DeadlySynz.3471 Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 Warclaw will never be removed; Anet has already "sold" skins for it in packages. Removing it is off the table. It's like asking to have downstate removed, unfortunate as it is, that wont be removed either because people have purchased finishers. There are a lot of people who want warclaw removed, but there are far more that don't. There are a lot of people who want downstate removed, but there are far more that don't. So far 18 people have replied to this thread (19 including myself), deciding warclaws fate based on 19 people is also not going to happen. People have to face facts here, there are likely many primarily PvE players who still dabble in WvW from time to time that vastly outnumber any of it's regulars. Low and behold, it's probably safe to say they like and want warclaw because they don't want to be slowed down getting to their group (or get left behind). IMO, there is only 1 thing that needs to happen with warclaw at the moment, it needs to be able to at least jump the same height as your character (if not slightly higher). Trying to jump on or over something on the mount is a lot more laborious than being on foot. Warclaw will often get hung up on parts of the landscape or stairs it can't climb or jump on, where on foot you can run up without having to jump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArchonWing.9480 Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > >. **Not every person wants to be forced into a fight especially if they are trying to get to a specific place.** > > > > Then I would suggest they don’t want to be in an open world PvP zone. > > > Not what i mean. Let me give a bit more detail. > If a keep is under attack and you die and you want to get back to the keep, but spot a roamer coming toward on the way there in the distance and want to prioritize getting to the keep.... Why should the roamer just instantly have the power to force you into combat with 0 counter play? Thats all im saying the roamer attempting to force you into combat is fine but there should still be some form of counter play in the event you just want to go to the Keep to defend. Have you tried not dying? That's a pretty good counterplay. ex. have a template for full nomads + mobility and/or use the buddy system while leaving spawn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheIceman.1039 Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 > @"Abyssisis.3971" said: > Imo, warclaw needs to be removed. It basically allows for instant melee combat since it can evade up to 3 times and comes with an extra 10k HP to avoid most if not all ranged attacks while gap closing. > > If it is to stay, warclaw should draw its HP and stamina the rider, rather than having an extra 10K HP and extra dodges. > Warclaw brings new players to wvw who otherwise wouldn't find a way there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gop.8713 Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 > @"zealex.9410" said: > So whats the general opinion on the mount and what should anet do? Opinion: It's just a mechanic, like any other mechanic in any game mode. Some players were able to adapt to it and others weren't. This has continued to be true as it has been alternately buffed and nerfed . . . What should anet do: Define the mount's purpose. I would say 'define the mount's purpose and balance it accordingly', but if they can do the first the second will flow naturally . . . > @"joneirikb.7506" said: > * As is or buffed, it would make it very difficult for fighting interested roamers to engage any players at all. I am one of these players, and this is simply not true. The mount made it more difficult to engage players who were not interested in engaging, but those players were generally incapable of providing a fight anyway, so no loss. The lance has made this frequent complaint even more absurd . . . > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > I do understand what you mean. You assume it’s a roamer. And it may be random. However, on our server, we are looking for those players to cut off reinforcements to allow us to cap the structure because too many people get back too quickly. > > It’s a double edge sword honestly. Both sides have something to lose and something to gain. So instead of looking at what each side has to gain or lose, consider what the mode gains or loses. If the defenders can get back to the fight faster, that should prolong the contest over the objective. If the attackers can cut off reinforcements the fight should end sooner. To me, the game mode is better served by more fights, so I'm in favor of the defender being able to return more quickly . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZDragon.3046 Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 > @"ArchonWing.9480" said: > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > > > >. **Not every person wants to be forced into a fight especially if they are trying to get to a specific place.** > > > > > > Then I would suggest they don’t want to be in an open world PvP zone. > > > > > Not what i mean. Let me give a bit more detail. > > If a keep is under attack and you die and you want to get back to the keep, but spot a roamer coming toward on the way there in the distance and want to prioritize getting to the keep.... Why should the roamer just instantly have the power to force you into combat with 0 counter play? Thats all im saying the roamer attempting to force you into combat is fine but there should still be some form of counter play in the event you just want to go to the Keep to defend. > > Have you tried not dying? That's a pretty good counterplay. > Sure have that works right now thats why people want warclaw changed lol cause you can choose not to die by just not engaging in most cases. Glad you asked ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaFishBob.6518 Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 Remove superior battle maul and replace it with a Warclaw performed finisher (like the old function gyro finisher). Allow mounting during combat. Extend cooldown of Warclaw mount to 3 minutes if forcefully dismounted, mounted during combat, or after using Warclaw finisher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sobx.1758 Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 > @"DaFishBob.6518" said: > Allow mounting during combat. > Extend cooldown of Warclaw mount to 3 minutes if forcefully dismounted, mounted during combat, or after using Warclaw finisher. That's a terrible idea that simply does everything backwards. Why would you need mounting during combat? On the offchance you'd run from a fight by using 3 dodges? That's the opposite of what wvw needs. And then to somehow "offset" that buff, you'd make the cd 3 minutes, so when you get dismounted, win a fight within a minute, you're now locked down from mounting for 2 minutes for... what reason exactly? Overally that's just a terrible set of changes. Literally creating problems and then ""solving them"" by creating new ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Za Shaloc.3908 Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 > @"DaFishBob.6518" said: > Remove superior battle maul and replace it with a Warclaw performed finisher (like the old function gyro finisher). > Allow mounting during combat. > Extend cooldown of Warclaw mount to 3 minutes if forcefully dismounted, mounted during combat, or after using Warclaw finisher. Kitty ballerina jump finisher? I'm in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayrilana.1396 Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 My opinion is that downstate should just be removed from the game entirely making the mount ability issue moot. It's a handicap mechanic people use as a crutch to not play better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sobx.1758 Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > My opinion is that downstate should just be removed from the game entirely making the mount ability issue moot. It's a handicap mechanic people use as a crutch to not play better. I don't really care about downstate remaining as a safety net in pve content, but I agree that there's no need for that in wvw/pvp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawdler.8521 Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > My opinion is that downstate should just be removed from the game entirely making the mount ability issue moot. It's a handicap mechanic people use as a crutch to not play better. > > I don't really care about downstate remaining as a safety net in pve content, but I agree that there's no need for that in wvw/pvp. If there is no need for tactical decisions or using your skills to stomp or res then I would argue there is no need to fight in WvW/PvP because all you get is a hollow empty shell of insta-kills so we might as well delete fighting. What, it's the same retarded argument people use for the warclaw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sobx.1758 Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > My opinion is that downstate should just be removed from the game entirely making the mount ability issue moot. It's a handicap mechanic people use as a crutch to not play better. > > > > I don't really care about downstate remaining as a safety net in pve content, but I agree that there's no need for that in wvw/pvp. > If there is no need for tactical decisions or using your skills to stomp or res then I would argue there is no need to fight in WvW/PvP because all you get is a hollow empty shell of insta-kills so we might as well delete fighting. Ayyy tactical decisions, you cleave/interrupt those scrubs in big scale and do whatever you want with the poor bastard on the ground in 1v1s. Other than that, it's just a safety net for outnumbering side, which is stupid. Downstate tactical decisions, oof... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrawHat.2639 Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 Just move Warclaw to desert bl only (big map appropriate) and leave it as is...sheeshh...enough wasting time on a useless gimmick that just brings lag and nothing really good to WvW unless mobility for red bl . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArchonWing.9480 Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > @"ArchonWing.9480" said: > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > > > > > >. **Not every person wants to be forced into a fight especially if they are trying to get to a specific place.** > > > > > > > > Then I would suggest they don’t want to be in an open world PvP zone. > > > > > > > Not what i mean. Let me give a bit more detail. > > > If a keep is under attack and you die and you want to get back to the keep, but spot a roamer coming toward on the way there in the distance and want to prioritize getting to the keep.... Why should the roamer just instantly have the power to force you into combat with 0 counter play? Thats all im saying the roamer attempting to force you into combat is fine but there should still be some form of counter play in the event you just want to go to the Keep to defend. > > > > Have you tried not dying? That's a pretty good counterplay. > > > > Sure have that works right now thats why people want warclaw changed lol cause you can choose not to die by just not engaging in most cases. Glad you asked ;) Well, also meant the dying and returning to keep part. If you die less, you would have to run back less and thus the chances of any of this acutally mattering regardless of the status of the mount seems inconsequential either way. But I mean, killing the enemy is a good counter; and I don't see why you or your enemy should get more preference. And if the situation in the keep is so severe that you are dying over and over, then you should have fellow teammates running back with you anyways. And the counterplay is simply just strength in numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZDragon.3046 Posted December 24, 2019 Share Posted December 24, 2019 > @"ArchonWing.9480" said: > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > @"ArchonWing.9480" said: > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > > > > > > > >. **Not every person wants to be forced into a fight especially if they are trying to get to a specific place.** > > > > > > > > > > Then I would suggest they don’t want to be in an open world PvP zone. > > > > > > > > > Not what i mean. Let me give a bit more detail. > > > > If a keep is under attack and you die and you want to get back to the keep, but spot a roamer coming toward on the way there in the distance and want to prioritize getting to the keep.... Why should the roamer just instantly have the power to force you into combat with 0 counter play? Thats all im saying the roamer attempting to force you into combat is fine but there should still be some form of counter play in the event you just want to go to the Keep to defend. > > > > > > Have you tried not dying? That's a pretty good counterplay. > > > > > > > Sure have that works right now thats why people want warclaw changed lol cause you can choose not to die by just not engaging in most cases. Glad you asked ;) > > Well, also meant the dying and returning to keep part. If you die less, you would have to run back less and thus the chances of any of this acutally mattering regardless of the status of the mount seems inconsequential either way. > > But I mean, killing the enemy is a good counter; and I don't see why you or your enemy should get more preference. And if the situation in the keep is so severe that you are dying over and over, then you should have fellow teammates running back with you anyways. And the counterplay is simply just strength in numbers. Well i mean true but generally one group or the other is going to die eventually there are often 40+ reasons that could contribute to a death running around so trying as hard as you wont wont turn your odds of being killed to 0% at any given time if you are actively engaging in combat. Besides risk are what makes the game fun if everyone played 100% super safe all of the time the game would be dead boring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strider Pj.2193 Posted December 24, 2019 Share Posted December 24, 2019 > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > @"ArchonWing.9480" said: > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > @"ArchonWing.9480" said: > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >. **Not every person wants to be forced into a fight especially if they are trying to get to a specific place.** > > > > > > > > > > > > Then I would suggest they don’t want to be in an open world PvP zone. > > > > > > > > > > > Not what i mean. Let me give a bit more detail. > > > > > If a keep is under attack and you die and you want to get back to the keep, but spot a roamer coming toward on the way there in the distance and want to prioritize getting to the keep.... Why should the roamer just instantly have the power to force you into combat with 0 counter play? Thats all im saying the roamer attempting to force you into combat is fine but there should still be some form of counter play in the event you just want to go to the Keep to defend. > > > > > > > > Have you tried not dying? That's a pretty good counterplay. > > > > > > > > > > Sure have that works right now thats why people want warclaw changed lol cause you can choose not to die by just not engaging in most cases. Glad you asked ;) > > > > Well, also meant the dying and returning to keep part. If you die less, you would have to run back less and thus the chances of any of this acutally mattering regardless of the status of the mount seems inconsequential either way. > > > > But I mean, killing the enemy is a good counter; and I don't see why you or your enemy should get more preference. And if the situation in the keep is so severe that you are dying over and over, then you should have fellow teammates running back with you anyways. And the counterplay is simply just strength in numbers. > > Besides risk are what makes the game fun if everyone played 100% super safe all of the time the game would be dead boring. Exactly. This is why Warclaw needs more nerfs. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZDragon.3046 Posted December 24, 2019 Share Posted December 24, 2019 > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > @"ArchonWing.9480" said: > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > @"ArchonWing.9480" said: > > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > > > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >. **Not every person wants to be forced into a fight especially if they are trying to get to a specific place.** > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Then I would suggest they don’t want to be in an open world PvP zone. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not what i mean. Let me give a bit more detail. > > > > > > If a keep is under attack and you die and you want to get back to the keep, but spot a roamer coming toward on the way there in the distance and want to prioritize getting to the keep.... Why should the roamer just instantly have the power to force you into combat with 0 counter play? Thats all im saying the roamer attempting to force you into combat is fine but there should still be some form of counter play in the event you just want to go to the Keep to defend. > > > > > > > > > > Have you tried not dying? That's a pretty good counterplay. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sure have that works right now thats why people want warclaw changed lol cause you can choose not to die by just not engaging in most cases. Glad you asked ;) > > > > > > Well, also meant the dying and returning to keep part. If you die less, you would have to run back less and thus the chances of any of this acutally mattering regardless of the status of the mount seems inconsequential either way. > > > > > > But I mean, killing the enemy is a good counter; and I don't see why you or your enemy should get more preference. And if the situation in the keep is so severe that you are dying over and over, then you should have fellow teammates running back with you anyways. And the counterplay is simply just strength in numbers. > > > > Besides risk are what makes the game fun if everyone played 100% super safe all of the time the game would be dead boring. > > Exactly. This is why Warclaw needs more nerfs. ? I dont define warclaw as 100% safe even at the moment but if the ideal is to nerf it so that its risk far exceeds the mild reward its built to provide thats not good design either. Its certainly safe to an extent (depending on area and zone controlled) and im fine with movment speed reductions and 1 less evade i just hope they dont make its speed = to standard swiftness running thats just gonna feel a bit lame tbh. AT that point depending on your profession it might be questionable as to why you would even use it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psycoprophet.8107 Posted December 24, 2019 Share Posted December 24, 2019 > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > @"ArchonWing.9480" said: > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > > > > > >. **Not every person wants to be forced into a fight especially if they are trying to get to a specific place.** > > > > > > > > Then I would suggest they don’t want to be in an open world PvP zone. > > > > > > > Not what i mean. Let me give a bit more detail. > > > If a keep is under attack and you die and you want to get back to the keep, but spot a roamer coming toward on the way there in the distance and want to prioritize getting to the keep.... Why should the roamer just instantly have the power to force you into combat with 0 counter play? Thats all im saying the roamer attempting to force you into combat is fine but there should still be some form of counter play in the event you just want to go to the Keep to defend. > > > > Have you tried not dying? That's a pretty good counterplay. > > > > Sure have that works right now thats why people want warclaw changed lol cause you can choose not to die by just not engaging in most cases. Glad you asked ;) This^ No matter what changes to wvw anet makes as long as players can pick and choose when the engage in a fight wvw will remain a dying game mode as that choice deletes a huge natural dynamic within the mode and deletes almost all risk venturing around, like a lesser version of just deleting pvp from a pvp mode. Not surprising anet cant see that tho and gues money is most important factor being skin sales etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sovereign.1093 Posted December 24, 2019 Share Posted December 24, 2019 i love the mount. its the best thing since glider. and the return of alpine bl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZDragon.3046 Posted December 24, 2019 Share Posted December 24, 2019 > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > @"ArchonWing.9480" said: > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > > > > > > > >. **Not every person wants to be forced into a fight especially if they are trying to get to a specific place.** > > > > > > > > > > Then I would suggest they don’t want to be in an open world PvP zone. > > > > > > > > > Not what i mean. Let me give a bit more detail. > > > > If a keep is under attack and you die and you want to get back to the keep, but spot a roamer coming toward on the way there in the distance and want to prioritize getting to the keep.... Why should the roamer just instantly have the power to force you into combat with 0 counter play? Thats all im saying the roamer attempting to force you into combat is fine but there should still be some form of counter play in the event you just want to go to the Keep to defend. > > > > > > Have you tried not dying? That's a pretty good counterplay. > > > > > > > Sure have that works right now thats why people want warclaw changed lol cause you can choose not to die by just not engaging in most cases. Glad you asked ;) > > This^ > No matter what changes to wvw anet makes as long as players can pick and choose when the engage in a fight wvw will remain a dying game mode as that choice deletes a huge natural dynamic within the mode and deletes almost all risk venturing around, like a lesser version of just deleting pvp from a pvp mode. Not surprising anet cant see that tho and gues money is most important factor being skin sales etc. Im not so sure its this clear cut there should always be a choice to not engage or disengage from a fight thats called strategy. There is not a single competitive game where choosing not to engage or to disengage a fight is not a option that a player is not allowed to use for their own strategic reasons. You see this with small zergs vs big zergs all the time. If there is a 10 man squad and a squad of 30+ people comes running along you do not engage that because you automatically know the result. There are no traps or environmental strats that you can use to cut their numbers in half to make the fight more even so you dont engage. If you sit here and say you dont ever "not engage" a fight especially when the advantage is obvious not yours everyone is going to know you are telling a massive lie its a perfectly acceptable thing to not engage for 1 reason or another. Should there be attempts or tools to force engagement? Yes, sure Should those attempts always work? No.... What kills the wvw game mode is not what you said but more of the fact that its become these big blob fest of players that anet cant balance the game around. WvW is already in itself meant to be an some what unbalanced game mode due to the sheer number of players involved in a single map but with such large numbers of players being concentrated in small spots it makes it even more unbalanced that intended. Then you have the issue of rewards for defending / taking objectives. Then you have the issue of the missing PvE elements in this mode that make it a lackluster PvEvP mode there are no outside keep, tower, camp objectives that are ever serious contest for players to battle over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psycoprophet.8107 Posted December 24, 2019 Share Posted December 24, 2019 Yes but ur engage/disengage potential should be part of ur class or spec decision in combination with skill and map awareness not a mount that allows all classes have both optimal engagement and disengagrment potential as in a open world pvp mobility not just in combat should be a strength only certain classes have as a counter to weaknesses in others. What if somthing was added to make all classes have the zerg impact potential fbs have? There'd be a uproar by all but classes that are weak in zergs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZDragon.3046 Posted December 24, 2019 Share Posted December 24, 2019 > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > Yes but ur engage/disengage potential should be part of ur class or spec decision in combination with skill and map awareness not a mount that allows all classes have both optimal engagement and disengagrment potential as in a open world pvp mobility not just in combat should be a strength only certain classes have as a counter to weaknesses in others. Even so whats just to stop someone from way pointing to safety to just avoid the engagement before you can put them into combat. Choosing to no engage goes beyond class and spec decisions. Not to mention whats to stop people then from just running a larger number of professions that have the power to just disengage when they want then you would demand nerfs from that class which is totally unfair because they picked that class for that reason. The same goes if people pick a large number of professions who want to force engagement people demand nerfs and then you cant engage despite picking the class for that reason. IT really does not matter. The mount ideally should be useful i doubt anet will remove it and its safe to say that option is not on the table. > What if somthing was added to make all classes have the zerg impact potential fbs have? There'd be a uproar by all but classes that are weak in zergs. There is, its called scourge and people hated it with a passion. I do not consider warclaw as effective as FB personally Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawdler.8521 Posted December 24, 2019 Share Posted December 24, 2019 > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > My opinion is that downstate should just be removed from the game entirely making the mount ability issue moot. It's a handicap mechanic people use as a crutch to not play better. > > > > > > I don't really care about downstate remaining as a safety net in pve content, but I agree that there's no need for that in wvw/pvp. > > If there is no need for tactical decisions or using your skills to stomp or res then I would argue there is no need to fight in WvW/PvP because all you get is a hollow empty shell of insta-kills so we might as well delete fighting. > > Ayyy tactical decisions, you cleave/interrupt those scrubs in big scale and do whatever you want with the poor kitten on the ground in 1v1s. Other than that, it's just a safety net for outnumbering side, which is stupid. Downstate tactical decisions, oof... > No one care about "big scale" or 1v1. The real game is smallscale, where yes you still have tactical decisions to make. A win or loss can be ressing or stomping at the right time, not just facepalming your keyboard in a zerg or playing it safe in the dueling spot. Yes, *especially* when outnumbered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArchonWing.9480 Posted December 24, 2019 Share Posted December 24, 2019 > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > @"ArchonWing.9480" said: > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > @"ArchonWing.9480" said: > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >. **Not every person wants to be forced into a fight especially if they are trying to get to a specific place.** > > > > > > > > > > > > Then I would suggest they don’t want to be in an open world PvP zone. > > > > > > > > > > > Not what i mean. Let me give a bit more detail. > > > > > If a keep is under attack and you die and you want to get back to the keep, but spot a roamer coming toward on the way there in the distance and want to prioritize getting to the keep.... Why should the roamer just instantly have the power to force you into combat with 0 counter play? Thats all im saying the roamer attempting to force you into combat is fine but there should still be some form of counter play in the event you just want to go to the Keep to defend. > > > > > > > > Have you tried not dying? That's a pretty good counterplay. > > > > > > > > > > Sure have that works right now thats why people want warclaw changed lol cause you can choose not to die by just not engaging in most cases. Glad you asked ;) > > > > Well, also meant the dying and returning to keep part. If you die less, you would have to run back less and thus the chances of any of this acutally mattering regardless of the status of the mount seems inconsequential either way. > > > > But I mean, killing the enemy is a good counter; and I don't see why you or your enemy should get more preference. And if the situation in the keep is so severe that you are dying over and over, then you should have fellow teammates running back with you anyways. And the counterplay is simply just strength in numbers. > > Well i mean true but generally one group or the other is going to die eventually there are often 40+ reasons that could contribute to a death running around so trying as hard as you wont wont turn your odds of being killed to 0% at any given time if you are actively engaging in combat. Besides risk are what makes the game fun if everyone played 100% super safe all of the time the game would be dead boring. There's a difference between dying every now and then, and just 1-pushing constantly and contributing nothing. If you can't leave spawn in a coordinated fashion with other people that died, then it has nothing to do with risk, but bad organization. This isn't even a skill thing. It is trivial to comment in map chat that there are gankers @ spawn. Everyone needs to pull their own weight in any given situation when reasonable, whether it be 1v1 10v10, 20 v 50. It should never be "I am dismounted against another lone player, I might as well just /gg already" And if you are sure you can't 1v1 people, then make it so you don't land in that situation by 5v1'ing them. > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > @"ArchonWing.9480" said: > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > @"ArchonWing.9480" said: > > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > > > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >. **Not every person wants to be forced into a fight especially if they are trying to get to a specific place.** > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Then I would suggest they don’t want to be in an open world PvP zone. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not what i mean. Let me give a bit more detail. > > > > > > If a keep is under attack and you die and you want to get back to the keep, but spot a roamer coming toward on the way there in the distance and want to prioritize getting to the keep.... Why should the roamer just instantly have the power to force you into combat with 0 counter play? Thats all im saying the roamer attempting to force you into combat is fine but there should still be some form of counter play in the event you just want to go to the Keep to defend. > > > > > > > > > > Have you tried not dying? That's a pretty good counterplay. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sure have that works right now thats why people want warclaw changed lol cause you can choose not to die by just not engaging in most cases. Glad you asked ;) > > > > > > Well, also meant the dying and returning to keep part. If you die less, you would have to run back less and thus the chances of any of this acutally mattering regardless of the status of the mount seems inconsequential either way. > > > > > > But I mean, killing the enemy is a good counter; and I don't see why you or your enemy should get more preference. And if the situation in the keep is so severe that you are dying over and over, then you should have fellow teammates running back with you anyways. And the counterplay is simply just strength in numbers. > > > > Besides risk are what makes the game fun if everyone played 100% super safe all of the time the game would be dead boring. > > Exactly. This is why Warclaw needs more nerfs. ? lol end of story. Fact is, even with nerfs it's still always beneficial to use the warclaw. Saying that nerfs will make it useless are absolutely nonsense-- using one is better than not. There is 0 cost to using it when running around, except when dealing with stairs. Now stairs should be nerfed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGrimm.5624 Posted December 24, 2019 Share Posted December 24, 2019 > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > My opinion is that downstate should just be removed from the game entirely making the mount ability issue moot. It's a handicap mechanic people use as a crutch to not play better. I think there are a lot of different views on changes to downstate. Not saying it should be removed, just changed. Right now a player needs to decide: do I try and rally my ally, do I revive them or do I wait till the fight is over and just rez them from defeated state. There is no difference between those and if you are on the larger side there is no price for a pyrrhic victory. In the least defeated enemies should have to respawn. Then if you can take some out before they get you it has value and it's not just a matter of the winning zerg keeps rolling thru. There should be value in taking out players and a price to pay. This fits well into the faster mount movement scheme and still keeps the fights rolling while also spreading out the zerg. A lesser version of that would be to give finishing more value and in the least finished foes have to respawn and comeback. Now to that you could also add logic that there is no rally, only revive a downed player and combined with the above and now that decision do I revive my ally or lose them is even more impactful and makes the game play all the more interesting. 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