything other than running arround while mounted, so ofc roamers are going to spend some time unmounted. And if you consider engaging in combat solo or with a small grp a "fault", it just shows how detrimental the mount is for said playstyles.

>

> >[...]THE ONLY THING THE WARCLAW IS DOING, is allowing slower classes to keep up.

>

> And that's an issue. Mobility is only worth something if it gives an advantage over others. Certain classes weren't dominating the solo roaming scene because they were fast. It was because they were faster. Which allowed them to disengage, kite and eventually split up chasing enemies into more manageable "portions".

> The mount takes away the tool of solo/small scale players to handle outnumbered fights, while at the same time giving zerglings a free pass.

>

> And even when i can get on the mount and run away from others, it is just incredibly boring. Kiting on foot was much more fun, because even with a mobility advantage i had to be very careful to not get caught. Now escaping/kiting unmounted is close to impossible to do (feels even worse than solo roaming on reaper), while getting away on the mount is trivial. It is completely dumbed down gameplay.

>

>

 

This is the best argued feedback that I've had so far in this thread, so let me try to address this without sounding like I'm attacking you or something. I'm honestly just trying to make for good debate:

 

1. I don't personally feel the 3 evades is a problem at all. Every character on foot has 2 dodges, evades, blocks, invulns, stealths, teleports, and even vigor buffs or passive endurance regen or energy sigils, that makes for even more dodges on swap. I do however believe that Warclaw should have some kind of a break bar. I assume it was made to not be effected by CCs because it is not in the game's coding for mounts to be effected by CCs. So we are more than likely looking at a coding issue. If it had a break bar "a not so powerful one" let's say that dazes and stuns maybe take of 1/3rd of the bar or more, but something like a straight knockdown would end up doing 2/3rds or more, and a very powerful CC like Signet of Humility, may break it in 1 hit. Then we could have it so when the bar is broken, the Warclaw instantly dismounts its player. <- This would not be difficult to do for most builds, and I think this suggestion goes hand in hand with the suggestions of Warclaw having some kind of dismount skill.

2. I see your point here, but I'm just not seeing this problem actually happening man. Lately I roam and zerg on Borlis Pass, which is merged with Tarnished Coast. In all seriousness, I'm seeing more roamer clash play over things like supply camps than ever before. I mean you have the aspect that Warclaw is faster in your territory and slower in enemy territory. This has very real effects ^^ I mean you cannot outrun an enemy on his Warclaw, with your Warclaw, if you are in his territory. The combat is going to happen if he chases you and has any damage at all. He's gonna catch you and dismount himself with a #1 dealing damage, leaving your Warclaw at about 8k let's say, and then considering he is a popular roam build: Spellbreaker, Soulbeast, ANY Thief build, Holo, ANY Mesmer build, DPSy Ele, he's going to shred through that remaining protection-buffless no heal skill 8k, regardless of the 3 evades with 1 to 2 strikes, which will be heavily ranged channeled or projectile, random teleport strikes, or enormously embellished gap closing power like a Spellbreaker has. And this isn't to mention that most of these classes, actually in truth have greater mobility dismounted, than a Warclaw rider has while he is in enemy territory. So in regard to the idea that "No one can catch each other on Warclaws" I'm just not seeing this claim come to be true in many cases, unless people are just not understanding how to work the new mechanics to their advantages. If anything was to be complained about, it shouldn't be Warclaw mobility issues, it should be the tanking and baiting power that it has for those roamer engagements. In example: For the Spellbreaker to catch the guy on the Warclaw, he has to burn a GS #5, a Bull's Charge, and pop Rampage to ensure the extra Gap Closers and the Rock Throw. By the time the player is dismounted and the real 1v1 begins, the Spellbreaker has many of his skills on cool-down, which isn't very fair. <- Now that is a real balance issue combat wise. But the Warclaw mobility? I just kind of feel like it's a "get used to the new dynamic" issue.

3. The thing I agree with here is what I just explained in the above ^ how Warclaw is a 10k shield that baits a player's CDs before the engagement even begins, But the mobility is just not actually "imbalanced" like people are claiming. It's actually more towards the idea of "balance" in my opinion, because it enables the viability of many other build structures in terms of getting places and keeping up or chasing. But the fact remains that when that Reaper dismounts to attempt to fight Thief he just chased, the Thief still has far greater mobility. Such great mobility in fact, that it can still outrun the Reaper's 2 friends that are still mounted, that are still trying to chase the Thief, and there are plenty of other builds that can run on foot just about as fast as the Thief. All the Warclaw has done, is lessen the mobile superiority of certain classes, in terms of their ability to dominant roam play. And likewise after recent power creeping, there are roam classes that now have viable builds within zergs. It's a new type of balance we are seeing, but it is balance. But yes, it is straying away from the idea of class individuality and unique attributes. In example: "The Scourge is meant for zerging only" "The Thief is meant for roaming only." Is this a good thing? I don't know you tell me. My claim was ONLY that Warclaw mobility complaints about it being "imbalanced" were incorrect. The "balance" issues with Warclaw lay in other places than what the granted mobility is doing to the game.

4. About your final comment: "Mobility is only worth something if it gives an advantage over others. Certain classes weren't dominating the solo roaming scene because they were fast. It was because they were faster." I completely agree, though the fact remains that we aren't on the Warclaw 100% of the time, and when players get off a Warclaw here is what we are looking at:

 

* Spellbreaker - GS 3, GS 5, Sword 2, Bull's Charge, Rampage 3, Rampage 5, Rampage 4 Throw Boulder. How could a player NOT catch and dismount a Warclaw or run from a Warclaw with all of this? This all equates to greater mobility than a Warclaw, even when it is in the Warclaw's own territory, and an abundant amount of methods to catch a Warclaw, while dealing large damage to dismount it.

* Guardian - It can't run from a Warclaw "well it never could run from anything to begin with", but it sure can catch it with JI and Sword 2 teleport bursts. DH can even use a Longbow True Shot, followed up by a single 1 auto = Warclaw dismounted. All a Core Guard would have to do is prep focus 5, JI in with gs 2, and pop smite condition. This small burst with pve stats and food buffs is like 20k+. Even with a watered down tankier wvw build, it should be easily landing 10k.

* Herald - Like Guardians, they can't run from anything and never could even before Warclaw, but boy oh boy buddy, can they chase with Unrelenting Assault and Phase Traversal, while dealing 20k+ strikes at that. If a player cannot catch a Warclaw with this, they're something very wrong.

* Soulbeast or any Ranger with a Longbow for that matter - If a player can't catch a Warclaw rider with this setup, he's a terrible player and should consider finding a new game to play. Upon this, Soulbeast builds with the merge feature, offer the potential to have double "Swoops" coming from the GS 3 and a bird's merge skills." The Soulbeast also has a permanent run boost while being merged. I am a Soulbeast main, and I can vouch that utilizing the 2x Swoops and the permanent run boost while merged, is as fast as a Warclaw in the rider's own territory, and it is faster than the Warclaw if the rider is in the Ranger's territory.

* Holosmith with Rifle & Rocket Boots - Not as strong at chasing the Warclaw, but it can run from them if the Engi is in his own territory. In enemy territory, the Warclaw rider will eventually catch him, but the Rocket Boots makes this and exceedingly annoying task.

* ALL Thief builds - DE = First Death's Judgement will dismount the rider, plenty of mobility for chase & disengage. D/P or D/Ds, first steal/mug into backstab combo will dismount the rider if running glass cannon DPS, plenty of mobility for chase or disengage. Staff Thieves - Vault into steal = dismount rider, plenty of mobility for chase or disengage. Condi Thieves - Nope, doesn't work anymore.

* ALL Necros - In no way could this class chase or disengage anything before Warclaw. Warclaw addition has enormously buffed Necromancer performance in terms of disengaging and regrouping, but not so much chasing. When the Necro dismounts, his chase on foot is still bottom tier outside of if it's Power based and has an axe.

* Chronos & Mirages - Between Blink, Continuum Shift, Jaunt, and all of the other hoo-ha going on here, a power burst Chrono/Mirage should be able to jump up and nail the Warclaw into dismount almost immediately, though if it fails, the Chrono/Mirage's chase ability doesn't have the longevity of something like a Herald or Thief chase ability, and there is a chance the Warclaw will get away. For Condi Chrono/Mirage the same applies, they should be able to jump up and nail the Warclaw with enough condi to tick the 10k health pool down in a relatively short amount of time, considering the Warclaw has no cleanse. The Chrono/Mirage chase ability is not top tier, but it has the methods to do a quick jump up burst chain, which is adequate. It's disengage is also limited to that burst of mobility skills that don't recycle as quickly as say the Spellbreaker's mobility skills.

* ALL Eles - Couldn't quite chase or disengage a Warclaw, but a DPS oriented Ele could easily dismount a Warclaw very quickly if got too close. tanky varients would have a more difficult time of course.

 

When evaluating it like this, it would seem that only Eles who are not completely DPS oriented, and Necros who do not have an axe who are not power based, are the only characters that would truly have a difficult time dismounting a Warclaw, or maaaybe Holosmith has a right to complain. If players are having difficulty chasing and dismounting a Warclaw rider with other classes while roaming, I'd say they should revise their build and figure out what went wrong. Again, it is in my opinion that the mobility "although some players see it as annoying" is not imbalanced. I believe that what should be on the chopping block is the 10k health pool, possibly needing to add a breakbar of some sort or a dismount skill ON the Warclaw. <- All of which is relation to how it can bait combat skills before getting close range to engage, which has absolutely nothing to do with the mobility granted.

[L A T I O N.8923]

> @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:

> A couple things to comment on, regarding recurring statements against Warclaw:

>

> 1. "I can't dismount people on Warclaw. It rides circles around me and it is invincible." Ok, it has 10k health pool and no protection buff. I run a Bunker Druid setup in spvp that lays down 10k damage spikes in about 2s, consistently. Now we're talking wvw with pve gear stats and food/utility buffs. What builds are these people running that cannot dismount a target with 10k health pool and no protection buff, in a high dps patching nonetheless? Are these people running Minstrel Tempest while trying take supply camps alone? Maybe those are builds that players shouldn't be roaming on? Is the mobility too great for these players and they cannot keep up to hit the Warclaw with melee? I hardly see how this is any different than chasing a Thief or a Mesmer or a Ranger with 2x Swoops. The only difference that Warclaw is making here, is that something like a Core Guard now has mobility like a Thief while mounted. I hardly see this is a vice, but rather a boon to balance issues, considering the incredibly dominant positioning that Thief/Mesmer/Warrior/Ranger mobility had in roaming before Warclaw. <- This was a problem with class viability in roaming, which is something that people don't seem to be identifying because they were conditioned for years to think this was normal, and that creates bias.

> 2. Upon all of this, why are these players trying to chase Warclaws around if it's just running from them and allowing them to take important objectives such as a supply camp? That's great! if he wants to run let him do it! Take the supply camp! WvW isn't about 1v1 pvp in a field. It has mechanics designed for actually trying to win the WvW Skrimish, which are all about taking objectives. Those objectives by the way, can be completed by never touching an opposing player. So if a player is running away on his Warclaw because he is afraid to engage, let him do it. Maybe players who complain about this should try the same tactics? Maybe they would notice that it's nice for everyone to be able to disengage and avoid bad situations for regroups, spending much less time in the respawn while doing it. Is the Warclaw rider riding in circles on a supply camp and stopping someone's cap of the supply camp? Look I don't know how else to say this, but if a player cannot catch and down a Warclaw with 10k health pool, no protection buff & no heal skill, with literally ANY of the builds in GW2 that provide numerous teleports/gap closers/ranged attacks, maybe that player ought to reevaluate what they are doing wrong. And that player should be thankful that the Warclaw rider is staying mounted instead of dismounting on purpose to come at him.

>

> Even if a player gets 2v1d by two Warclaw riders while roaming, let's take a look at the facts of the matter:

> * First of all, why is that player even being caught in the 2v1 if he also possesses a Warclaw? Just run man, that's the purpose of it. Disengage and regroup with other players before heading back. If the player gets caught in a Warclaw meta that is his own fault.

> * If the player is caught and the two Warclaw riders are being very aggressive, 1 of 2 things is going to happen. Either both riders will dismount for attack immediately, or maybe 1 will dismount for attack and the other will ride around I guess? The point being here is that worst case scenario is that both riders dismount for attack immediately. The better case scenario is that 1 of the riders stays mounted, because he cannot attack while mounted without dismounting. This gives the player who is being attacked, an advantage to only be essentially 1v1 for a time. It gives him a moment to actually down that player first, before the other dismounts. So I have no idea where the arguments are coming from about "Oh some of them stay on the Warclaw and it's so OP." <- That's one of the more blindly stupid things I've ever heard said in this forum. There is no advantage for a group that is trying to kill someone, to stay mounted so they can't attack. All that does is allow the defender a moment to actually kill the player who dismounts for combat. This is especially true if the group of Warclaws is trying to engage some 1vX legend.

> * Looking at these situations in terms of a player who is actually capable of winning 1vX situations, I'm telling you right now that nothing is more favorable than a group of 10 idiots riding around him on Warclaws as they individually take turns dismounting to attempt to 1v1 him. That's just classic kung fu movie villain mistakes right there. "Let's take turns 1v1ing the main character instead of jumping him 10v1." So stop even bringing this stuff up or pointing it out at all, because it's ignorant to do so. Seriously boys, the only thing the Warclaw is doing is allowing players to keep up or get to you if you are dismounted, and is that really any different than the way it was before? If my memory serves me correctly, if I was in combat and slowed due to it, but enemies were approaching me who were ooc, the same exact thing would happen. In fact, some classes are still faster than the Warclaw when they have a target to teleport at. THE ONLY THING THE WARCLAW IS DOING, is allowing slower classes to keep up.

>

> **The only thing that has changed in terms of dynamic in wvw, is that slower builds can now contest the mobility & disengage of some of the faster builds, with a 10k protectionless no heal value shield in front of them. And even still, we all know something like a D/P Shortbow Thief, can still outrun or easily catch a Warclaw, and dismount it in a single backstab. So stop crying and acting like that isn't true. It's disgusting, get over the bias of new dynamic ^^**

>

 

Im stating the fights i dont get because people are running away, OR ganging up and engage 2:3 with at least a few terrain advantages

 

My guildrooster Activity allready dropped by 70%, im stationed on one of the few used-to-be roaming servers and barely see anyone in 'offensive' bl

 

 

How is this healthy again?

[Andromeda.8293]

> @"Mil.3562" said:

> If someone is truly looking for a 1 vs 1 or small group fight, isn't there a pvp and gvg mode for that? Maybe you know you don't stand a chance against real pvpers, so you decided to come into WvW, hiding and then pick on non-pvp players thinking you can bully and gank them and hoped to win 90% of the fights? Erm.. What did you call yourself again? WvW roamers? LOL

 

if that's directed at me - I pvped sufficiently to have my top 25 titles from the beginning

 

But contesting a point because of mount is stupid. ~ and it's really hard to dismount ppl if you're sword weaver and they're just hopping away from you the entire time

[Trevor Boyer.6524]

> @"L A T I O N.8923" said:

>

>

> How is this healthy again?

 

Dunno man, maybe it isn't.

 

I just stated my subjective point of view is all.

[Dawdler.8521]

> @"Jayden Reese.9542" said:

> > @"Andromeda.8293" said:

> > > @"Mil.3562" said:

> > > If someone is truly looking for a 1 vs 1 or small group fight, isn't there a pvp and gvg mode for that? Maybe you know you don't stand a chance against real pvpers, so you decided to come into WvW, hiding and then pick on non-pvp players thinking you can bully and gank them and hoped to win 90% of the fights? Erm.. What did you call yourself again? WvW roamers? LOL

> >

> > if that's directed at me - I pvped sufficiently to have my top 25 titles from the beginning

> >

> > But contesting a point because of mount is stupid. ~ and it's really hard to dismount ppl if you're sword weaver and they're just hopping away from you the entire time

>

> The contesting on a mount isn't stupid thats fine. What's stupid is some circles are huge and have buildings like golanta where you can hide behind 1 side swap to the other if only vs 1 guy and hold forever. They need to make every circle smaller and uniform. No reason some are tiny and others are huge circles giving the ability to troll certain ones.

The big rings and buildings isnt stupid thats fine. Whats stupid is small rings giving a massive advantage to AoE classes and the extremes of this is seen in sPvP. If you cant cap a camp with just someone riding around then get more teammates that can.

[Dawdler.8521]

> @"Jayden Reese.9542" said:

> > @"Dawdler.8521" said:

> > > @"Jayden Reese.9542" said:

> > > > @"Andromeda.8293" said:

> > > > > @"Mil.3562" said:

> > > > > If someone is truly looking for a 1 vs 1 or small group fight, isn't there a pvp and gvg mode for that? Maybe you know you don't stand a chance against real pvpers, so you decided to come into WvW, hiding and then pick on non-pvp players thinking you can bully and gank them and hoped to win 90% of the fights? Erm.. What did you call yourself again? WvW roamers? LOL

> > > >

> > > > if that's directed at me - I pvped sufficiently to have my top 25 titles from the beginning

> > > >

> > > > But contesting a point because of mount is stupid. ~ and it's really hard to dismount ppl if you're sword weaver and they're just hopping away from you the entire time

> > >

> > > The contesting on a mount isn't stupid thats fine. What's stupid is some circles are huge and have buildings like golanta where you can hide behind 1 side swap to the other if only vs 1 guy and hold forever. They need to make every circle smaller and uniform. No reason some are tiny and others are huge circles giving the ability to troll certain ones.

> > The big rings and buildings isnt stupid thats fine. Whats stupid is small rings giving a massive advantage to AoE classes and the extremes of this is seen in sPvP. If you cant cap a camp with just someone riding around then get more teammates that can.

>

> Ya I have no problem capping camps or pulling people off mounts but I can sure see it as a problem especially for a melee. I legit hid behind buildings once vs 4 players then leaped and hid behind the other side for about 2 min because I saw the tag was heading that way. Then of course those 4 were wiped and I actually felt guilty. Now I know you can do it w/o a mount also but the circle def shouldn't encompass buildings you can use to hide but hey they should have brought 8 guys instead of 4 according to you. Their bad.

If 4 people cannot find and take out 1 enemy on a camp then kitten yes they obviously needed 8 people (or more). Please dont try to argue that the mount is responsible for enemies being bad because it hurts my brain.

[Thelgar.7214]

> @"Psycoprophet.8107" said:

> I dont get this whole wvw isnt pvp its wvw mentality, it clearly makes no sense and is literally players deluding themselves regarding the game mode to match their prefered playstyle. Irl wars over territories which wvw basically is were lone soldiers ignored by scouting parties etc when they were discovered en route? Was there some rule that only large groups were to engage with the enemies large groups?no that sounds rediculous. Large zergs also chase down and gank solo players often so that's better than a solo player engaging a solo player? Like seriously. Small groups on mounts also troll and gank solo players so gankers are not the only players with reasons to feel that mounts have no place in the game mode.

 

It's more WvW isn't GvP - Gankers vs. Players. And there have been a lot of complaints by gankers complaining they can't gank people. There have been complaints by others, but most of them are the same as the "gliding ruined WvW" complaints that will fade out over time just like those did.

[Jermoe Morrow.9501]

I. Love. Warclaw.

 

I have been on and off in WvW for a while, but roaming was spending 15 minuets walking to get ganked in a camp, and zerging without a comparably sized enemy zerg is just bashing your head against a door...if you can even reach the commander on the other side of the map. So I never got too invested in WvW in the past.

 

Now with the warclaw: I am having more small scale fights than ever before, seeing an enemy zerg isn't instant death, I can get to the action of a friendly zerg in a reasonable timescale, and I'm just generally having more fun. It's like a whole new WvW for me, and I love it.! Because of this, I convinced my brother who didn't really like WvW at all to get the warclaw, and even he enjoys roaming now!

 

Hell, I didn't even want to touch desert borderland before warclaw, but now it is becoming my favorite!

[Psycoprophet.8107]

Warclaw removed almost all threat from the spawn camp to the location of the zerg. That's great for zergers and I'm glad now they enjoy the mode more now that the can play their zerg builds with very little worry of an engagement between spawn and zerg. Its unfortunate that we as human show our true colors in how the pro warclaw players have little or no disregard for the other half of long time players that enjoyed the actual danger imposed during travel whether they were roamers or not.half the excitement was removed from the mode for players that liked there to be risk during travel, but as long as u the zergers are happy lmao. People as a whole are garbage,present company included.