You win if you have enough ele's. I run E/N SH nuker with [gaze of contempt]. If you have tons of melee you are sorta screwed though.
Btw, you get ~1200+ for a loss so its not terrible.
M
|
Im not complaining about faction... its all good. However, I would rather actually have a fair fight, rather then a team where 1 kurzick monk can just camp behind the green gate, and bond, spellbreaker, and heal one NPC the entire match. Thats what pisses me off.
|

|
Im not complaining about faction... its all good. However, I would rather actually have a fair fight, rather then a team where 1 kurzick monk can just camp behind the green gate, and bond, spellbreaker, and heal one NPC the entire match. Thats what pisses me off.
|
|
hmm FA no longer balanced?
well - Before Luxons usually won - now the wins are split evenly. I'm pretty sure it's balanced now |
from what I saw, only time was reduced to 15 right? You can still comfortably win. It's all down to players. If good players are 1 night on kurzick side, it's bad to play luxon. And vice versa. It was always like that.|
Originally Posted by Cobalt
if the Kurzicks have two good heal/bonder monks it is a virtual win
|
|
Sigh.
from what I saw, only time was reduced to 15 right? You can still comfortably win. [...] Funny how Kurzicks always knew that bonding means winning, and only rare Luxons knew that anti-enchants = winning. Imagine that, preparing for a battle instead of taking random build and whinning. |
|
I know you’ve posted this before, but I can’t for the life of me find it. Gaile, can you please reiterate that there is no "server" or "game" limit (max number of games that can be going on at once) set for Fort Aspenwood? Everyone and their cousin seems to think only 2 games at once can be played.--Ryudo 03:39, 7 March 2008 (UTC) Yes, that's correct. As long as there are full teams to oppose one another, another game will spawn. No limits, really! -- Gaile 05:58, 11 March 2008 (UTC) Thanks a million Gaile. Amazing how net rumors can easily overwrite common sense sometimes.--Ryudo 01:59, 14 March 2008 (UTC) |
|
Sorry, not true at all. There was a time when Kurzicks woudn't play FA since Luxons seemed to break through in less than 5 minutes. Even with bonders, there was no reason not to bring Enchant removal with E/D running amok. I was Luxon at the time, I remember.
|
|
Funny how Kurzicks always knew that bonding means winning, and only rare Luxons knew that anti-enchants = winning. Imagine that, preparing for a battle instead of taking random build and whinning.
Truth is, Luxon NPCs are better. Turtle > Juggernaut, any day. Kurzicks were on average always better prepared, they had players who are up to challenge, and they had players who knew that they need to think and prepare to win. Luxons, I remember back in the old days, always had chaotic approach with "lets just go in with whatever, follow turtles and we win". |

|
-ignores all the "strategies" for FA-
I believe this was done to promote play in JQ. In JQ, Luxons would have the advantage, in FA Kurzicks do. So those wanting a challenge would go to the opposing one. Those wanting easy Faction would go to their side's battle. Overall - more people at JQ - at least on Luxon side. |
|
OP you're frickin crazy the Luxons broke in two times in a row this morning because they had MONKS and most of the time when the luxons lose they don't have any monks. Same on the Kurzick side when we have MONKS we win quite a bit when we don't we lose most often. So, it's well balanced based on the number of monks on each side. Plus if you're smart and bring chant removals you have a better chance of winning on both sides as well. Man I swear people lose and as soon as they lose they come whinning unfair not balanced wah wah wah. I've lost 10 times in a row on the Kurzick side and I didn't whine about it. Just kept on truckin.
|