Feedback talk:User/Flipper/Fort Aspenwood

As a person who has healed a Siege Turtle many times, I'd have to agree that they're now pretty useless. As it stands, all they're really good for is countering Spirit Spam and Minion Masters, assuming of course they can get through the gates first. There's supposed to be an incentive to keeping the Siege Turtles alive, but at the moment, it's often better to keep Elementalist teammates up since they can do more and actually move when attacked. --Curse You (talk|contribs) 21:25, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Siege Turtles don't need a skill change, they need an AI change. (i.e. while their siege is recharging, they need to ignore players apart from the occasional Carrier Defense.) -~=Sparky  User Sparky, the Tainted charr sig.PNG  (talk)  21:40, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how this would be possible except possibly to update the siege AI to ignore anyone not within earshot. However the problem of Defy pain tanks still remains as the siege is unable to remove them on its own. Flipper 18:51, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, while FA is currently in favor of the Kurzicks, this update would just be insane. You don't need to put extra explosives in your giant siege cannon, you need more troops, or at least a diversity of troops, and an AI fix. -- Gah_  18:41, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually this update idea is really not all that much, it just appears to be when glancing at it. The only thing that has changed (apart from the removal of one effect, something it nearly does already through its enchant removal) is the ability of the siege to occasionally knockdown a SINGLE target. The intent was not for the siege to knockdown a group of players, as such a thing would be game-breaking, but to allow the siege to finally have a chance at taking out one target that may be blocking its path. Anyone else caught in the siege's aoe will see no change at all, the siege will do the same damage it has always done. For example if a siege is targeting a group of 6 Kurz all running amber, only one of them would be knocked down briefly, the others would see no change. Flipper 18:51, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Just update the mine cleansers (and the other NPCs) to have the PvP skills as they should have. Problem solved. I play on boths sides and FA isn't hard for the luxons, they also get the good deal out of the faction gain, since they can win quicker (and get the full 2500) and also can get the full 1500 even when losing. -- Ckal Ktak [[image:Technobabble.jpg|20px]] 18:00, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Which PvP update to ritualist spirits are you talking about? Anyway I think the main problem with Fort Aspenwood is the luxons often have leechers, and leechers affect luxons a lot more than kurzicks (just a few good defenders can sometimes keep a whole team out), whereas the luxons often need everyone in a team to just break through. A way to fix that is to add an "Exclude list" feature, so that you don't end up in a team with people in your exclude list. You find a leecher or people who you just don't like being on the same team with, you put them on your exclude list and you don't end up in the same team as them. This could mean you have to wait longer to get a game, but you might have more fun when you do. It could also mean that the leechers all end up in the same team when everyone else excludes them, but that's fine - the players who actually want to play won't complain about that.


 * The pvp update is that the PvE versions of binding rituals cast quickly, but the pvp versions do not, the mine cleansers are using the Pve versions. -- Ckal Ktak [[image:Technobabble.jpg|20px]] 16:59, 14 September 2009 (UTC)