Please remove the stomp from the mount....

[LetoII.3782]

> @"SWI.4127" said:

> > @"Celsith.2753" said:

> > > @"SWI.4127" said:

> > > > @"Katrina.8702" said:

> > > > I just don’t get the notion of smaller groups having no chance with mount stomps. If anything, at least based on my experience, the mount stomp gives smaller groups a much better chance as you can finish the downs immediately and turn the fight around. It really can go both ways as a mechanic that is available to everyone equally. A better group with better execution wins the fight with or without the mount stomp, imho.

> > >

> > > Which group can afford to have people standing off to the side not participating in the fight while still being able to generate downed states? I can tell you most of the time it's not the smaller group.

> > >

> > > > Oh and please do not remove mount stomp unless you first address the op downstate/rez mechanics.

> > >

> > > They did address res mechanics. In fact they were nerfed very heavily including the most used one, Merciful Intervention.

> >

> > We use mount stomp all the time as a small group against larger numbers or as pugs v a tagged up comped squad. And so does Kats guild. It's a decision we take per fight. Do we think we can generate down quickly enough that it's worth keeping someone mounted for a possibly game changing stomp on a key target? Or do we all engage and hope we can cleave. I generally find that I get mount stomped myself when it literally doesn't make any difference to the fight. Outmanned buff on us being chased by a map queue, I get mount stomped. Doesn't matter, I was going to get run over anyway.

> >

> > I can't see how anyone who fights outnumbered would complain about mount stomps. I can see that it would very much annoy that zergling chasing 5 people with 30 who got stomped though :3

> >

>

> You say outnumbered, but you're playing with a map queue. Let's get some perspective here.

 

Hate to break it to ya bud, but Mag EB is rarely queued, rarely has a tag, and NEVER monoblobs. In fact, far from monoblobbing, we're fighting both servers at once.

Yeah, it's that drastic.

 

 

> Bursting someone with rangers and a dedicated mount stomper isn't a fight, it's a gank. Gankers are gonna gank, so to each their own.

 

Now getting culled from your Zerg is ganking too? My, what a diverse word.

 

 

> I'm not trying to balance around ganking.

 

You're not trying to balance, your trying to eliminate situations where you lose. Such makes up 75% of posts about "balance"

 

 

> You really can't see how someone who fights outnumbered would complain about mount stomps? Imagine this scenario. You are being W-keyed by a bigger zerg and they have so many people that they half of them are still mounted and just running at you. This is a very common situation.

 

No different than combat speed pre-mount. Something small groups have had to deal with since day one. Only thing mounts changed about that is it made life in the Zerg a bit less safe _while_ they're chasing us across the map lol.

 

[SWI.4127]

> @"LetoII.3782" said:

 

> Hate to break it to ya bud, but Mag EB is rarely queued, rarely has a tag, and NEVER monoblobs. In fact, far from monoblobbing, we're fighting both servers at once.

> Yeah, it's that drastic.

 

I have a Mag account and play there quite often. I know EB is queued like 90% of the time from early NA to late. So don't even try me with that nonsense.

[LetoII.3782]

> @"SWI.4127" said:

> > @"LetoII.3782" said:

>

> > Hate to break it to ya bud, but Mag EB is rarely queued, rarely has a tag, and NEVER monoblobs. In fact, far from monoblobbing, we're fighting both servers at once.

> > Yeah, it's that drastic.

>

> I have a Mag account and play there quite often. I know EB is queued like 90% of the time from early NA to late. So don't even try me with that nonsense.

 

On weekends? Sure.

Who isnt.

 

Oh, right. Whoever's facing mag

[Teratus.2859]

> @"SWI.4127" said:

> > @"Teratus.2859" said:

> > > @"SWI.4127" said:

> > > Which group can afford to have people standing off to the side not participating in the fight while still being able to generate downed states? I can tell you most of the time it's not the smaller group.

> > >

> >

> > Is that really a bad thing?

> > You'd think a smaller group would be glad to have a number of players on the larger force actively not participating in the fight.

> > If the smaller group is better organized and not severely outnumbered then they could potentially turn the tide thanks in part to those choosing to stay mounted and not participate.

>

> Let me try to do a better job of explaining this assuming you're talking about zerg fights, because maybe I haven't done a great job so far. The enemy has 20 extra players. You need every man you get can in your squad doing their job. You cannot afford to have people standing off to the side doing nothing until someone goes down. Which, by your own admission, is putting you at a disadvantage. Now the side with the extra 20 players can afford to have 5-10 pugs running around on mounts and still have a numbers advantage. Now say one of these 5-10 random pugs mount stomps 3 people. That is over 100k damage in ONE skill. It takes no skill to pull off, just one button. There is no tradeoff where they have to forego another skill in their build, there is VERY little risk as they have an extra 10k HP, free dodges, and mobility. Players shouldn't be rewarded in this way _especially_ if they aren't even participating in the fight, which, by definition, they are not (otherwise they wouldn't be on a mount). Now would this random player be able to do 100k damage in a fight otherwise? I've seen your average WvW player, and I'm going to go with no.

>

> It's a straight up garbage mechanic.

 

Sure the side with fewer is being disadvantaged by players leeching on mounts that is a valid point but that's on the smaller squad to organize better if those players are in the squad when they're supposed to be doing somethine else.

If you got followers who are not part of the squad lingering on mounts then they generally don't matter, they're just doing their own thing and contirbuting in their own way, be that an extra weaponor janitor cleaning up the downed.

 

I don't see why that damage figure is important tbh, not on a skill that's purely circumstantial and pretty much a 1 time use in combat.

It's not remotely the same thing as someone doing 100K in regular combat after they stun you or something, that would be a problem.

 

I don't really see the Warclaw stomp any different than someone casting AoE's on groups of downed playersto tag them for loot, it's just more instant.

Going downed in combat is effecively a loss and most of the time I go down I die, rarely do I ever manage to rally even before Warclaws this was a constant experience in WvW and one I just accepted as normal.

Warclaw really hasn't changed anything in that regard for me, if anything it just kills you quicker giving you a possible chance to get back if you died close to a waypoint rather than having you linger in downed state being useless to your squad and eventually being picked off.

Warclaw is helping in this regard get you back quicker without the need for swiftness and swiftness giving skills, personally I am greatful for this as I no longer need to waste utilities and traits on movement speed increases, nor rely on a group of people spamming swiftness and I don't have to run the risk of being locked in combat with the wrong skills or traits equipped.

 

You say there is very little risk but Warclaws are very squishy these days thanks to the nerfs.

I see them dropping like flies in my WvW experiences and personally I focus them when I see them because they're so easy to dismount with my build, it's almost like feeding my group a free kill in some regard.

I've killed vastly more Warclaws and their riders than I've been killed by Warclaws, so I am having a hard time understanding why some people hate them so much.

 

 

[Bigpapasmurf.5623]

> @"LetoII.3782" said:

> > @"SWI.4127" said:

> > > @"LetoII.3782" said:

> >

> > > Hate to break it to ya bud, but Mag EB is rarely queued, rarely has a tag, and NEVER monoblobs. In fact, far from monoblobbing, we're fighting both servers at once.

> > > Yeah, it's that drastic.

> >

> > I have a Mag account and play there quite often. I know EB is queued like 90% of the time from early NA to late. So don't even try me with that nonsense.

>

> On weekends? Sure.

> Who isnt.

>

> Oh, right. Whoever's facing mag

 

Not to play devils advocate, however thanks to being paired with Mag, ive been on more lately, esp in EB. EB last night (non weekend) was Queued, and the night before was queued. More often than not there have been comms running (more EB than home BL, although their response time in need in home BL is really good...and this is coming from a home BL defender). I will state that in EB they dont normally monoblob, however in ABL's it tends to happen more than not (unless something happens and a 2nd comm pops a tag)

[SWI.4127]

> @"Bigpapasmurf.5623" said:

> Not to play devils advocate, however thanks to being paired with Mag, ive been on more lately, esp in EB. EB last night (non weekend) was Queued, and the night before was queued. More often than not there have been comms running (more EB than home BL, although their response time in need in home BL is really good...and this is coming from a home BL defender). I will state that in EB they dont normally monoblob, however in ABL's it tends to happen more than not (unless something happens and a 2nd comm pops a tag)

 

Thank you. Every time I've signed into my Mag alt in the last 3 weeks, I've had to queue up for EB. And I'm not even playing NA prime, this is late NA on weeknights.

[kash.9213]

> @"Teratus.2859" said:

> > @"SWI.4127" said:

> > > @"Teratus.2859" said:

> > > > @"SWI.4127" said:

> > > > Which group can afford to have people standing off to the side not participating in the fight while still being able to generate downed states? I can tell you most of the time it's not the smaller group.

> > > >

> > >

> > > Is that really a bad thing?

> > > You'd think a smaller group would be glad to have a number of players on the larger force actively not participating in the fight.

> > > If the smaller group is better organized and not severely outnumbered then they could potentially turn the tide thanks in part to those choosing to stay mounted and not participate.

> >

> > Let me try to do a better job of explaining this assuming you're talking about zerg fights, because maybe I haven't done a great job so far. The enemy has 20 extra players. You need every man you get can in your squad doing their job. You cannot afford to have people standing off to the side doing nothing until someone goes down. Which, by your own admission, is putting you at a disadvantage. Now the side with the extra 20 players can afford to have 5-10 pugs running around on mounts and still have a numbers advantage. Now say one of these 5-10 random pugs mount stomps 3 people. That is over 100k damage in ONE skill. It takes no skill to pull off, just one button. There is no tradeoff where they have to forego another skill in their build, there is VERY little risk as they have an extra 10k HP, free dodges, and mobility. Players shouldn't be rewarded in this way _especially_ if they aren't even participating in the fight, which, by definition, they are not (otherwise they wouldn't be on a mount). Now would this random player be able to do 100k damage in a fight otherwise? I've seen your average WvW player, and I'm going to go with no.

> >

> > It's a straight up garbage mechanic.

>

> Sure the side with fewer is being disadvantaged by players leeching on mounts that is a valid point but that's on the smaller squad to organize better if those players are in the squad when they're supposed to be doing somethine else.

> If you got followers who are not part of the squad lingering on mounts then they generally don't matter, they're just doing their own thing and contirbuting in their own way, be that an extra weaponor janitor cleaning up the downed.

>

> I don't see why that damage figure is important tbh, not on a skill that's purely circumstantial and pretty much a 1 time use in combat.

> It's not remotely the same thing as someone doing 100K in regular combat after they stun you or something, that would be a problem.

>

> **I don't really see the Warclaw stomp any different than someone casting AoE's on groups of downed playersto tag them for loot, it's just more instant.

> Going downed in combat is effecively a loss and most of the time I go down I die, rarely do I ever manage to rally even before Warclaws this was a constant experience in WvW and one I just accepted as normal.**

> Warclaw really hasn't changed anything in that regard for me, if anything it just kills you quicker giving you a possible chance to get back if you died close to a waypoint rather than having you linger in downed state being useless to your squad and eventually being picked off.

> Warclaw is helping in this regard get you back quicker without the need for swiftness and swiftness giving skills, personally I am greatful for this as I no longer need to waste utilities and traits on movement speed increases, nor rely on a group of people spamming swiftness and I don't have to run the risk of being locked in combat with the wrong skills or traits equipped.

>

> You say there is very little risk but Warclaws are very squishy these days thanks to the nerfs.

> I see them dropping like flies in my WvW experiences and personally I focus them when I see them because they're so easy to dismount with my build, it's almost like feeding my group a free kill in some regard.

> I've killed vastly more Warclaws and their riders than I've been killed by Warclaws, so I am having a hard time understanding why some people hate them so much.

>

>

 

I can pull that caster away and get my people up, if your side owns a spot and one of you goes down only a player skill should be able to ninja that stomp, mount stomp is not the same especially when my own side can take a stomp away from me which is nearly all of the time now. If you're just staying in the blob following a tag and waking up when it's time to clean inventory and log off, mount or player stomp might not matter to you, otherwise it's just another dumb gimmick that doesn't belong in this game mode.

 

[Curt.7963]

> @"SWI.4127" said:

> The enemy has 20 extra players. You need every man you get can in your squad doing their job. You cannot afford to have people standing off to the side doing nothing until someone goes down. Which, by your own admission, is putting you at a disadvantage.

 

Hate to break it to ya bud, but you're playing the game wrong. You have to tell your pugs to get on mounts and follow your push to clean up the downs so you don't waste time cleaving and prevent the larger group from rezzing. Otherwise, you're gonna get a lot more value out of dropping 1 or 2 players in your squad to follow with mount stomps on the first push. You'll also get free rallies if your group explodes on contact but you can down a few in the process.

 

If you're doing say a 5v5, get your holo/thief/mesmer/ele/warrior to dip out of combat and mount up to stomp, its a heck of a lot faster and safer. Just learn to exploit the new systems instead of protesting them.

[Krypto.2069]

To me... having **Mount Stomp** in WvW is a nice **"compromise"** to leaving downstate instated.

(This is coming from a person that would _prefer_ downstate to be REMOVED.)

 

I love it when some dude comes flying in on his mount and Mount Stomps some turd that's trying to be ress'd within his 60 man blob!!!

HELL YES! CRUSH THAT MOTHER!!! :+1: (He should have been dead to begin with!) :rage:

 

[SWI.4127]

> @"Teratus.2859" said:

> I don't see why that damage figure is important tbh, not on a skill that's purely circumstantial and pretty much a 1 time use in combat.

 

Of course it's important. That's 100k+ damage that the zerg doesn't have to do. Those players are now dead and don't contribute to the target cap. The zerg doesn't have to spend an extra few seconds cleaving the downs, etc.

 

> It's not remotely the same thing as someone doing 100K in regular combat after they stun you or something, that would be a problem.

 

No, it's even worse. It's someone not even in combat doing 100k with one hit. How is it not even remotely similar? A rev could phase smash the 3 downs and do like 40k damage and everyone will call it OP. Yet someone not in combat taking almost NO risk whatsoever can do way more than that and suddenly it's trivial? Sorry but I disagree.

[LetoII.3782]

Don't apologize, be proud of your erroneous opinion. It's not as if Anet was actually going to remove Cashclaw.

 

This is an emotional support thread at best.

[SWI.4127]

> @"LetoII.3782" said:

> Don't apologize, be proud of your erroneous opinion. It's not as if Anet was actually going to remove Cashclaw.

 

Thanks. Keep making tough "tactical" decisions in "fights" like "should we use this insta-kill mechanic with no drawbacks or not?". Truly a question that will give any tactician some real food for thought.

[Xan.5328]

Getting killed in sustain gear and hiding in a huge blob is pretty embarrasing, sucks to suck. I love mount stomps, its the only thing that anyone can do against all you hilariously tanky bunkers, who already got the Massive damage nerfs they where crying about. now digging for the last component of being able to kill successfully. Gunna be some stimulating gameplay a few months from now when the only thing that does dmg is our auto attacks, and we're forced to wand each other over the course of half an hour+ bc no one dies. In other games downstate doesnt exist, and in this game its complete aids as it is so I for one, am thankful there's a way to actually get some kills. Looks to me like the primary QQ squad is coming from ppl who spend an exorbanant amount of time ressing their random allies that are just gonna get downed again anyway, Gotta love downing the SAME guy 3 times in the course of <20 seconds bc he keeps getting ressed. So it looks like the popular consensus here is to have the full zerker scholar player deal in the neighborhood of 60,000 dmg plus to kill one guy... (bc he keeps getting ressed). Ya this sounds like sustainable fun game play where can I sign up. I'm more in favor of removing downstate entirely, but I can see that the players that spent the majority of their play time in it, probably see it the other way.

[Teratus.2859]

> @"SWI.4127" said:

> > @"Teratus.2859" said:

> > I don't see why that damage figure is important tbh, not on a skill that's purely circumstantial and pretty much a 1 time use in combat.

>

> Of course it's important. That's 100k+ damage that the zerg doesn't have to do. Those players are now dead and don't contribute to the target cap. The zerg doesn't have to spend an extra few seconds cleaving the downs, etc.

>

 

From my experience we don't do this anyway.

The zerg runs over most of the downed and ignores them to focus on the players still alive, it's often just a handful of players at the back of the group cleaning up the downed.

I dunno if it's different on other servers or accross the pond as i've only played on one, but I rarely every see a friendly zerg wipe up the downed mid combat when there are more players to chase.

 

Anyway all players have access to the mount and the stomp so it doesn't matter, both sides can use this tactic to score some quick kills.

If you're on the recieving end of it most of the time then perhaps the problem isn't the warclaw it's that your groups are being outmatched in combat.

After all the stomp only works on downed players and the whole point is not to get downed in the first place.

 

> > It's not remotely the same thing as someone doing 100K in regular combat after they stun you or something, that would be a problem.

>

> No, it's even worse. It's someone not even in combat doing 100k with one hit. How is it not even remotely similar? A rev could phase smash the 3 downs and do like 40k damage and everyone will call it OP. Yet someone not in combat taking almost NO risk whatsoever can do way more than that and suddenly it's trivial? Sorry but I disagree.

 

Agree to disagree then I guess.

Nevertheless, All the best to you in your future WvW endeavors ^^

[Celsith.2753]

> @"SWI.4127" said:

 

> You say outnumbered, but you're playing with a map queue. Let's get some perspective here. Bursting someone with rangers and a dedicated mount stomper isn't a fight, it's a gank. Gankers are gonna gank, so to each their own. I'm not trying to balance around ganking. You really can't see how someone who fights outnumbered would complain about mount stomps? Imagine this scenario. You are being W-keyed by a bigger zerg and they have so many people that they half of them are still mounted and just running at you. This is a very common situation.

 

I say outnumbered because we have the outmanned buff. :3 Time zones other than NA exist. Shout out to DB SEA. I also wasn't aware that focus targeting people in a zerg was ganking. That label is given to so many scenarios!

 

Mount mobility isn't what is being discussed here. I've complained plenty about 20 people behind the 10 chasing us on foot being able to just ooc and mount up. If you think I don't have experience of being chased then you are very wrong. I personally was vocal in saying the mount should not be introduced and I still hold to that. It's here to stay however and in that case I want to keep the one thing that can even out an outnumbered fight.

[Celsith.2753]

> @"SWI.4127" said:

 

> Let me try to do a better job of explaining this assuming you're talking about zerg fights, because maybe I haven't done a great job so far. The enemy has 20 extra players. You need every man you get can in your squad doing their job. You cannot afford to have people standing off to the side doing nothing until someone goes down. Which, by your own admission, is putting you at a disadvantage. Now the side with the extra 20 players can afford to have 5-10 pugs running around on mounts and still have a numbers advantage. Now say one of these 5-10 random pugs mount stomps 3 people. That is over 100k damage in ONE skill. It takes no skill to pull off, just one button. There is no tradeoff where they have to forego another skill in their build, there is VERY little risk as they have an extra 10k HP, free dodges, and mobility. Players shouldn't be rewarded in this way _especially_ if they aren't even participating in the fight, which, by definition, they are not (otherwise they wouldn't be on a mount). Now would this random player be able to do 100k damage in a fight otherwise? I've seen your average WvW player, and I'm going to go with no.

>

> It's a straight up garbage mechanic.

 

First of all, 3 downed people having 100k health. You think that is ok? Second, mounts now have less hp and max 2 dodges. There is your counter play by the way. The trade off is that they just ran into the middle of a group and dismounted, leaving them at the mercy of anyone with a brain.

The side with more people doesn't tend to have anyone mounted. They're all on comms being told where to stand and what buttons to press.

You mentioned yourself that you are aware of my group and you have seen us 'gank' some poor fellow all alone with no help at all in the middle of his squad. It's pick or squishy groups with no support that I regularly see have someone mount. Because with no support you have to reset and get ooc. If you just got ooc and are coming back into the fight, it's sensible to do so mounted and stomp. It's a great leveler against comped up on comms, supported, commander driven squads that think they should get an easy win because they stacked all the cards in their favour.

 

You can explain all you want but you are explaining to people who utilize this when we have the outmanned buff and are chasing round a massive ktraining zerg.

[DeceiverX.8361]

Mounts shouldn't have ANY bonus health, being completely honest.

 

We've come a long way from the only profession with permanent 25% was thief for combat value on the shitty old SoS to people having free massive movespeed, 10k hp, and free stomps for just basically existing with the expansion pack.

[SWI.4127]

> @"Celsith.2753" said:

> First of all, 3 downed people having 100k health. You think that is ok?

 

No, I don't think that's okay TBH. Someone mentioned reducing downed HP. It could be a good compromise actually between the people who want no downstate and the people who still like the teamplay aspect of saving downstates but recognize it's got problems.

 

> Second, mounts now have less hp and max 2 dodges. There is your counter play by the way. The trade off is that they just ran into the middle of a group and dismounted, leaving them at the mercy of anyone with a brain.

 

It's really not risky at all to mount finish someone even in the middle of a zerg. Any competent player can double dodge instantly to safety.

 

> The side with more people doesn't tend to have anyone mounted. They're all on comms being told where to stand and what buttons to press.

> You mentioned yourself that you are aware of my group and you have seen us 'gank' some poor fellow all alone with no help at all in the middle of his squad. It's pick or squishy groups with no support that I regularly see have someone mount. Because with no support you have to reset and get ooc. If you just got ooc and are coming back into the fight, it's sensible to do so mounted and stomp. It's a great leveler against comped up on comms, supported, commander driven squads that think they should get an easy win because they stacked all the cards in their favour.

>

> You can explain all you want but you are explaining to people who utilize this when we have the outmanned buff and are chasing round a massive ktraining zerg.

 

I never denied that the mount stomp *can* benefit small groups. I'm just saying that it VERY OFTEN benefits the bigger side just as much. In your earlier post you said "I can't see how anyone who fights outnumbered would complain about mount stomps". I'm giving people very clear examples here.

[Mil.3562]

Don't be cruel OP. The horse... i meant the kitty is already dead, stop beating it. Go pick on some other mounts or professions.

[Famine.7915]

Anything that benefits the small groups benefits the zerg more. That being said, mounts remain the only way to secure a stomp when fighting a larger group that can mass rez/support downed players.