You should read and understand my whole post instead of taking few specific words from it and converting them into any meaning you like.
-
Member
-
Member
I can't believe alliance is crying about WG you win 80% of all WG battles shut the **** up lol.
-
Member
Actually, not lately. Most of the time Horde has WG these days and yes, it's when the multibotters play. (yeah, I said botters).
The multi-botters are camping the very last wall in the keep, destroying 6-8 sieges single-handedly. Just happened an hour ago. Ally had the walls down with 15 minutes left, horde mb'er plus the rest of the players stacked the chamber, destroying siege after siege after siege, plus all the players defending the sieges, and Ally lost. Horde didn't even have vehicles at that point. Just players and a multi-boxer. So yeah, they're affecting the outcome.
Most people who think mb'ing is cool are mostly pve players who haven't seen it. I have no issues with mb'ers in pve. But when it takes half a raid to take out one player, and it IS one player, that's affecting the tactics of the BG.
-
Member
I'm on ally side. Most of the time when I logged in, ally has WG. Also, it's not too hard to kill this OP setup (20x e-sham 5x rdru).
-
Banned
it's ok when horde controlls WG, we can gank pve noobs near the fortress =P
-
Member
I wouldn't be so sure about that, at least since last couple of weeks, horde has been controlling the fortress way more often than alliance. And yes I've been logging everyday, unless ofc, you only play during am ST
-
Member
I'm so tired of hearing "it's not so hard to kill....". Sure, it can be done if you devote 1/3 of your 40-man raid to killing it, but then there go the "tactics" for the BG, which is the whole point of this thread. The point of BG's is tactics, not dps, and not killing other players. That happens, of course, but it's not the point of WG or any BG.
-
Member
In any case of wg, you cant do simple wg tactics. In the end of wg boxer is most likely standing in base defending, thats the same place you have to be in order to destroy gates, so you have way more than 40people rushing there and trying to kill boxer.
Killing players IS the point of wg, since you have to kill other to be able to take vehicles.
Boxer in most cases does not restrain you from doing pve in bgs.
-
Member
Yes, they do. A single multi-botter can take out siege after siege after siege. If you'd read, I said - plenty of times, Ally has had the gates down with 15-20 minutes to spare, and horde and the mb'er stack the last gate and end up winning. Yesterday, horde didn't even need vehicles for the last 5 minutes - they and the mb'er held everyone off at the chamber and ended up winning. But hey, post your in game name so I can look for you in Wintergrasp, and you can show me how it's done. I'd love to learn!
-
Member
Is that a bad thing? Alliance used to win 85% of the time. Now it's about 50-50 and you whine how unfair it is. Grow up. What comes to the multiboxers, we had an Alliance boxer in Ogi yesterday. He was killing the auctioneers and all the people that tried to stop him. I just smirked and went to UC for the auctioneers.
-
Banned
Horde noobs are happy they have access to VOA with multibox support.
How about you grow up, stop being terrible in pvp and get VOA in legal way (premading, f.e.) without 100 multiboxers rambling around ?
-
Member
"If Horde lose so often, why dont they just create a premade and easily win match. its so easy, u just need to coordinate l0l"
"Remove 20 people from my team and give me 200x Tenacity buff so I can have a challenge."
The biggest joke of all is the atmosphere though. One or two people (of both sides) will try to discuss politely and appropriately until someone else suddenly feels triggered and flames others which unfortunately spirals the thread down into "wow u are just crybabies" "u ruin the fun for everyone u nerd".
I'd really like to see a podcast between a GM, a civilized Pro-MBoxing and a civilized Con-MBoxing. It would induce far less headaches than the usual vicious circle of "we have the disadvantage" "no, we have the disadvantage".
Personal opinion; I think boxers can just ***pull any reason they want, regardless if it makes sense or not. They know the policy won't change, so they can make fun of people's ideas all they want, as it won't cause them any trouble. Similarly, any solo person's argument, no matter how well thought-out it is, has absolutely zero value because of the same reason; nothing is going to change. Only thing they'll earn are the same arguments of "how bad multiboxers have it", and in turn people answer back with "but it ruins the fun for everyone else involved", etc. etc. etc.
I think it's not Mass-Multiboxing that bothers me most, but rather the Boxers' attitude, and the people that rage-flame them. Both cause me immense headaches.
I could also point out all the times that a mboxer camped WG spawn, or VoA, but it'll just get me laughed at by them, so there's no point in bothering.Edited: October 8, 2016
-
Member
Did I make it sound that it is a bad thing? Can you explain where exactly? He stated some basic statistic like it's a factual source which I ended up to disagree, at least for this last two weeks, and that's it. I personally don't play WG battles nowadays, I don't need VoA, so I could not care less if it's 50-50, 100-0 or 0-100. Well actually, I prefer when it's horde controlling it, you see, I'm a big fan of world PvP and I usually have lots of fun ganking in front of the chamber. These threads nowadays have some kind of restriction which I didn't get quite yet, it seems no one can say anything otherwise they're whinning. You should distinguish "whinning" from giving a simple statistic by other players' point of view, so, if anything, you need to grow up, not me.
-
Member
Mbxa is my name :P
multiboxing IS the legal way.
-
Member
It's like being a politician, basically a thieving criminal without being labeled. Any who go drink bleach.
