|
|
Post by Archilese on May 2, 2013 1:15:46 GMT -5
This post is mainly going to focus on Stonemist Castle because it tends to be the point of contention of WvW.
The reason I think SM is such a valuable asset and should be held onto at all costs is because of the waypoint, from SM we can quickly hit any other point on the map without running very far. And then take into consideration the points and whatever else it gives.
We seem to be able to get a hold of and hang onto SM for quite a while and yet we've lost it a few times to quick rushes with mesmers and golem rushes. I think this is an easy fix with ensuring we have somebody from Teamspeak sitting in SM at all times calling out precisely what is happening and I don't mean saying "20 man zerg outside west gate" we need more effective communication then that we need to know how many, where, who, what siege they have and what % the gate or wall is it.
Holding SM against small groups of 15-20 is easy with a few arrowcarts but against a zerg we need co-ordination and supply, without supply you will never hold SM against any sizeable force.
So here I propose we shift our focus once we have SM.
Hold onto Danelon and Umberglade at all times fully upgraded, this extends to all 4 towers around the keep and the keep itself. Have people running Dolyaks and watching these points who can call out if somebody attacks and then the commander in EB actually respond before the tower goes down.
I make this post because recently I log into EB and stand in Durios asking for help while 3 commanders circle jerk in SM watching trebs hit the wall. We then lose all 4 towers and almost the keep. If we are outmanned in a border then defending a tower is much easier then attacking one.
Side note this also means taking the Hylek and the Ogres whenever possible.
You will also notice HoD does this, they almost never lose their 4 towers or keep in EB even if they are outmanned.
|
|
|
|
Post by rikkity on May 2, 2013 15:14:39 GMT -5
something i always see hod or et doing when they control the castle is constantly having trebs up in there and denying the other 2 servers the opportunity of holding all 4 of their towers. trebs can hit pretty much all the nearby towers, so they take the battle to those towers and just flip them constantly. no opportunity for upgrades.
it distracts us and gives us something to focus on besides the rest of the map.
and theyre a lot better at doing it than we are.
we need to be trebbing and flipping anz, klovan, and wildcreek any time we control sm. (can klovan be hit by trebs over that large mesa?) take the battle to those points and itll be easier to keep the rest of our stuff in eb.
|
|
|
|
Post by Remnant Militant on May 2, 2013 20:18:55 GMT -5
something i always see hod or et doing when they control the castle is constantly having trebs up in there and denying the other 2 servers the opportunity of holding all 4 of their towers. trebs can hit pretty much all the nearby towers, so they take the battle to those towers and just flip them constantly. no opportunity for upgrades. it distracts us and gives us something to focus on besides the rest of the map. and theyre a lot better at doing it than we are. we need to be trebbing and flipping anz, klovan, and wildcreek any time we control sm. (can klovan be hit by trebs over that large mesa?) take the battle to those points and itll be easier to keep the rest of our stuff in eb. The biggest importance of flipping those outer towers is to allow the respective camp supply into SM. If you have 4 out of six outer towers, you get 280 supplies without any upgrades. If you have all six, you get 420 supplies without upgrades. This is key to upgrade SM and maintain the ppt of eb. |
|
|
|
Post by xnuggetx on May 2, 2013 20:52:45 GMT -5
IMHO i hate SM it's a "Magnet" for trouble. all it does is create attention to us. I would rather divert our attention into holding:
- All our BL
- Our 3rd of EB
- Both towers at the bottom of each other BL (camps if possible too)
Start of this week we made 1st place against HOD and ET but never overtook HOD by enough point's even thought we held SM and some towers in EB. HOD was always +/- 15 PPT from us. we deserved the win this week but HOD played smart and never allowed us to take a big advantage. when we held SM they had a tower and 3 camps in our bl and a tower and 2 camps in ET evening out the PPT.
If we focus on keeping our BL, our 3rd of EB and the bottom tower/towers of ET and HOD (+ a few camps) we will have a 300+ PPT all week instead of having to continually run to the "SM has Mark's" call.
SM = 35 points and allot of attention to keep/upgrade.
Briar + Lake (+camps) = 40 - 70 Points and less attention.
EDIT: we have 80+ PPl on TS during Peak:
15 IN ET BL
15 IN HOD BL
20 IN FC BL
30 IN EB
Good communication between the Defender's in FC/EB to change BL if more are needed. If HOD/ET Has to many defenders for the 15 ppl to handle taking Briar/lake just break up into 3, 5 man group's and run around flipping camps, 6 camps in each BL = a possible 60 points.
I know this is asking a lot but I bet if we try it and do it well, this would be a better setup than holding SM.
|
|
|
|
Post by rikkity on May 2, 2013 21:37:37 GMT -5
something i always see hod or et doing when they control the castle is constantly having trebs up in there and denying the other 2 servers the opportunity of holding all 4 of their towers. trebs can hit pretty much all the nearby towers, so they take the battle to those towers and just flip them constantly. no opportunity for upgrades. it distracts us and gives us something to focus on besides the rest of the map. and theyre a lot better at doing it than we are. we need to be trebbing and flipping anz, klovan, and wildcreek any time we control sm. (can klovan be hit by trebs over that large mesa?) take the battle to those points and itll be easier to keep the rest of our stuff in eb. The biggest importance of flipping those outer towers is to allow the respective camp supply into SM. If you have 4 out of six outer towers, you get 280 supplies without any upgrades. If you have all six, you get 420 supplies without upgrades. This is key to upgrade SM and maintain the ppt of eb. i totally agree about supply lines. but... one thing i noticed very much today hangin around sm for several hours... et was sooooooo focused on defending anz that they made only 1-2 excursions into our territory, and occasionally flipped umber. they kept practically everyone tied up defending it... with us using 1 treb at a time and having 5-10 people skirmishing and acting as treb guards. they consistently rebuilt siege on the lord ramp, had people manning 5 pieces of siege the entire time, and had 15 or so more people skirmishing between sm and anz. at times i would look at the entire map and see all their borderland camps flipped (by hod, cmon guys). the rest of us in eb were variously fighting hod, recapping our camps, defending somewhat uncoordinated attacks against our side of the map, and repairing sm (with supply that couldve gone towards the cannons and fortify). but seriously, the only et presence on the map was at anz... and i felt like we barely took advantage of it within eb. hod bl... entirely other story, lukian and co took so much pressure off of us in eb. but even with hod outmanned much of the time, we only ever flipped like 1 of their towers during my whole time in eb. and TREB PLACEMENT GUYS! dont just go throwin trebs every which way on a wall, place the things so they cant be aoe'd. a single well placed treb motivated et to get our walls down rather than deal with free flips for us. the other ones just got aoe'd down or counter trebbed (might i add, without adequate response to them building the trebs from us. i have no issue with people learning to treb, but please for trebs sake, PAY ATTENTION to their reactions and SAY SOMETHING when it starts goin downhill) and commanders, fucking spot for the trebs once the walls are down. run in and suicide or ask for a volunteer. tell the trebber where the 6 arrow carts are, (s)he can kill them with 2 shots. only a handful of people do this ever, and we need at least 5x that many. /rant sorry |
|
|
|
Post by Archilese on May 3, 2013 0:43:06 GMT -5
Personally I think we need to take the focus off so much offence, sure HoD might be outmanned but ET will run 10-15 people into durios while we hit wildcreek and sure we'll take wildcreek but they'll take it back before the tick and then we are a tower down from where we started, fuck attacking unless we're completely safe I see no reason with the AC buff to ever lose a tower in EB.
And we shouldn't focus on having 2 towers in enemy borders thats something guilds need to pick their shit up on, at any time a group of 6 can roll into an enemy border and take the 2 easy towers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Remnant Militant on May 3, 2013 7:57:55 GMT -5
IMHO i hate SM it's a "Magnet" for trouble. all it does is create attention to us. I would rather divert our attention into holding: - All our BL - Our 3rd of EB - Both towers at the bottom of each other BL (camps if possible too) Start of this week we made 1st place against HOD and ET but never overtook HOD by enough point's even thought we held SM and some towers in EB. HOD was always +/- 15 PPT from us. we deserved the win this week but HOD played smart and never allowed us to take a big advantage. when we held SM they had a tower and 3 camps in our bl and a tower and 2 camps in ET evening out the PPT. If we focus on keeping our BL, our 3rd of EB and the bottom tower/towers of ET and HOD (+ a few camps) we will have a 300+ PPT all week instead of having to continually run to the "SM has Mark's" call. SM = 35 points and allot of attention to keep/upgrade. Briar + Lake (+camps) = 40 - 70 Points and less attention. EDIT: we have 80+ PPl on TS during Peak: 15 IN ET BL 15 IN HOD BL 20 IN FC BL 30 IN EB Good communication between the Defender's in FC/EB to change BL if more are needed. If HOD/ET Has to many defenders for the 15 ppl to handle taking Briar/lake just break up into 3, 5 man group's and run around flipping camps, 6 camps in each BL = a possible 60 points. I know this is asking a lot but I bet if we try it and do it well, this would be a better setup than holding SM. While I agree this strategy works, the biggest challenge with it is that you cannot control the 4 breakouts that can occur (2 in our BL and 1 each on the other BL's). While I'm not a huge fan of SM myself, I do recognize it's importance for it on the map and the key it can play both offensively and defensively in the ppt game. SM is the only structure that allows you to hit 6 towers and a keep. The hardest part of defending SM is the beginning when the upgrades are going on and this is the most vital time to flip the outer towers. Once the upgrades are down, then I would suggest to moving in to the inner towers/keep (my 2 cents). It's a long week and the more we get to protect our stuff and upgrade it in the beginning the better prepared we are for the offensive/defensive game. Our biggest challenge once said upgrades are done, is the coverage gaps :/ (but that's a whole different discussion). Side note: If we do get SM again, set up a treb third floor for Ogrewatch and Klovan. Those would be the outer towers that are ideal since they are closest to our spawn point. Even if you manage to keep the tower and camp for 30 mins, you have the potential of providing an additional 840 supplies into SM. |
|
|
|
Post by kaamau on May 5, 2013 2:25:55 GMT -5
Ignore SM they said... we would do better they said... look at the score so far. SM is worth a good amount of points and is in a very tactical position, owning it is better then not, so I say we march on it and take it if not just to make it paper again and to own it for 1 or 2 ticks, letting HoD have it for days is helping them and hurting us, you say it puts focus on us, but it appears we have a focus any way, ET and HoD still assault us constantly and HoD is closely guarding their Bl's so using that or Et's bls to make up the points is not very good option, my thought on it is that rather then putting a focus on us it puts their focus on SM. Its like making them block our left so we can smack them with our right, if we do gain and lose it , at least we distracted them and made up some ground.
|
|
|
|
Post by Samhaim on May 5, 2013 5:29:20 GMT -5
Ignoring SM is only worth it if we are activelly taking HoDs stuff, taking stuff from ET doesnt affect HoDs ppt and it makes it too hard to catch up to them or to stay in the lead.
|
|
|
|
Post by rikkity on May 5, 2013 10:19:59 GMT -5
i think the tradeoff for not trying to hold sm needs to be daily upgrade wipes with golem rushes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nicholas S Lin on May 6, 2013 23:10:55 GMT -5
I've always believe that holding Stonemist Castle is strategic and an important sign of server strength and unity.
Holding Stonemist Castle of course should not ever be at the expense of holding onto most/all of our borderland and where possible our third of our Eternal Battlegrounds.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cosmic on May 20, 2013 15:21:30 GMT -5
I came across a post in another forum which I agree with.
If we have SM we should use it offensively and get trebs going on the the second level and harass the the surrounding towers to put pressure on the opponents. A defensive SM I think is not worthwhile the pain and the few points we gain. There are easier ways to get the 35 points.
|
|
![[FE] Red7Rum Avatar](http://storage.proboards.com/3658185/avatar/MtarSYB0mBmIfnemr6kw.jpg)