Forts - timer speed increase on third stage

[Naelar]

If you know the opposition is going to try and push two forts, plan your defenses accordingly. Or leave one fort and go defend the second. The only thing 'locking' anyone into one fort while another is being attacked, is greed.

[emiliorv]

Yes please, change the mechanic to remove the strategy from the game. Only AOE spam on funnels must matter, any other strategy is cheat the system...

[Gurf]

If you know the opposition is going to try and push two forts, plan your defenses accordingly. Or leave one fort and go defend the second. The only thing 'locking' anyone into one fort while another is being attacked, is greed.

There is an add-on called SOR which tells you how many people are defending a fort, as soon as the numbers went down to a low level the attackers would come back for easy take.

The Devs tend to want to discourage zerging so adding a timer to third stage also would help against those who just want to Zerg through zones without any opposition, which applies to both sides.

[Gurf]

Yes please, change the mechanic to remove the strategy from the game. Only AOE spam on funnels must matter, any other strategy is cheat the system...

It's a strategy for people who want to avoid PvP , which doesn't surprise me that you would be in favour of it.

[Nekkma]

Realm vs realm never was primarily about pvp. Striking where the enmy is weak is ofc a valid strategy. Using a smaller force to bind a larger to be able to strike somewhere else is and was a great strategy to make progress in the campaign during prime time. Sadly, the star system and the way forts work removes alot of that strategy and promote zerging in one zone.

[emiliorv]

Yes please, change the mechanic to remove the strategy from the game. Only AOE spam on funnels must matter, any other strategy is cheat the system...

It's a strategy for people who want to avoid PvP , which doesn't surprise me that you would be in favour of it.

Its a strategy to force the defender to divide their players between multiple attack points. Its a propper strategy used in real war during ages....

anyways, as others said. Anyone is forcing you to stay in a empty fort, organize better => its harder for attackers back to a fort than for defenders, if attackers back defenders can back much faster.

[Naelar]

If you know the opposition is going to try and push two forts, plan your defenses accordingly. Or leave one fort and go defend the second. The only thing 'locking' anyone into one fort while another is being attacked, is greed.

There is an add-on called SOR which tells you how many people are defending a fort, as soon as the numbers went down to a low level the attackers would come back for easy take.

The Devs tend to want to discourage zerging so adding a timer to third stage also would help against those who just want to Zerg through zones without any opposition, which applies to both sides.

Yes, I know what SOR is and does. If 'the numbers went down to a low lvl' and the attackers came back, so would the defenders. At least if most ppl weren't ruled by greed.

My point still stands. The only thing 'locking' you in one particular fort is you...

[Gurf]

Yes please, change the mechanic to remove the strategy from the game. Only AOE spam on funnels must matter, any other strategy is cheat the system...

It's a strategy for people who want to avoid PvP , which doesn't surprise me that you would be in favour of it.

Its a strategy to force the defender to divide their players between multiple attack points. Its a propper strategy used in real war during ages....

anyways, as others said. Anyone is forcing you to stay in a empty fort, organize better => its harder for attackers back to a fort than for defenders, if attackers back defenders can back much faster.

To be honest I don't mind it as a tactic in Prime time when there are loads of players on and the actual intent was to get to the city, whereby there is still opposition in the Fort but the organised Warbands are locked in one and can't get to the other

The issue I have is when it started to get used in day time but not to actually push a second fort but rather to take the other zones without opposition, then the next Fort would be abandoned early also. There is no strategy there to progress to the City, it is just a way of pushing zones and getting bag rolls without opposition

[billyk]

If you know the opposition is going to try and push two forts, plan your defenses accordingly. Or leave one fort and go defend the second. The only thing 'locking' anyone into one fort while another is being attacked, is greed.

There is an add-on called SOR which tells you how many people are defending a fort, as soon as the numbers went down to a low level the attackers would come back for easy take.

The Devs tend to want to discourage zerging so adding a timer to third stage also would help against those who just want to Zerg through zones without any opposition, which applies to both sides.

Yes, I know what SOR is and does. If 'the numbers went down to a low lvl' and the attackers came back, so would the defenders. At least if most ppl weren't ruled by greed.

My point still stands. The only thing 'locking' you in one particular fort is you...

Blaming Order for greed when the only reason to pull off this is to get more Invaders, then whining when people call for the Devs... classic Destro.

There are lots of effective tactics and tricks that are banned, barricading your gates with siege engines comes to mind. There's no reason Destro should get away with their little stunt here.

[VindicoAtrum]

If you don't want to be "locked in fort", maybe you should defend pre-fort zones and DON'T let forts happen in first place.

Didn't want invaders or royals anyway