a) Agreed, archers should just ignore players and gates, and target the guards.
b) disagree
c) disagree
d) disagree
I disagree with b, c, d because the game is already long enough without any need for more defense. The game last for 15 minutes. By having supplies to reinforce the defense lane, almost all games will end with the team with the higher score winning.
I think that having more things to do than the available player is what makes this new map interesting. 10vs10 would mean that all roles are covered at the same time and strategic decision would be less important
You mean like soccer, football, rugby are unorganizable zergfests with multiple players for the same role etc?!?
If you actually knew a thing about soccer you would know not every player is active at any moment. Part of football is realizing you have to stay in the field for 90 minutes and if you tried to be everywhere you be costing your team a substitute. Stronghold doesn’t have any of those limits, your character doesn’t get exhausted from being every where.
Rarely do you see goalies active in the front or defenders at the other team’s goal line. Thus even if you have 11v11 rarely are they more than 3v3 active at any given time, except during a corner kick.
Adding to that, Soccer, football and rugby players do not actually kill each other at least in their rule book. They play a totally different game.
Yeah these stronghold builds are turning out very different than conquest. A good comp seems to look like this so far:
2 offensive pushers with AoE nukes – they won’t need peeling power
1 main peeler who is unstoppable like a GS/Sword warrior or a S/D Thief
1 supply runner/doubles as 2nd peeler – Mesmer with portal is best
1 gate defender – Turret Engi looks to be the best
Scratch Turret engi off the list.
Turret engi is best as supply runner because they can leave turrets at mid and then continue running supplies. However, Shoutbow does a better job at that.
Defenders should be a zerker build because they can kill enemy creeps really fast before they do any damage to the door.
Perhaps because I can afk and watch a movie while playing turret engi :S, not to mention the fact that the turrets are immune to conditions and can self-heal. But that’s not the topic of this thread, anet can nerf or keep them the same Idc.
People always say that but they don’t actually show that turret engis can do that.
After the first gate has fallen, massively create tengu archers. Do not create anymore Skritt doorbreakers until all the guards are dead. The guards does a lot of damage to skritt and may possibly one shot them. A mix of tengu and skritt is a big waste of resources. Just go with full tengu. After all the guards are dead, go full skritt doorbreaker.
Have a shoutbow and a D/P thief. The shoutbow should be in the assault lane while the D/P thief should be in the Defense lane. I feel these two profession should have a place in every stronghold compliation.
Shoutbow are extremely mobile and tanky. On top of that, they are extremely supportive. They have access to stability and plenty of stunbreaks to stop interrupts. With their mobility, they take the role of supply runner and assault. They can create an army really fast. Their healing and condi removal will support teammates and creeps alike. You can give swiftness to speed up the creeps to their destination. While supplyrunning, the shoutbow can give out the shout healing to party members still fighting over mid or drop a banner in case of dying friends. Then you go back to running supply. Depending on the situation, you can run with the creeps to support them.
The reason why D/P should be on defense is because of their shadowstep and high dps. Shadowstep grants them quick access to the treb instead of having to run around it. With access to the treb, they can support mid by trebbing it. They also have high damage. A dead enemy does 0 dps. The D/P thief should always kill the dangerous creeps first. If the gate is up, kill the skritt doorbreakers. If the guards are alive and is in the way of the creep, kill archers.
S/D thief may be an alternative but I haven’t tried it yet.
I found heroes to be really useless until the lord’s gate is open. After that, they become really dangerous as they do big damage. You must stop the Hero from reaching the gate or else there will be big trouble. Do not defend Hero if the Lord gate is up. However, kill the enemy hero so it doesn’t become troublesome later on. If the enemy is heavily guarding the Hero when the Lord gate is up. Take this time to kill enemy skritt doorbreakers, and run supply until the enemy leaves the lord alone.
Do the final push when the enemy Lord Gate is down and you have a Hero running. Keep the hero alive and keep it moving fast. However, if the enemy is in the same situation. You might want to consider killing the enemy hero.
IMO, the only designation offense should be the shoutbow while the designated defense should be s/d thief or d/p thief as long as they have shortbow.
Why?
Shoutbow has tons of support, they have stability, and they don’t die easily. They can take supply run back, give swiftness to creeps go back to mid, heal people up, cap supply and repeat.
Thief should be defense because they are closer to the treb and they have high dps. Their job is to kill doorbreakers and archers really fast and then go back to the treb to attack mid.
Yeah. ANet is “money grabbing”. Too bad ANet is a company and actually needs continuous supply of money to continue functioning – you know, like for server maintenance, employee salary, bills, etc?
And I may have missed the memo that the Nodes they are selling are actually to make dailies convenient.
Sorry if I sound rude, but I am just in awe of this laziness. You must have NOT played other MMO other than GW2.
If an internet service company like Comcast decides to cut your internet speed, put the internet speed you had before in a more expensive plan($4000 increased price), and then you decide to complain. I’ll be there to be “in awe of your laziness,” compare you to some third world country that doesn’t have internet(“You must have not lived in OTHER countries!”), and tell you about “server maintenance, employee salary, bills etc and stuff.”
This is what you sound like.
Anet sold you some gathering nodes for your home instance. You got the gathering nodes. There has been no change in the quality of the gathering nodes. They are exactly the same as when you bought them. If Anet had removed some of the gathering nodes you bought, and required you to pay more to get them back, then your analogy would be apt.
But daily requirement had been increased. So the analogy stands.
Yeah. ANet is “money grabbing”. Too bad ANet is a company and actually needs continuous supply of money to continue functioning – you know, like for server maintenance, employee salary, bills, etc?
And I may have missed the memo that the Nodes they are selling are actually to make dailies convenient.
Sorry if I sound rude, but I am just in awe of this laziness. You must have NOT played other MMO other than GW2.
If an internet service company like Comcast decides to cut your internet speed, put the internet speed you had before in a more expensive plan($4000 increased price), and then you decide to complain. I’ll be there to be “in awe of your laziness,” compare you to some third world country that doesn’t have internet(“You must have not lived in OTHER countries!”), and tell you about “server maintenance, employee salary, bills etc and stuff.”
Please reduce the requirement of each of these daily achievement by 1.
I bought the Basic Mining/Logging/Harvesting node so that I can easily complete the daily chore. I didn’t buy these to be forced to run out to the zone looking for these nodes to complete the daily chores.
The basic logging and mining nodes have 9 mines and 9 chops each. The daily requirement is 10. By reducing the requirement by 1, I can easily achieve the daily chore by supporting the game by buying the basic nodes.
Just by having one more, you put a middle finger on me because I was supporting the game. Is this how you treat customers?
Requested Features List:
(Please note this does not mean that any of these things will happen, won’t happen, are planned to happen, and or not planned to happen)
Increase max dolly (camera distance) distance
Decrease min dolly distance
Automatic camera height adjustment on /sleep emote
Look at camera
Free orientation movement
Fix automatic camera height so that the over the shoulder camera works as it would be expected to work
Look acceleration toggle
Keep drawing mouse cursor when right clicking toggle
Keybind toggle for holding right mouse down / click once to toggle option
Keybind for look up and look down
‘selfie’ mode
First person camera
Transition smoothing when spectating in PvP
Manual FoV adjustment
More finite dolly control
Manual camera height adjustment
Stop ‘random snapping’ from happening
Here’s the current list of things to address with the camera changes.
(Please note this does not mean that any of these things will happen, won’t happen, are planned to happen, and or not planned to happen)
Optimization to Camera
Camera Head Height Consistency
Underwater Vertical Slider Behavior
Fov on Login Reset
Fov on Pvp Map Load Reset
Engi Kits, Aegis and other effects do not hide properly
Add In-combat and out of combat camera.
In both cameras, I can customize different FoV. In an in-combat camera, I want a low FoV so I can see my target better. In an out-of-combat camera, I want high FoV so I can look at the scenary.
Even if there is a cap and old currencies are re-used, then people will hoard them. Put it this way, when I finish getting everything I want with a currency, then I’ll max it out and leave it that way for the next thing that comes along that will use it. I don’t see it solving anything as I’ll still have a head start.
From a QOL perspective, how about making a collections tab for new currencies? If you think about it you may come to the conclusion that everything in collections are already currencies. Would be a kind of cap without an actual hard cap if one wanted to use normal bank space for more.
I don’t even see how karma belongs in this discussion. It’s a different animal – game wide like gold. Unless you propose a cap on gold too.
My view at this point: Just say no to CAPS
the cap is generally set at an amount that gives you a jump ahead, but not enough to make it that big a jump.
lets say the cap on dunegon tokens was 1000, they release an elite version of the dunegeon armors, with some added stuff. They make each piece cost 600.
yeah you get a jump on it, but you dont have it all in one day, and new players arent given some insane number like
5000 tokens per piece, which is designed not in terms of a good amount of runs before getting something, but in terms of how much old players have stacked up.
Why shouldn’t players get it instantly? What differences does it make if it happens 5 days later or instantly. Those players worked for it.
Even if karma gets capped, ANet will end up making more currencies anyways because:
It brings players to other parts of the game.
If the new Living story uses karma as currencies, would you want players to farm EOTM so that players get what they want or farm the new area they added?
This is a real problem with the Living Story because the LS can’t work without multiple currencies as it is now. However, would you want each map in HoT to have their own currency, or use the same one on all new maps?
For now, I will be in the multiple currency side. I never had a problem with it, and I explore through many parts of the game because of it. Your idea sounds interesting enough for me to be swayed.
The idea of doing whatever I want to get the same reward is interesting.
The problem is: People will flock to the most efficient way to farm the currency leaving every other part of the game being a deserted wasteland. Meaning, I won’t be able to do what I want.
Until you think of a good idea that will eliminate that problem, I am sticking with the multiple currencies.
Dont speak about ppl unless you have a data.
I want to mix n match armors, dont care how other ppl look because i have standard models enabled. Outfits are limiting MY choice in customizing a character.
So mr panites speak for yourself only if you want to be treated seriously.
Step 1: face toward the Ranger. Congrats, you just cut his bleed application by ~60%
I could go with more steps, but honestly, simplicity is best. Dodge Entangle and you’re pretty much set as he is relying on his bleed on crit trait to do any damage if you keep facing him. Which, with the build you linked, is a mere 20% chance to actually proc if he has Fury at that moment. Otherwise, only ~13% chance.
You do know that splitblade applies 5 stacks of bleeding in melee range?
You do know the OP was talking about a shortbow?
You do know that shortbow isn’t the only weapon set that applies bleed?
But it competes with axe, since nobody uses axe+shortbow. And the OP is about shortbow bleeds.
I see a lot of people using axe/dagger + shortbow condi ranger.
Step 1: face toward the Ranger. Congrats, you just cut his bleed application by ~60%
I could go with more steps, but honestly, simplicity is best. Dodge Entangle and you’re pretty much set as he is relying on his bleed on crit trait to do any damage if you keep facing him. Which, with the build you linked, is a mere 20% chance to actually proc if he has Fury at that moment. Otherwise, only ~13% chance.
You do know that splitblade applies 5 stacks of bleeding in melee range?
You do know the OP was talking about a shortbow?
You do know that shortbow isn’t the only weapon set that applies bleed?
Even if karma gets capped, ANet will end up making more currencies anyways because:
It brings players to other parts of the game.
If the new Living story uses karma as currencies, would you want players to farm EOTM so that players get what they want or farm the new area they added?
Step 1: face toward the Ranger. Congrats, you just cut his bleed application by ~60%
I could go with more steps, but honestly, simplicity is best. Dodge Entangle and you’re pretty much set as he is relying on his bleed on crit trait to do any damage if you keep facing him. Which, with the build you linked, is a mere 20% chance to actually proc if he has Fury at that moment. Otherwise, only ~13% chance.
You do know that splitblade applies 5 stacks of bleeding in melee range?
Not really. ANet could just make the stability pulsing instead of making a 20 sec long stability without any of this stab change nonsense.
Then there would be unstoppable ability in the game that have a stab that you cant strip or steal.
Yeah, that’s the point of Elite transforms with high cooldowns.
That the thing that not how the hard cc works that most ppl are talking about. Lined cc needs ppl to run into it unless you get behind them and they run to you the bigger zerg not going to be able to land most of there hard cc on you effectively. The line hard cc is best see as a retreating trick this is why it works far better at countering zergs then smashing small groups.
The best way to counter bigger groups of ppl is putting in strong bomb or attk in one places but in gw2 you can only hit 5 targets most of the time. Lines get past this rule letting you put down your big bomb that can truly stop a zerg in its tracks.
Now target hard cc IS better at attking so its stronger at smashing small groups but worst at dealing with big zergs. Back to the 5 target being the main reason.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Why don’t you stream a GvG to show us what you are talking about.
Wait do you mean a GvG that one side is greatly out numbered? I guess you could call that a gvg though i think that more of a zerg vs a group of ppl smaller then the zerg.
So, are you going to release a GvG or a zerg busting video or is everything you are saying bull?
I said GvG, because I know you wouldn’t release a video of you getting mowed over.
Not really. ANet could just make the stability pulsing instead of making a 20 sec long stability without any of this stab change nonsense.
Then there would be unstoppable ability in the game that have a stab that you cant strip or steal.
Yeah, that’s the point of Elite transforms with high cooldowns.
That the thing that not how the hard cc works that most ppl are talking about. Lined cc needs ppl to run into it unless you get behind them and they run to you the bigger zerg not going to be able to land most of there hard cc on you effectively. The line hard cc is best see as a retreating trick this is why it works far better at countering zergs then smashing small groups.
The best way to counter bigger groups of ppl is putting in strong bomb or attk in one places but in gw2 you can only hit 5 targets most of the time. Lines get past this rule letting you put down your big bomb that can truly stop a zerg in its tracks.
Now target hard cc IS better at attking so its stronger at smashing small groups but worst at dealing with big zergs. Back to the 5 target being the main reason.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Why don’t you stream a GvG to show us what you are talking about.
Stability in the old system was unlimited CC immunity for duration that was stacked. This meant that ground based AOE CCs that had unlimited CC potential for their duration were fine. Stability in the new system has limited CC removal for it’s duration, however many ground based AOE CC continue to have unlimited CC potential.
The solution, then, is to be consistent in changes and give these GTAOE CC’s (Line of Warding, Ring of Warding, Unsteady Earth, Static Field, Spectral Wall and any others) limited number of times they interrupt users. If a stability charge is expended, or a person gets CC’d, then the field is weakened until all remaining charges are used and it expires. With the current stability numbers, I would say the standard 5 is perfect before expiring.
However chances are that this is fairly complex and well if things are hard to do then Anet doesn’t do them.
Wouldn’t the better solution be not running back and forth through those unlimited CC fields? If you have a standard three stacks of stability, you can pass through a Unsteady Earth or Static Field and have some left. If CC fields were stacked, I see no reason a zerg shouldn’t be punished for all charging through multiple AoE fields. Why should the AoE be punished for the idiocy of their victim? That’s like suing a volcano for burning people who thought lava-surfing was a thing.
A better solution is to play the pirate ship meta.
My point is that anet nefed small guild groups cos too many ppl qqued about being killed by em while in blob
I see you want to continue in this pro360noscope fashion. Very well. I literally never saw a single thread about that on this sub forum. The GvG community seriously need to stop thinking that Anet thinks about it every time they balance something in the game.
I believe that Anet thought about nerfing the zerg tactics in general, as well as how over-powered stability was in WvW. Have you ever seen a single engineer in your “skilled” zergs? Ask yourself why. Hint: (no stab).
Rangers? (no AoE ranged damage, no stab)
Thieves? (no AoE ranged damage, no stab)
Mesmers? (no AoE ranged damage, no stab)
Ok, WvW is unbalanced. Ok, the game is balanced about small scale. But if guardian was as brokenly OP in pvp as it was last week in WvW, imagine the kittenstorm on the pvp subforum! So you lost because you sticked to your GWEN outdated meta? Adapt or get rekt, that’s the tough law of WvW.
Ranger: Yes. Snipe the casters
Thieves: Yes. Stealth is very helpful in ressing downed players. That can also be there to assassinate the casters.
Mesmers: Hohoho
Engi have ranged AoE damage.
because overall it WAS needed, especially in sPvP. For instance on a ~20sec cd a thief could steal a 20s stab boon. Or a mesmer could shatter it off w/e when someone used a 180sec elite skill. It was BS. It only really worked well in WvW zergs. Any smaller scale and it was really poor (including wvw roaming) the way it worked.
We just need a slight tweak now for large scale.
Not really. ANet could just make the stability pulsing instead of making a 20 sec long stability without any of this stab change nonsense.
Without utilizing instances, and thus moving the fight somewhere else (which is already doable through sPvP arenas), it would be extremely hard to do. The current engine simply doesn’t sem to support it, and would have to be completely rewritten.
Now, you are simply put in a group that says who can attack you, and who you can attack. Even if you created a new, special “duel” group, whose members could attack each other, but couldn’t be interrupted by “pc’s and allies” group, all someone would need to interrupt you, is to start a separate duel in the same place.
In order to get the system you want, that system would need to be changed to remember aggro separately against multiple individuals. That seems like a core change, which is a major undertaking (and thus unlikely to happen, especially not for such a trivial reason).
How do you know sPvP doesn’t support it? I’m pretty sure you don’t work for ANet.
I never said sPvP – it does indeed suppot it, using instances. I said open world PvE. And i don’t need to know the internal working of the engine to see the results.
Mind you, the bandit camp bug in silverwastes was quite revealing on the issue.
Additionally, all the troll zerg would need to interrupt you, even if interacting wouldn’t be possible, is to stack on top of the fight. I bet the duel would be really cool when both combatants would be unable to see each other.
Which requires a zerg. Please tell me how realistic for a zerg seeking out duelist just to troll them.
Considering that one of the common points brought by the open wold duelist supporters is that they want to duel waiting for world bosses? Very realistic.
If you can rally a zerg to insult random players, then I’ll believe you.
ANet should just revert the stability change. Its dumb.
I disagree here. I like it. Makes more sense, too. But the balance of applications needs looked at.
It has almost no effect in sPvP. But in WvW, it turned from an organized melee train into a ranged AoE fest.
Since it has no effect in sPvP, and ranged AoE fest is boring, might as well revert it.
“Organized melee train”, aka safe zerg fest. Yeah, good riddance. Sorry man, no support. That stuff needed broken up a bit.
Maybe because you don’t hear about bigger blobs destroying small groups no matter how skilled they are is because you don’t support. Maybe you don’t hear about groups ranging from afar being the meta is why you don’t support. Maybe you don’t hear about ranged groups existing with the organized melee train pre-patch is why you don’t support. Maybe you dislike real strategy and tactics is why you don’t support.
Organized melee train is far from safe. It requires rushing through a hail of Meteor showers, Barrage, frozen ground, and every AoE you can think of. It requires keeping everyone healthy with water fields and condi removal to get them ready to go. They are the foot soldiers in a war.
But, maybe you just like ranging from afar in a “safe zerg fest.” Which is why you don’t support.
In one of the POI streams they stated that stability allowed classes (specifically guardian) to just stack stability and run into groups without any fear of CC. Stability is pretty low on the boon strip hierarchy so this is allows for some additional counter play.
This will more than likely only be apparent in WvW situations because as Laraley stated, it would be pretty difficult to remove all the stacks in a 5v5 situation.
This is bad because…?
If ANet disliked how classes should not fear CC, stability should have been higher on the boon strip hierarchy. WvW turned into a pirate ship meta.
Players get to duel uninterrupted anywhere they want.
Without utilizing instances, and thus moving the fight somewhere else (which is already doable through sPvP arenas), it would be extremely hard to do. The current engine simply doesn’t sem to support it, and would have to be completely rewritten.
Now, you are simply put in a group that says who can attack you, and who you can attack. Even if you created a new, special “duel” group, whose members could attack each other, but couldn’t be interrupted by “pc’s and allies” group, all someone would need to interrupt you, is to start a separate duel in the same place.
In order to get the system you want, that system would need to be changed to remember aggro separately against multiple individuals. That seems like a core change, which is a major undertaking (and thus unlikely to happen, especially not for such a trivial reason).
How do you know sPvP doesn’t support it? I’m pretty sure you don’t work for ANet.
Additionally, all the troll zerg would need to interrupt you, even if interacting wouldn’t be possible, is to stack on top of the fight. I bet the duel would be really cool when both combatants would be unable to see each other.
Which requires a zerg. Please tell me how realistic for a zerg seeking out duelist just to troll them.
“Duelers” would just be the same WvW roamer thieves who will ask for a duel on even the slightest disagreement.
The amount of toxicity it would create on the PvE community is not worth it.
Which doesn’t happen. I never seen toxicity in dueling throughout my MMORPG years. It is only in these dueling threads that I hear about dueling being toxic. Recently, I went to WoW, and Rift. I never get duel request. So I put myself in a spot where I get duel request. When I do get duel request and I reject them, they moved on. I didn’t get a single insult. When I do accept them and win, they said good fight and moved on.
