Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst
1
2
  1. #21
    Deleted
    Most of the time on our server the horde are in control... Which is weird since its a 80/20 split Alliance:Horde

  2. #22
    Its already on a 1v1 ratio, but theres a minimum of players, not really fair to not let all the ally/horde play just cause only one of the opposing faction queued for the battle.

  3. #23
    It is hard, and unbalanced but still possible. We have won a few times only because the defending team goofed and didn't shift to another base in time.
    News | Forum Guidelines | MMO Champion IRC | Free Games List
    Playing: Guild Wars 2 | APB: Reloaded
    -I don't care what the next expansion is about, as long as the story is dark and rich so I can refer to it as Chocolate WoW.

  4. #24
    The TB design is faulty, because there is no incentive for defenders to take a risk and get out of bases. I don't count zerging an undefended base with less than a quarter of a team as a risk.

    In WG, the battle around the southern towers could be even more crucial than the battle around the castle. TB needs something like that. The 3 towers in TB are not instrumental at changing the tides of a battle.

  5. #25
    Deleted
    Though they are very good at pvp!

  6. #26
    Tol Barad is one of the most stupid ideas Blizzard has came out with. They should have thought it through a little bit more. Hopefully we see a fix in one of the future patches. Defenders have a 90% chance of winning...

  7. #27
    So far strongly favors Defense. Only time it's changed hands on my server has been when people wasted too much time at Towers for achievements, and other side got a slight edge in keeps.

  8. #28
    yeah. it's very unbalanced. It takes way too much coordination to Attack and very simple coordination to Defend it. A well planned out attack plan can make it so you can win Tol Barad but it's hard to do that when you have 10-40players who you don't know to tell each one to go do xyz. While Defense on the other hand all the coordination you need to do is tell people which base to zerg after they get killed at a base.

    When you die on D you go back to center of map and have easy time to get to other bases. When you Die on O you spawn by base you just died at. While respawning at the base you were just at is a Huge advantage when trying to take over a base it is a huge disadvantage on overall scheme. I mean if the base you were just defending just got zerged by other team Why go back to that base when you can easly have others that died with you go to another base that is less defended. so while you will loss that one base you will start to take over another one.

    and if people on Offense want to counter this they will have to run to the base you are heading to. but 1 dont know where your going and 2 have to mount up and go though the enemy that will be in-between them and the base.

    My server we win most of the time but it really isn't fair to the other side.(also win offensive like 50% of the time since around 5pm pst our good raiding guilds normally enter the battle and well they just steamroll the other side,)

    There should be a ton of changes to this battle. One towers should mean more then just more time. Two if a side has defended 3-4times in a row the other side should get a buff that will help them in the attack(Think handicap). Three allow Offense to choose where they want to rez at. not just send them to the base they were just at.

    Just Huge balance issues here currently and something needs to be done to address it.

  9. #29
    Deleted
    Tol Barad:

    Win it at night, have it for the day.

    Defending:

    Walk around in a big group and keep capping the bases

    Due to lots of people going to Tol Barad to farm herbs/ores, you can normaly defend it very easily

  10. #30
    Deleted
    Tol Barad actually works fine. Assaulting force always has a hard time, even in real life. Thing is, Blizzard should give the attackers a 4/3 ratio of players per battle.

  11. #31
    IMO it should work like this.

    attackers get 10 mins and 5 additional mins for each tower brought down(just like now)

    if at any time the attackers take all 3 bases they win(also just like now)

    at the end of the battle, which ever side has more bases(ties going to the defense) wins the battle. this means attackers can win if they control the majority of the zone and defense cant just zerg around and only ever keep one base
    Quote Originally Posted by tkjnz
    If memory serves me right, a fox is a female wolf.

  12. #32
    Deleted
    The problem is that its to hard to attack, and to easy to defend. Make it the opposite and it'll be alrite!

  13. #33
    Horde on my server have had Tol Barad for the past week :-/, I know it doesn't make my alliance side look great, but still >.<

  14. #34
    guys, did no one read the blue post about this? i mean it sucks for attackers but it makes sense
    ggg

  15. #35
    On my realm it usually changes hands at least twice a day, sometimes three, but it's defended a few times in a row before it gets taken. Half the time i get bored though, it feels like such work to attack i dont want to go anymore.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •