test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Mod 6 Aligned Mobs are breaking Gauntlegrym
lilhamlet
Member Posts: 260 Arc User
So with the mob damage and DR scaling in Mod 6, the mobs on points 2 and 4 in Gauntlegrym are 2-shotting players, while being near impossible to kill. Teams are taking this to a ridiculous advantage by posting an Immortal Cleric (Faithful DC) or a Paladin to defend the point with these mobs. (For those that don't know why those are the players that are used to defend, it is because of their survivable nature. By staying on point and buffing the mobs, they slow down the contesting progress.)
The result is that anything less than 4 players can't take the point back as they have to contend with surviving the mobs while keeping on point long enough to take it.
So essentially teams that don't get Immortal DCs or Paladins that can hold that point are often losing just because there are 2 points which they cannot contest, while the other 3 are still being challenged by 8 other players.
I'm a fan of environmental hazards, and I think the mobs should still exist as one, with one major alteration:
Make the mobs non-aligned so that they will attack any player from either side on that point. This would make it a viable environmental hazard for clever players to use to their advantage, while adding risk to the return, rather than having 8 free unkillable defenders.
I think this would make gauntlegrym so much more enjoyable again, and make it a fair contest no matter the class makeup of your teams.
The result is that anything less than 4 players can't take the point back as they have to contend with surviving the mobs while keeping on point long enough to take it.
So essentially teams that don't get Immortal DCs or Paladins that can hold that point are often losing just because there are 2 points which they cannot contest, while the other 3 are still being challenged by 8 other players.
I'm a fan of environmental hazards, and I think the mobs should still exist as one, with one major alteration:
Make the mobs non-aligned so that they will attack any player from either side on that point. This would make it a viable environmental hazard for clever players to use to their advantage, while adding risk to the return, rather than having 8 free unkillable defenders.
I think this would make gauntlegrym so much more enjoyable again, and make it a fair contest no matter the class makeup of your teams.
Post edited by lilhamlet on
0
Comments
Quick, make it stop asap!
We're only allowed to mindlessly zerg and be a (yet again completely broken with the bug preventing them being seeing after they atack)permastealth TR fodder.
Oh but I see, you want to be able to control the 2 points indefinitely while keeping the other 3 contested for an easy win. Let me guess, you also quit gauntlegrym in 3 min if you're not winning.
Defenders of the current model basically want to be rewarded for getting there first and then letting the environment do the work. That's neither competitive, nor is it particularly bright. It is just lazy.
PvP should be chess, not checkers. You shouldn't get an easy win because your piece made it to the other end first to "king" it.
Not sure how much damage they deal to average players, but for a BiS GWF, they do little dmg on me, but help me generate determination to use Unstoppable, easy 10 stacks destoyer's buff and then one heavy combo to take out whoever is defendingi their node, and then, play hide and seek around the node with the nodes.... viola...!! cappedddd!
Author of GWF Speed Demon PvP Build (Mod 11) <- Click to reveal the Speedy Beast! >:)
If they seem to be 2 shotting you, that's a simple but telling evidence of of of just how much you're behind the 'basics' in terms of PvP gear and/or skill. No offense, just stating the obvious.
I love those mobs, no matter for offence or defence
hes right. completely. now sometimes there is a problem where too many golems will chain stun cc you and yes that can be a problem to squishy classes but otherwise you can avoid them easily.my first piece of advice STAY OUT OF THE RED..
NEVER!!! RED = Determination = Unstoppable = PROFITTTTTT!!!!!
Author of GWF Speed Demon PvP Build (Mod 11) <- Click to reveal the Speedy Beast! >:)
2 shot doesn't mean 2 attacks, 2 shot means 2 landed attacks. Which can easily happen when another player stuns you while you are there, but thanks for reading the post and being entirely constructive.
BiS and Transcendent Negation should not be a barrier to entry in PvP. And full burning set and PvP campaign rings don't denote someone who doesn't know how to play, but thanks for being as dismissive again without any information.
I wasn't even saying to remove them. I was pointing out that they should be an environmental hazard that no one can control, as the current way they function creates an imbalance. It's why people always camp an immortal DC or OP there. That's not brilliance, it's pretty simple strategy, but if your team has neither of the classes to keep the point contested so that the golems/ogres remain, then you're already at a disadvantage.
But thanks for being dismissive and not bothering to actually read. You've shown once again how you're a pillar to this community.
Cheers.
Please don't tempt them to add doors anywhere. I'm still steamed about a bunch of CN runs thwarted by bugged doors. LOL
Yeah... a nice effect like the golems just deactivating and standing there like statues and then reactivating again would be cool, but with all that's broken, it's far from my first ask.
If you could activate or deactivate them with switches off-point like how the bridge works, that would be interesting.
That's what's supposed to happen. Why are you whining about what's perfectly WAI again?
No, it doesn't denote someone does not know how to play.
However, it does denote which people are less prepared. You're complaining about someone who is not prepared adequately, becoming a victim of of a disadvantaged situation, where he/she is not only attacked by NPCs, but also by human players as well.
I'm sorry, what's there to whine about in the situation you described again? I don't get it.
...this weird, illogical talk....
If your team does not have a class to keep a point contested, or to at least match it in other areas, then you're supposed to lose. Again, really, I'm so sorry, what is there to whine about a situation you are losing because your team is not on par with the opponent?
I read everything.
1. All you've put down was a complaint about a situation which is perfectly WAI no matter how I look at it. The big guys are all there to defend, and to stop them from being pushovers they have strong damage and tough defense, although in no way are they as tough as IWD/WoD HE bosses.
2. If you get hit by a red circle attack, then you suck.
3. If you are forced a hit by a human player defending the node, then ... uh.. what's supposed to be wrong with this? I don't get it. They are there in that manner to be utilized by the side that owns it, exactly in that manner. It's a force multiplier.
If a defending human player does that, then he did something smart. If you choose to fight under such conditions, and then get hit by attacks like that, you did something stupid. So you die...
Frankly, all this thread sounds like is nothing much but someone pissed that he can't take a node because there's one, tough guy defending it. But again, that's exactly what it is meant for. If you can't kill the guy, then you can simply force-takeover the node with more numbers.
Once again, you seem to have missed the point of the original post, which is that receiving free attackers to defend for you is cheap and uninteresting. If mobs attacked everyone, you can still aggro them and pull them into opposing players. But hard-hitting mobs that fight for you, is just not competitive. That would be reward given for taking actual risk.
To that suggestion, you've given no response or any sort of intelligent discussion on that. I'd love to hear other people's opinions, rather than their knee-jerk reactions as to how talented they think other players are compared to them.
At what point did my post seem angry? I'm suggesting that a change can make a more interesting game, like sieges in many other games. This is essentially a discussion on game design.
As far as the team makeup, this game should be made to accommodate all the players, not just those who do pre-mades.
But I digress, if some people have no better input to offer than to try to incite negativity in other people so you can thump your chest to say how awesome a player you are, I'll gladly leave you to your dry mouth and scraped knuckles.
I'm part of the discussion to talk about possibilities of the game, not something to prove. So please add something constructive to the conversation.
You've just heard the opinions. Most of them don't agree with you. Try counting. Besides, that's not the point of your opening post. The point of your opening post is clear and simple: the mobs are strong, they hit hard, so you need really strong classes (like four of them) to take the node over. I refuted your claim. I simply stated the obvious in that it seems too strong because one might not be adequately prepared to basic item levels and stuff. You felt this was an insult, and simply decided to dismiss it as an opinion.
That's very brilliant. Erase every opposite opinion from your mentality, and all you have left are supporters. Wow.
It was a guess. Usually people flock to the forums when they are pissed.
I'm not a premade. My IL is around 2.5k. I take the node alone with my TR, with my GWF, with my CW if its empty of human players. If there are a few defenders on the node, I call for help and survive it until help comes so we can force-takeover. If there are too many defenders flocking so taking it becomes impossible, I bail out and go for other nodes.
I don't see any of what I am doing warrants "premades", or seems like "impossible for all the players to do." Do you?
Try looking at the mirror, my demented little friend. The only thing I'm proving here is your assumptions and contentions are wrong, and many other players already have commented that they disagree with you. I'm the only one who actually blurted out what they all had their in my minds. Oopsy!